Talk:Kansas City International Airport

Passenger Friendly?

"The three-ring design makes it one of the most passenger friendly airports in the world" - This strikes me as POV, and certainly has no source. And certainly does not fit my experience of having to wait over 20 minutes for the "Red Bus" to decide to show up just so I can effectively leave the airport to get to another terminal just to wait in line again at security because you have to leave the area. Ridiculous. Soonercary 13:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with you. The only things I've heard about MCI is that it's the complete opposite because of difficult to transit terminals. The only ones I've heard described as "passenger friendly" would be places like DTW, PIT, DEN, and the like due to a single security checkpoint. NW036 16:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Pasenger Friendly? Yes indeed.

On various newspapers and newscasts, the airport is always mentioned as easy to get around. Keep in mind, 90%+ of passengers either begin or end their travel at KCI. Southwest has all of its aircraft in councorse B and Midwest has all of theirs in concourse A. If you have the need to travel in betwen terminals its probably due to a code share disaster. You can fault the airline you flew with for that problem. There is no airport in the western hemisphere handling the amount of passengers MCI handles and yet has such small distance between parking and gate. At LaGuardia airport you can wait up to 2 hours just to get through security. In short, passengers love the airport because of ease of use and airlines hate it do to the amount of security and workforce required to service it. Kcuello (talk) 22:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Foot bath deal

The fact that a far-right-wing talk show host and a far-right-wing heavily-biased "news" site like WorldNetDaily attacked this is not evidence of any broader "controversy." Connecting the foot baths with 9/11 is a blatant example of poisoning the well and absolutely does not belong in this article. It's wingnuttery in the extreme. I have inserted a factual statement about the installation. FCYTravis 16:28, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Foot Bath Information

The Foot Bath controversy has been extensively discussed here, here, here, and here. It is easily found in a google search for "Kansas City International Airport Foot Bath". I'm not up for a reversion war over sanitizing history. So here's the section that was deleted. Americasroof 16:52, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

A minor part of the renovation received national publicitiy in 2007 when the airport built four low level shower heads at the cabbie way station under the airport control tower that is usually not visited by the general public.

Radio talk show host Michael Savage said the baths were built for Muslim cab drivers. Worldnet showed pictures of the footbath area which had rolled up prayer rugs nearby and had the following quote:<</nowiki> Airport admits installing foot-washing benches - Worldnet.com - May 1, 2007 - Retrieved October 11, 2007

Islamic suicide attackers go through a ritual called ablution, or bodily cleansing, before carrying out their martyrdom operations. The 9/11 hijackers performed this ritual before entering airport terminals...Muslims are required to wash their feet and other body parts before praying to Allah five times a day. They often complain that public restroom sinks do not accommodate their needs. Floor-level basins and benches make it easier for them to perform their foot-washing ritual.

Worldnet quoted Mark VanLoh, director of the Kansas City Aviation Department: "The majority of our drivers are Muslim, so preventing them from praying at all was not an option, especially in our public terminal restrooms...This was the best solution, and those facilities were added without public money.

Kansas City Aviation Department spokesman Joe McBride was quoted at Worldnet as saying the showers could be used "for any wash purpose by any of the users, including filling car wash buckets." McBride told KMBC-TV "It's a case of mistaken information on the Internet."

Response to Foot Bath Comments

You posted a bunch of links to... right-wing or Christian conservative blogs and forums. That spectacularly fails our reliable sourcing criteria. This has been extensively discussed over at Islam in the United States. The "controversy" over this matter is limited entirely to a few right-wing Web sites and talk show hosts. There is no serious opposition to the installation, no lawsuits have been filed nor has anyone attempted to have them removed. It's hot air and bloviation from the usual suspects. FCYTravis 17:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The IndyStar article you mention makes note of the controversy:

They have drawn the ire of bloggers and pundits, who say they violate the separation of church and state, and the praise of advocacy groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

