Talk:O'Hare International Airport

Statistics

Removed this statement, which appears to be true (from forums on Airliners.net) from flight/passenger numbers at ORD:

"It is among a select group of airports worldwide with the distinction of serving more than 200 destinations, along with Heathrow, Frankfurt, Atatürk, Amsterdam, Charles de Gaulle, Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth, Munich, and Dubai."

Perfunctory research indicated informal support for the numbers (by internet users comparing airports' own numbers) but no definitive, published numbers to reference.Chidino (talk) 00:59, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

"Modernization plan" section

First off, it looks like the "modernization plan" section has not been updated in a while. Second, should that section be merged into the "History" section? Much of the events listed in the modernization plan section took place quite a while ago and it may not be appropriate to continue to give it its own section (then, of course, I'm not sure what the exact status of the plan is as it does not appear to have been updated in a while). --1990'sguy (talk) 02:08, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I've updated the Modernization plan section and added a section for the new terminal plan. Chidino (talk) 05:40, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Infrastructure

In the past, history of runways was both here and in the earlier sections about the history and growth of ORD. I'm going to make a judgement call and say that the references earlier are sufficient, and if additional fleshing out from there is needed, I honestly don't think it belongs in this section. Here the discussion should be as to facilities, runways, infrastructure as it currently exists, imo... maybe in the event a lost pilot brings this description up while flying? slight LOLChidino (talk) 06:01, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Air India to Hyderabad

Stop adding Hyderabad! Many users have repeatedly added HYD as a destination for ORD even though HYD-ORD-DEL is not on the same plane. There is a change from a 777 to another 777 in DEL. Additionally, per bullet #7 of AIRPORT-CONTENT, flights travelling through hubs on the same flight number should not have the final "flight number destination" listed. --Irehdna (talk) 00:49, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

This plea was warranted in 2018 when it was posted, but it's no longer valid. Previously, Air India sold Chicago-Hyderabad tickets that they marketed as a discrete flight but actually required a plane change in Delhi. We were right to exclude Hyderabad as a destination then. But Air India now does actually offer a non-stop Chicago-Hyderabad every Wednesday. Seriously. This is already properly sourced, telling me someone previously added it, properly sourced it, and had it removed by someone who didn't bother reading the source. But it's real. You can verify this on the already-cited source, on Air India's booking site, on Google Flights, on Flight Aware, or by just Googling it. It's AI 108. ThisIsPaulina (talk) 19:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I removed Hyderabad, as it's no longer bookable. There's no news source on this, sadly, but that's not surprising. It does show bookable again starting in March, but in lieu of any other source, and given the history, I think we wait and see. ThisIsPaulina (talk) 20:49, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Class change

Some very kind person(s) at WikiProject Aviation/Airports raised their ranking of this article to B class. I took the liberty, based on that, to raise the page's ranking on WikiProject Illinois to B, since that project is listed as semi-active. I'll submit to WikiProject Chicago for assessment. Chidino (talk) 19:48, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

B rating

Chidino, I am having trouble giving this a B rating. I don't feel the WP:LEAD is really a summary of the article. If the LEAD is not decent, I can't support B. The LEAD seems to have all kinds of facts that are not even in the article rather than summarize it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:36, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I was imitating various airport articles, rather than following Wikipedia standards for WP:LEAD. I'll keep working on it. Chidino (talk) 06:12, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

I've adjusted the LEAD to be a very brief summary of some of the highlights. Chidino (talk) 08:09, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Please make sure that you include a summary of each major section in the LEAD.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

At the very least, every paragraph should have at least one WP:IC from a WP:RS.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:35, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Better? (I haven't written a LEAD before, so I appreciate your help. I have been following the standards and trying to adapt them here, and any feedback would be great.) Chidino (talk) 02:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

The "Airlines and destinations" and "Statistics" sections remain as sectionz without prose. Each section should have well-cited prose. That prose should be summarized in the LEAD. The "Cargo" section has substantial prose and remains unsummarized in the LEAD. You will either need to reorganize the article or rework the LEAD. I am not a big fan of the current summary of the Terminals section. N. B.: In the end the LEAD will have to be 3 or 4 paragraphs (4 is the max for a quality LEAD). I remain concerned that many paragraphs are without ICs from RS.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:51, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I understand your concerns. I suspect this is one of the moments Wikipedia policy (well-established) wells up against an effective entrance. While I do not have any experience as a Wikipedia editor, I do know how to write a good, summarizing entry (and for an airport as complex as O'Hare, this is a DAMN good entry -- something you did not note). While Wiki's insistence on every section having equal weight in the opening, that means editing content to give equal weight to less pertinent facts. Especially with an airport, we could get caught up with statistics ad nauseum. Please tell me how to write a more meaningful entry of five paragraphs that will serve a purpose to someone 10 minutes out from landing at O'Hare. Who is Wikipedia serving here? I am not asking for reconsideration of B status -- I think that is appropriate. I wonder what devil we are serving when policy is more important than relevancy.

