Talk:Mexicana de Aviación
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mexicana de Aviación article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
||It is requested that an image or photograph of the Mexicana building in Mexico City during the daytime be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Mexico may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
Previous unsectioned comments
This currently reads a bit like a press release from the company's PR dept. (Though I doubt they'd go so far as mentioning accidents!). I've cleaned it up a bit but I think it could do with a bit more drastic pruning. Graham 11:20, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)
The list of destinations includes Portland. Is this Portland Maine, or Portland Oregon? Darlene 2 May 2005
Portland, Oregon22:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)220.127.116.11
Charles Lindberg was one of the first pilot, but it wasnt THE FIRST, also the story about the second passenger dropping the bags was a little bit ... unaccurate. I edit such things
since in other airlines pages whom recently change their livery they just talk about the new livery i edit the old livery section
I changed the airline's "hub" and "focus city" section and excluded a few of the cities listed because Mexicana has a small presence in those cities, although it does serve a few destinations. For example, in Morelia, the airline has about 20 weekly flights to 5 US cities. This is hardly a hub or focus city. Guadalajara is more of a focus city because the airline has a lot of daily flights to many cities, but few connection opportunities. The problem is creating a definition for "hub" and "focus city"; in my opinion, the low number of flights Mexicana has to these cities (Los Cabos, Leon, Morelia, Zacatecas, etc.) excludes them from this definition.
To list Mexico City as both a Hub and a focus city is wrong; Monterrey is not a Mexicana hub or focus city.
- "Monterrey is not a Mexican hub or focus city"... Are you kidding? I would like to see some sourced data, because, last I checked, Monterrey was the airport with most air traffic in the nation after Mexico City. For Mexicana, they fly to and from Chicago, Boston, Mexico City, Guadalajara, and a large amount of other cities from Monterrey.
- Of course, the General Mariano Escobedo International Airport is more a hub for AeroMexico, who pretty much concentrates all its air traffic for the north here (and who flys more international flights, even to other continents), but that doesn't mean Monterrey is not an important hub for Mexicana also.
- Finally, the article itself describes Chicago as an important focus city. Why do you keep deleting this?
- Hari Seldon 04:12, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Because there are no sources which support the assertion that ORD is a focus city for MX. They fly to exactly six destinations, three of which are other MX hubs/focus cities. That size of service doesn't meet any commonly accepted definition of "focus city." Similarly, given that there are exactly four destinations from MTY on Mexicana, you can hardly call it a focus city for them. FCYTravis 05:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Nowhere in the article is Chicago described as "an important focus city." FCYTravis 06:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- According to the Mexicana website, the airline also does only 4 routes from Guadalajara. Los Angeles? How many flights does the airline does from there?
- In Mexico, and based on the structure of the economy, four routes make a city a "focus city" because of the intensity of travel. One flight to Mexico City from Monterrey every 20 minutes, and one flight to Guadalajara from Monterrey every hour definetly makes it a Focus City.
- It is subjective, I know, but unless we agree on a standard definition of "focus city" and apply it to all airports, then I don't think its fair to list some and leave out others with similar characteristics. And by your own implied definition, the only airport/city that matters is Mexico City. So I will delete all other airports until and if we agree on a standard. Hari Seldon 20:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
I feel "mexicana" needs a disambiguation for the Spanish word "Mexican woman" (mexicana). 18.104.22.168 23:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
The correct full name for "Mexicana" is Compania Mexicana de Aviacion SA de CV which has been shortened in recent press releases to CMA.
No incidents or accidents for Mexicana?
Mexicana is not the leading Mexican carrier
I read in the article that Mexicana is the leading carrier in Mexico, however, that is wrong because the major carrier by fleet and number of passengers is Aeromexico.
Fair use rationale for Image:Mexicana early timetable.JPG
Image:Mexicana early timetable.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
- Majority of the article is uncited. Failed B-class-1.
- Incidents and accidents section is missing. Failed B-class-2.
More Historic airplane pictures
And I know Mexicana´s PR people have them. --Dagofloreswi (talk) 05:36, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Status of rescue proposal?
I rewrote the Proposed return to service section since a lot of the previous language was written in an inappropriate tense and contained some unsourced speculation. One thing that's not clear is if the offer is entirely dead at this point. Can someone clarify and possibly add a source? Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 19:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Purported resumption of operations
In order to stave off a possible edit war, I have invited User:22.214.171.124 here to discuss the airline's return to operations. In the meantime, I have reverted the unverified information until we can nail down a reliable source. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Turns out, in its archives, Mexicana was celebrating its 75th anniversary:
- English: http://web.archive.org/web/19970124190141/http://www.mexicana.com/english/corp/corp11.shtml
- Spanish: http://web.archive.org/web/19970315071729/http://www.mexicana.com/espanol/corp/index.shtml
Editing Mexicana Airlines Fraud Section
The Mexicana Airlines Fraud section was poorly written and not appropriate for a encyclopedia type article. It was biased and did not have any supporting documentation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duncandav (talk • contribs) 00:25, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Resumption of operations... again
Any claim that Mexicana is going to resume operations is contrary to WP:CRYSTAL. The issue here is that since many claims have been made by many parties over the past year and a half and each one has proven untrue, we should not include any predicted dates of resumption until it actually happens. There's no particular reason why the latest claims are any more reliable than the previous claims. Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 16:54, 13 June 2012 (UTC)