There is clearly controversy and KCI is one of the first major airports to have the controversy. The airport will continue to be mentioned as the foot bath issues will continue to arise. There are legitimate arguments (e.g., the cleansing is part of the 3x/day prayer process and not necessarily only a precursor for terrorist attacks, there were safety concerns and there's the famous separation of church and state arguments). The debate occuring in the Midwest rather than the more cosmopolitan coast cities adds to the notability. Unfortunately in an attempt to make the article politcally correct, a real issue is being sanitized. P.S. I've added sections to separate the section about the deleted section from the debate. Americasroof 18:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Footbaths are not a precursor to terrorist attacks at all. This is the kind of false "controversy" that I'm talking about. No sane person believes that Muslim footbaths are a precursor to terrorist attacks on airliners any more than holy water fonts are precursors to terrorist attacks on abortion clinics. The "debate" is nothing of the sort - where is there serious debate? We do not serve to republish and amplify fringe opinions, and there's nothing to suggest that the opposition is anything more than fringe. Indianapolis, Phoenix, Denver, Kansas City - all have Muslim prayer facilities and none qualify as "coast cities." Where is the serious attempt to remove these? It's a blogstorm that's already passed. Get back to me when there's a lawsuit filed or some concrete evidence that there's more to the opposition than hot air. FCYTravis 21:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for deleting this. I found this topic very strange to be located in an airport article. I have yet to read the article of any major airport in the world that has such an off-topic article. The issue bears no reason as to why it needs to be in this article. Kcuello (talk) 22:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Central Terminal

Added additional information on the central terminal issue. I cant seem to find pictures of the blueprint the arcitects used to display to the airport personell. If someone could find a picture of the blueprint and include it in the article it would be much appreciated. Kcuello (talk) 15:09, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Removed possible small vandalism in first paragragh. Previously said airport was "inconveniently" located 15 miles from Kansas City. Removed the "inconveniently". WTarrasque (talk) 14:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Why? It's an accurate description of location. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.62.69.76 (talk) 21:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. One of the most inconvenient airports I've ever been to and since I have status on 4 airlines and regularily fly 200,000 miles a year, I should know. It's one thing to be light-years from the city. It's another thing to have no accessible transportation to and from and no amenities near by. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.155.16.95 (talk) 19:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

While it is POV, it is true. I say keep it in!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.216.212.193 (talk) 16:47, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

American Airlines

Can somebody add AA and/or American Eagle service to DFW and wherever else besides ORD? Some dork screwed it up by adding AS to SEA/PDX service which doesn't exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.94.61.74 (talk) 11:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

MCI had airlines in 1969?

"passengers were flying out of the [MCI] airport since at least August, 1969."

Airline passengers? Anybody know what airline he's talking about? Tim Zukas (talk) 23:20, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Air Canada service to YUL

I am not sure who continues to add Montreal as a list of destinations from MCI via Air Canada. That is incorrect and should not appear. The only N/S destination is YYZ.

References

I've restored the refimprove tag as various sections (for example 1.3-1.5) are entirely devoid of inline references. Many statements in other sections are also unreferenced. Dpmuk (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

"TWA's Flawed Vision" Reference

There is only one citation for the entire section, and it leads to a webpage that has copy/pasted the entire wikipedia page without providing any more useful information. Recommend deletion. Attempting to find better sources at this time. 208.79.15.57 (talk) 03:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC) Stan, 8 March 2014

Regional Airlines and ... operated by

WiKipedia is no longer listing all regional aircraft as XYZ operated by ABC. Please do not revert to the old format.

All airports in the US are now doing as an example American Eagle, Delta Connection, Air Canada Express without the operated by.

RicHicks (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Kansas City International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061113050231/http://www.ntma.com/07_2002_honor_awards.php to http://www.ntma.com/07_2002_honor_awards.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:45, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kansas City International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110519174435/http://www.flykci.com/NewsRoom/NewsRoom/156.htm to http://www.flykci.com/NewsRoom/NewsRoom/156.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kansas City International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100226035755/http://flykci.com/Link.asp?Url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eairportsites%2Enet%2Fmasterplans%2Fkci%2Fdefault%2Ehtm to http://www.flykci.com/Link.asp?Url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airportsites.net%2Fmasterplans%2Fkci%2Fdefault.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100305124811/http://www.flykci.com/NewsRoom/NewsRoom/263.htm to http://www.flykci.com/NewsRoom/NewsRoom/263.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://wildlife.pr.erau.edu/sig_strikes_2008.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kansas City International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nbcactionnews.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=DCE6476C-1100-46EF-9D35-44536D1635E5&gsa=true
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724012716/http://www.dodgeglobe.com/news/local/x1167181776/Great-Lakes-Airlines-to-discontinue-flights-to-Kansas-City-from-Dodge-City-Regional-Airport to http://www.dodgeglobe.com/news/local/x1167181776/Great-Lakes-Airlines-to-discontinue-flights-to-Kansas-City-from-Dodge-City-Regional-Airport

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:30, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

intro re-write

I rewrote the intro, which had over-emphasized a 2013 study to claim that the airport mostly serves Kansas residents. A slight majority of vehicles at the time were from the Kansas side of the state line, but the airport serves the metropolitan area as a whole, including residents who arrive at the airport by transit, and also visitors who fly into Kansas City Airport for business, family, and tourism on both sides of the state line. -2003:CA:8715:CF00:8C10:1153:6CFD:1BFE (talk) 09:35, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