AND no answer summarizes my criticism -- after almost a year. What, precisely, holds you in grand respect and dismisses my views? Are you more valid than me?

Architectural recognition of Terminal 1 (Jahn)

@Magnolia677 In respect to Undid revision 852864104 by Funarchitect How is being one out of 200 notable? Please discuss.

Would the following be more acceptable?

In celebration of the 2018 Illinois Bicentennial, more than 3500 licensed Architects from throughout Illinois were asked to select the State's 200 most important architectural places, dating from the earliest prehistoric settlements to the most modern designs and structures; based on its unique spaces with their "splendid sense of light, and of lightness",  the United Airlines Terminal at O’Hare was selected as one of these Illinois 200 Great Places  by the American Institute of Architects Illinois component (AIA Illinois).

--Funarchitect (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@Funarchitect As a contributor to this page that has struggled to help provide a consistent voice, I hope you don't mind my chiming in.

I believe this is an excessive amount of detail that doesn't serve O'Hare well. (As trivial as it sounds, if you boost the Terminal 1 coverage, an equal amount dedicated to Terminal 3 will magically appear.) This section, in particular, is dealing with the progress of the airport in the 1980s. Current architectural recognition, right before returning to construction on Terminal 3 in the 1980s, is abrupt and IMO misplaced in this section.

Further, I sincerely do not mean offense to AIA Illinois or to you, but this is, at best, trivial praise. "One of 200", as @Magnolia677 pointed out? And why is this list any more important than, say, the CAF's? In an effort to provide context, a quick Google search turned up the AIA (in toto) naming it "one of the best ten works of American architecture completed since 1980." That exceedingly impressive award isn't in there (maybe should be), but none of the architectural awards it, Terminal 5, and the CTA station have racked up are listed, simply because we're always struggling to keep this an introductory article and not meant to function as the Encyclopedia of O'Hare.

Chidino (talk) 06:48, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

References

Get rid of United Express in destination table?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports/Archive_17#Potential_Major_Change_to_WP:Airports:_Removing_Regional_Carrier_Listings_from_Airport_Articles

I believe this settled the matter. However, there is one editor, unnamed for now, that, if we listen to him/her, United Express in the destination table of this article would be merged with United Airlines. If that happens, you won't know if an airport/city is served by United or United Express specifically. (That editor wants to do it on another airport but, if we listen to him, O'Hare could be in danger) I bring it up because many wise editors read O'Hare but few read smaller airport articles.

Should this change be made? (wipe out United Express)Aerostar3 (talk) 06:09, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

After more than a week of assessing for opinions, I will test edit the United Express table to see how it looks like. Also see the RFC https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Airports#RFC_Destinations%3A_United_Express_and_United%2C_like_it_currently_is%2C_or_no_standard_way_is_ok Aerostar3 (talk) 03:31, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

There has been no change in Wikipedia policy. You (Rubber Ducky/Aerostar3/Blissfield101, allegedly) are performing edits while referring to an RfC that "received" 16 votes, of which 9 supported the position. This is hardly a consensus; the most important thing is to broaden the scope of respondents to determine, if possible, what method works best for the average reader. Isn't that what is most important? I understand you have a position on this, but you have not convinced the rest of the editors, and this is a community. Chidino (talk) 06:14, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

"Ohare" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Ohare. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 1#Ohare until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Conifer (talk) 21:22, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

A notable fact

O'Hare currently has the most number of runways of any civilian airport. While I added this fact in the article, I was considering working it into the introduction. I feel like it's a pretty notable fact to include in the lead. Thoughts? Apoorv Chauhan (talk) 08:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Why no terminal 4?

Why doesn't this airport have terminal 4? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clrichey (talk • contribs) 01:43, 27 November 2021 (UTC)