Talk:US Airways

DCA is now definitely hub - I found source!

US Airways President: Reagan National Most Profitable Hub for Airline see article [<a href="http://www.sungazette.net/arlington/news/us-airways-president-reagan-national-most-profitable-hub-for-airline/article_1b7e2996-773d-11e1-bd8d-001871e3ce6c.html"></a>]. Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport is the most profitable major hub [..] of the US Airways route system, the carrier’s president recently said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by B767-500 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 30 March 2012‎ (UTC)

Reagan National Airport is not a hub.

Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport is not a hub of US Airways, it is a focus city. It clearly states here: http://www.usairways.com/en-US/aboutus/pressroom/factsheets.html on the first pdf link, which was updated on April 1st, that Ronald Reagan National Airport is a focus city, not a hub. --Greggy123 (talk) 05:21, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I've changed it already and included the reference to it, although some staff may say that DCA is a hub, the primary sources as per WP:V should be taken over what the staff had said. Sb617 (Talk) 09:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

But you have weakness in argument due to Scott Kirby is President, which he is not just a staff! --B767-500 (talk) 03:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Okay, let's hope we don't get into an edit war with B767-500 (talk · contribs). —Compdude¹²³ 15:00, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't do the edit war with editors due to ...

You explains issues and don't just dumps my text. So, I just wait for upgrade to hub status when lefting the gates by Delta, and update DCA portion in summer.--B767-500 (talk) 06:00, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that American Airlines-US Airways merger be merged into both American Airlines and US Airways--Petebutt (talk) 07:14, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

• Comment: Uh, any reason why? Because of the vagueness of this request, I'm visualizing the exact same info being copied onto both articles. This is a notable merge to say the least. Srsrox (talk) 13:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
• Comment. I updated the pointers to point to one discussion. You can not have a discussion in two places on the same issue! Vegaswikian (talk) 21:02, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. This was discussed on the projects talk page before the announcement and there was no object expressed there. In addition, if merged to multiple places, these are the wrong two. What is actually being merged is the companies, US Airways Group and AMR Corporation. Yesterday there was material being added to at least 4 articles about this. There is no reason to split repeat this 4 times or to make decisions on what material is appropriate for each of those 4 articles. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:02, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose I cant see any reason why. As things develop the article will grow. --JetBlast (talk) 14:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose: What would probably end up happening is that the same exact information will be copied to both articles. Better just to have it all in one place, easier for the reader and users. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 01:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose: Granted, there's not much in the article now, but there will surely be much more information made available as the merger continues. WikiRedactor (talk) 21:58, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose – Merging it to two articles would mean that as the merger progresses, you'd have to update two articles with the exact same info. Why would we want to do this? I see nothing wrong with having an article about the merger. —Compdude¹²³ 22:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion related to the merge

• It seems to me that the content of the merge article should be included in one (1) of the two (2) articles American Airlines and US Airways. Would the users above have a thought on which would be the better target for that information? --Izno (talk) 22:22, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, I have thought about it and my choice would be neither of the two articles offered since both are not among the leading contenders that should be considered. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:12, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Split should be vetted properly {{split2|AMR Corporation–US Airways Group merger|date=February 2013}}

The following split should on the table for discussion:

{{split2|AMR Corporation–US Airways Group merger|date=February 2013}}

I don't know if the above is a split or a rename proposal, but just wanted to put it forward for discussion. The above is in reference to the article American Airlines–US Airways merger.

--71.135.164.241 (talk) 06:04, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Defunct: America West vs. US Air

It should be noted that America West purchased US Air and thus the company US Air ceased to exist but the branding, which was determined to be much better for the entire combined airline as was retained. The entire line of corporations comes all from the America West side and the original US Airways ceased to exist as Chapter 11 bankruptcy and then sale to an America West created entity. The combined company uses the AWE identifier with nickname "cactus" to signify the airline that "really" survived. The defunct company is US Airways not America West. I suggest using the Bank of America Corporation/NationsBank wiki page as the template for company details in summary and entry. This will also template the American Airlines merger very nicely.

Do you have any sources to support this please? --JetBlast (talk) 06:48, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Merger Details:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/701345/000095012305011287/p70803a2sv1za.htm p. A-2-4

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/701345/000095012305011287/p70803a2sv1za.htm p. B-2-18

Callsign:

http://www.allacronyms.com/CACTUS/United_States__Airways/1302569

http://www.flightradar24.com/

"Commenced in 1996"?!

Dear all, I think this statement (founded in 1937, commenced in 1996) in the infobox is misleading. Obviously, the purpose of these two "data slots" is to cater for airlines which launched revenue flights considerably later than being founded. Take Lufthansa as an example: The company was founded in 1953, but the actual "airline stuff" was only started in 1955. I can fully understand that the history of the various predecesors of US Airways is complicated and must be well explained, but this infobox spot is not the right place.--FoxyOrange (talk) 15:07, 12 December 2013 (UTC)