I re-wrote it and put down Kansas City metropolitan area for neutrality. Then listed exactly as the source states 8% more is quite significant not very slight. It’s not just in 2013 it says that in 2008 49% were from Kansas and 45% from Missouri and now it’s 51% and 43%. That 6% missing includes travelers and people from other states. By Transit there’s only a few busses that go there a day from a system in both states so that’s irrelevant. Then people take Uber in both states too so still irrelevant. The reason Johnson county uses it the most is because of the quite significantly higher average income. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historybuff1111 (talk • contribs) 11:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@Historybuff1111 - A few issues with your rewrite:

1. If just 51% of the cars are from Kansas then this isn't an overwhelming majority. Even an 8% difference is relatively slight. I think we'd need to be looking at something like 75%, or at least 67%, to say that it "mostly" serves Kansas.

2. If I'm not mistaken, the study was simply based on the cars going to the airport, so it wouldn't be counting people who arrive at the airport by city bus, airport shuttle, get dropped off by a friend, or some other such means, where people from the Missouri side might be over-represented.

3. All of this is only counting local residents who use the airport and then return - not people from other parts of the country (or world) who fly into KCI (MCI) and visit friends or family, attend a business conference, etc...And yet those people are also being "served" by the airport, and it's likely that a majority of them are going to the Missouri side, since KCMO is the largest city in the metro area, and also home of a number of corporate headquarters.

...In any event, I think it's fine to note the disproportionate use of the airport by Johnson County residents, but to say that it "mostly" serves Kansas or Johnson Co. is not appropriate. -2003:CA:8715:CF00:8C10:1153:6CFD:1BFE (talk) 11:47, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

The biggest city is completely meaningless especially since it has much lower population density than cities like Overland Park and other “suburbs”, what matters is total area population within 100 miles, which is mostly in Kansas when you add Lawrence And Topeka Kansas metro and micropolitain areas it’s another 390,000 people for example. As far as corporate headquarters Johnson county has the sprint Headquarters, Garmin headquarters etc and many more than KCMO and even KCK has Cerner. Actually Kcmo almost has almosy as much land area as Johnson county Yet Johnson County has 592,000 people. Peopld being dropped off would probably be the same in both states. I’ll re-word it a little bit. You seem to be the same person who wrote the Kansas City metropolitan area page totally in favor of KCMO because you’re the only one who would say “straddle the Missouri Kansas state line” word for word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historybuff1111 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok , I reworded the intro. Sorry it makes you upset that Johnson County uses the airport most but it’s just a fact. 9 counties in Missouri only accounts for 51% of business and financial employment compared to 5 counties in Kansas accounting for 49% according to the bureau of labor statistics[1]. That doesn’t even count nearby Topeka Kansas (the state capitol) or Lawrence Kansas (Location of Kansas University 30 minutes away). There’s also more universities in Kansas that would use the airport , Kansas State and Kansas U. Missouri university is closer to St Louis, and Springfield mo has their own airport for M-state. It’s judt a fact, it’s an encyclopedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Historybuff1111 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

@Historybuff1111 -

So, first of all, I haven't made any significant edits on the KC metro area page...actually not any at all that I'm aware of. Saying that the metro area straddles the state-line is hardly unusual wording.

I have no agenda here. I don't live in metro-KC and never have. I have flown in and out of KCI a few times though.

In any case, I only discovered this page because I was curious to read about the airport, and then I found that it had some major POV pushing trying to make it look like the airport "mostly" serves Kansas, when that's simply not the case.

It's true that the study did show a small majority of cars parking at the airport from Kansas, with most of those from Johnson Co., but it could well be that more of the people from the Missouri side arrived at the airport by other means, and again, if someone who doesn't live in the area at all flies into KCI for a conference in Missouri then it's serving the Missouri side, even if there's no Missouri car parking there. And even using that study as the metric, again, it doesn't show an overwhelming majority of the sort that would be needed to say that the airport "mostly" serves Kansas...

This language simply isn't informative. It's POV pushing from someone I would guess lives in Johnson Co. and wants to toot the horn of the Kansas side of the BI-STATE metro area.

Anyway, this is the compromise text, which strikes a good balance of presenting all facts, by stating that the airport "provides service for the bi-state Kansas City Metropolitan Area and the surrounding region. A 2013 study by airport officials reported that 51% of local travelers were from Kansas, mostly from Johnson County, and 43% were from Missouri."

