Jump to content

Talk:Swissair: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Pateb (talk | contribs)
Line 78: Line 78:
inasmuch as the infobox is designed to give a snapshot at a particular point in time, it is more appropriate that an historic roster of executives be rather included in the text of the article. --[[User talk:emerson7|emerson7]] 17:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
inasmuch as the infobox is designed to give a snapshot at a particular point in time, it is more appropriate that an historic roster of executives be rather included in the text of the article. --[[User talk:emerson7|emerson7]] 17:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


Emerson; Jaquelyne Fouse and even Mario Corti were not key people at Swissair. They were only in the roles you mention at Swissair in the last one of 70 years of existance of this airline. I don't know what your personal relation to these persons is, but please stop deleting more relevant information to put them up again. As you mention yourself above, you can include these people in the article itself in the last chapter about the airline if you feel they are important enough.
: Emerson; Jaquelyne Fouse and even Mario Corti were not key people at Swissair. They were only in the roles you mention at Swissair in the last one of 70 years of existance of this airline. I don't know what your personal relation to these persons is, but please stop deleting more relevant information to put them up again. As you mention yourself above, you can include these people in the article itself in the last chapter about the airline if you feel they are important enough. Also: The fleet size was not 72. It was (around) 312 aircraft in total, 72 in 2002, when the airline stopped flying. So the 'at the demise' or 'in 2002' is not an optional info, as the other number is just plain incorrect. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pateb|Pateb]] ([[User talk:::Pateb|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pateb|contribs]]) 22:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Also: The fleet size was not 72. It was (around) 312 aircraft in total, 72 in 2002, when the airline stopped flying. So the 'at the demise' or 'in 2002' is not an optional info, as the other number is just plain incorrect. <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pateb|Pateb]] ([[User talk:Pateb|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pateb|contribs]]) 22:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:: while all of the information you are adding is certainly relevant, your adding it to the infobox is inappropriate and should be included in the article. again, the infobox only gives a snapshot in time--in this case upon dissolution in 2002. it doesn't make sense to add the qualifier ''"at bankruptcy, etc,"'' i think our readers are clever enough to understand that point. also, the term ''"key people"'' is generally defined as 'corporate executives'. corti and fouse ''were'' among the sa top five cadre at the end....the individuals you keep adding were not. historical data like is supposed to be part of the article...not the infobox. you might want to take a look at the articles on other defunct companies, and also the infobox template instructions for guidance. --[[User talk:emerson7|emerson7]] 22:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:17, 24 March 2009

WikiProject iconAviation: Defunct airlines Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
B checklist
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Defunct Airlines task force.

This page was placed on Votes for Deletion in June 2004. Consensus was to keep; view discussion at /Delete.


Very misleading Article as a whole

This article about Swissair is really not representing real facts, specially the so called 'history' section. This article focusses on the demise of Swissair that happened in the late 90's. The whole history behind the airline is mentioned nowhere. At least the complete fleet and Accidents are mentioned after someone copied them from another site. for a real view about Swissair and its history you'd better go and check out the links such as the 'Gone with the wind' article or the fansite on www.swissair.aero. Once I have some more time I will try to improve the quality of this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.9.112.196 (talk) 08:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted a See Also link to Sabena. Besides being former national airlines for small western European countries, there's little else to tie them together. If there's a reason it should go back in, please do so—but also please place enough information in the article to point out why it's important. --Milkmandan 09:40, 2005 Jan 19 (UTC)

There is indeed a tie between the two companies; the page on Sabena has a few details, but the story is much longer and more complicated than that. I'll restore the link and try to add a bit of information to the article. Schutz 11:06, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Little to tie them together? Sabena was part of SR at the end, and bankruptcy of both airlines was due to the same Hunter strategy. There is very much hat ties these two airlines together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.94.122 (talk) 19:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs reviewing

