Talk:Shenzhen Bao'an International Airport

Current Dispute

Ok, this little dispute regarding China has go on long enough. I am very tired of it. The category which it should be in Airports of the People's Republic of China. There was already a CFD attempt on that category and it failed. Burgundavia 07:23, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)

There was no poll on deletion of category:Airports of mainland China. — Instantnood 04:10, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

• you are begging the issue. There was a poll to move Airports of the PRC to Airports of mainland China which so far has no concensus to do. SchmuckyTheCat 04:21, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You are right. But there is no CFD to delete category:Airports of mainland China. The previous poll kept that category, without addressing in what way in should be kept, and how it should be used. — Instantnood 06:15, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Usually a move entails that the old category should be deleted. Thanks for pointing this out. I shall perhaps go inform the admins that they forgot to delete it? :D The current situation works just fine. Renamed categories can be made to redirect, as has happened here.--Huaiwei 07:09, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The poll voted down renaming from category:Airports of the People's Republic of China to category:Airports of mainland China. The decision was to kept the then present name, and to make category:Airports of Hong Kong and category:Airports of Macau subcategories of it. There was no discussion on how airports in mainland China will be dealt with. — Instantnood 07:49, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

That is splitting hairs. As I have said before, I don't really care which way this falls, but currently it is at PRC not mainland. If you wish to change it, CFD is your vehicle. As the vote failed, it was also a vote, in my mind of keeping and adding to mainland. Burgundavia 07:52, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Let's keep existing articles in the existing manner. Until the issue is ressolved at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese), new or uncategorised articles should not be dictated by the previous CFD on category:Airports of the People's Republic of China, which is not entirely relevant. — Instantnood 08:42, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Object. The situation has always been to discuss the naming of categories on a case by case basis, as has been do for this category. You tried to use the conventions to come up with regulations addressing all similar Mainland China vs PRC disputes, something the discussions has obviously failed to accomplish. There is a reaffirment in Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese) that this dispute should continue to be dealt with on a case by case basis. Why then should precious rounds of discussion not count, or are of any less relevance?--Huaiwei 08:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes.. the set of conventions will be applied on a case-by-case basis (like what had been done at template talk:Europe), upon an agreement on the general direction. Before the general direction is agreed on, please keep things as they are. — Instantnood 09:00, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

What in the world are you talking about? If the consensus is to be based on a case by case basis, then obviously the vote process should be respected. If people like youselves fails to respect them, we will make sure it is put right. What do you mean by keeping things as they are?--Huaiwei 09:34, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

CFD

While there was no vote on mainland China, there was a vote for PRC, which was defeated. Thus to avoid splitting articles, they should all be in one. As PRC should not be deleted, the article should thus go into there and mainland should be a redirect. Burgundavia 07:30, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

How the airports in mainland China should be dealt with was not addressed (well, perhaps marginally addressed) in the poll. — Instantnood 07:50, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

But it dealt with how airports in the PRC should be addressed. I think the situation is quite clear. Only people who are unable to come to terms with the voting process will come up with commentaries such as this.--Huaiwei 08:47, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

jguk's comment was made without acknowledging what mainland China means. Grutness' and Tony Sidaway's comments did not address how airports in mainland China should be dealt with. — Instantnood 08:55, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

See Also

Does this article need a see also section to the greater list of PRC airports? If so, it should obviously point to the articles name, not a POV redirect. SchmuckyTheCat 16:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It's needed as per Wikipedia:Lists#Navigation, Wikipedia:Lists (embedded lists). Both links are not NPOV to the everyone. The disputed parties involved should preserve the status quo ante, instead of insisting on their own POV. — Instantnood 18:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

What? SchmuckyTheCat 19:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Destinations

Shenzhen offers flights to Luxembourg?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.82.55 (talk) 03:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Air China to Los Angeles

This is a same flight number, same plane service, so there is no terminal change at PEK. Verify it in FR24 here. Sources here and here.

Also see WP:Airports page content, #7. For examples of this elsewhere on wiki:

• AI 127 HYD-DEL-ORD same plane: HYD is listed on ORD page.
• AKL and CHC on the DXB page, as EK operates direct service through multiple cities on to these airports. - ✈Sunnya343✈ (talk) 14:30, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

See PEK airport page. International flights by CA use a totally separate terminal (3E) than domestic flights (3C). HkCaGu (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Shenzhen Bao'an 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/20110724142633/http://www.ups.com/content/cn/en/about/news/press_releases/02_08_2010_CN.html to http://www.ups.com/content/cn/en/about/news/press_releases/02_08_2010_CN.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100529192202/http://eng.szairport.com/catalog_518.aspx to http://eng.szairport.com/catalog_518.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090411171755/http://www.jadecargo.com/ContactUs/tabid/68/Default.aspx to http://www.jadecargo.com/ContactUs/tabid/68/Default.aspx
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.szcpost.com/2009/03/shenzhen-international-airport-guangdong-china.html

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) 07:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)