If you want to depart from this and include what I find to be very POV-pushing language that it "mostly serves Kansas," or "mostly serves Johnson County, Kansas," then start an RFC. But I"m pretty sure most editors here will see your POV-pushing for what it is. -2003:CA:8712:CE00:D14A:B684:951A:AAED (talk) 14:25, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. The compromise language is NPOV, makes sense, and is informative. Trying to talk about "mostly serves" doesn't add anything. 19:21, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Be aware that User:Historybuff1111 and over a dozen associated accounts have been blocked for sock puppetry. Nonconstructive edits have been made across Kansas City related articles, often inserting Johnson County, Kansas anywhere and everywhere regardless of relevance. Grey Wanderer (talk) 20:19, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that after commenting here again today. I saw that the "serves mostly Kansas" rhetoric had been added just a few days ago by someone who was then flagged as a sock-puppet, so of course that sent up an immediate red-flag, along with the fact that he and the other one both seemed oddly triggered by the word "straddling" to describe the KC metro area "straddling" the MO/KS state line. I started the process of reporting him, but apparently he was already flagged as a sock while I was writing the report. -2003:CA:8712:CE00:D14A:B684:951A:AAED (talk) 21:40, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Removing Johnson County cruft/spam, again...

About a year ago an issue came to light (see discussion above) with a sock-puppeteer using multiple sock accounts to spam metro-KC articles with stuff emphasizing Johnson County, Kansas.

This stuff was removed at the time, but I just now checked the article again and it's back. Removed it once again. -2003:CA:870E:703A:8587:6026:7791:C9DF (talk) 23:11, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2020

Go to Facilities section. Second sentence, that begins; In the year ending April 30, 2018, change 2018 to 2019, change 124,556 to 116,587, change 341 to 319. Source:Reference#2, Airport Master Plan for MCI (form 5010). Thank you. 2601:581:8402:1EE0:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 12:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:11, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit requests for 2020 year end airport data for MCI

Hello and good day. Please make the following changes in the infobox:

• Change stat year from 2019 to 2020
• Passengers, change 11,795,635 to 4,493,669
• Aircraft movements, change 123,395 to 73,715
• Total cargo, change 205,706,735 to 195,439,513
• Source; goes to December 2020 PDF

• Annual traffic section, enter 4,493,669 for 2020

Source:flykci.com Traffic statistics (website) Thank you for your time.2601:581:8402:6620:F0F0:DA42:91E8:F261 (talk) 23:02, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Airport code change proposals

I edited the section about proposals to change the airport code to reflect that it is the FAA, not IATA, which objects to changing airport location identifiers due to navigational concerns. The IATA deals with passenger-facing concerns and their airport codes are just used for things like passenger ticketing and baggage handling. Pilots and air traffic controllers do not use IATA codes at all, but rather FAA and ICAO ones. In the U.S., most airports try to use the same code for their FAA and IATA codes, but this is just a convenience, not a requirement. Additionally, most passenger-service airports in the continental U.S. also use their FAA location identifier prefixed by 'K' as their ICAO code, but this is also not a requirement.

As a general rule, the FAA does not allow airport location identifiers to be changed unless there is some major change in service at an airport, such as gaining scheduled passenger service at an airport that previously was not eligible for a 3-letter identifier or sometimes when an airport is completely relocated to another site. This is also why Orlando International (previously McCoy Field) is still MCO, Nashville International (previously Berry Field) is still BNA, and Louis Armstrong New Orleans International (previously Moisant Field) is still MSY, for example. Vbscript2 (talk) 18:07, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

SCHMUCKOLA...

@Smuckola

What's up Danny? Just in case you forgot...

I wasn't sure what WP:DOX was quoted for, because DB was originally meant as doochebag, not yer name. Until then, u were were unimportant and not worth my time. But that little tidbit intrigued me when u told on yerself, so I started Googling to find out more about the sanctimonious prig that u are. I found multiple accounts under the same name online. Now I'm curious as to how mentally sluggish a person has to be to use the same screen-name on multiple platforms? I mean, what a dipchit! And some with photos too. I have to say, ya look like a human version of menstrual cramps. Definitely come across as a fruit booty who enjoys the bottom, too. Seriously, like the type of person who enjoys tongue punching fartboxes and buys alphabet soup just to swallow all the Ds. On the Google reviews though, I am curious who the pig is in the sombrero. Did U go out hogging one night and find a wife? But I no longer wonder why u get yer jollies off of bullying people on Wikipedia like a keyboard warrior. U definitely aren't taken seriously in the real world because, well, u look like a fuking nerd. 199.192.119.194 (talk) 19:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)