Some of this article contains pretty strong statements about why things happened, and I can't help but suspect there is some POV at work here. I would recommend any experts on the subject to insert a little balance. Andrewferrier 14:02, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking particularly of this excerpt: The grounding of all flights were, to a certain extent, triggered by the September 11 attacks which disrupted most airlines. But in the long term, it was Swissair's conservative administration board that caused the company's demise. Many members of this committee were Free Democratic Party of Switzerland politicians who made their careers in the cantonal governments or the national parliament. This serious conflict of interest prevented the airline from gathering competent specialists. Andrewferrier 14:04, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Andrew, for some time I have been the main editor of this page. I'm not keen newspaper reader anymore, and so my perception of the Swissair demise might be troubled... so, to refresh the things I know, I'm doing a little google research... it's sad that nearly nobody speaks German here:
  • http://www.kantonsrat.zh.ch/internet/Protokolle/NZZ/Nzz2001/NZ011022.HTM - a protocol of the Canton of Zurich parliament. All parties, the Democratic Christians, the Socialists, the Greens and even their enemy, the populist People's Party, condemn the vigorous "Hunter strategy" discussed in the Swissair article. The Free Democrats, however, is the single party that doesn't condemn the Swissair management. Instead, they divert the attention to the Swiss-German landing approach treaty which limits the landings leading over German territory, thus hindering the Zurich Airport company unique.
  • http://chronik.geschichte-schweiz.ch/swissair-debakel-grounding.html is a thorough description of the Swissair history, but in German. There, the liaisions between the Free Democrats are mentioned again. The consulting company, McKinsey, which told the Swissair into the Hunter strategy, has its connections to the Swissair - the very same person who devised the strategy at McKinsey was elected to the Swissair board of executives at a later time.
Regards, --Keimzelle 21:14, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it was McKinsey who proposed the Hunter Strategy to Swissair, not PWC. PWC conducted Swissair's auditing, but did not advise on issues of strategy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.134.67 (talk) 07:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Table

I realise that my using the {{prettytable}} template for the history of accidents and incidents means that the dates are not displayed well, but at present I have run out of time to investigate how to tweak it. Perhaps someone already knows how; otherwise I aim to research and modify sooner rather than later.
David Kernow 01:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sikander!  Method duly noted and I've now also centered the dates. I don't suppose it's possible to overrule the cellpadding/spacing for the sake of more room around the lengthier dates?
Best wishes, David Kernow 06:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Current event reference

I saw this news story relating to this article, perhaps it will be useful: [1]. →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 04:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this one too: [2]. →James Kidd (contr/talk/email) 04:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is an article on Swissair, and not on Swiss (which is referenced and has its own article) I removed the link to swiss.com. In its place, a link to the Internet Archive "Wayback Machine" and the archived copy of the last goodbye message from Swissair on the web.

Anybody who is closer to the current trial who would be able to keep the page up to date with the case? Jkstark 02:32, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Air Outre Mer

Why Air Outre Mer redirects to this page? I suppose that Air Outre Mer should redirect to AOM French Airlines. I have no knowledge in this field and I do not know how to verify this information but it is clear that one or both of this two page (AOM French Airlines and Swissair) are wrong.

LLP, Andcoz (talk) 14:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with History

Swissair was a company that provided at least 65 years of perfect service (very good quality and reputation) so to limit the company's history to the last few years (hunter strategy and collapse) seems a bit strange. Swissair also had a long period of successful expansion (creation of companies like Swissôtel and Gate Gourmet) why isn't that mentioned in the History part?


. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.227.15.136 (talk) 09:34, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fansites

per WP:EL fansites should not be promoted....particularly over official sites whether past or present. --emerson7 18:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

infobox

inasmuch as the infobox is designed to give a snapshot at a particular point in time, it is more appropriate that an historic roster of executives be rather included in the text of the article. --emerson7 17:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Emerson; Jaquelyne Fouse and even Mario Corti were not key people at Swissair. They were only in the roles you mention at Swissair in the last one of 70 years of existance of this airline. I don't know what your personal relation to these persons is, but please stop deleting more relevant information to put them up again. As you mention yourself above, you can include these people in the article itself in the last chapter about the airline if you feel they are important enough. Also: The fleet size was not 72. It was (around) 312 aircraft in total, 72 in 2002, when the airline stopped flying. So the 'at the demise' or 'in 2002' is not an optional info, as the other number is just plain incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pateb ([[User talk:::Pateb|talk]] • contribs) 22:54, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
while all of the information you are adding is certainly relevant, your adding it to the infobox is inappropriate and should be included in the article. again, the infobox only gives a snapshot in time--in this case upon dissolution in 2002. it doesn't make sense to add the qualifier "at bankruptcy, etc," i think our readers are clever enough to understand that point. also, the term "key people" is generally defined as 'corporate executives'. corti and fouse were among the sa top five cadre at the end....the individuals you keep adding were not. historical data like is supposed to be part of the article...not the infobox. you might want to take a look at the articles on other defunct companies, and also the infobox template instructions for guidance. --emerson7 22:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]