Talk:Amsterdam Airport Schiphol

Superfluous additions

1. Adding flags for decoration purposes is a violation of MOS:FLAG
2. Adding the 11th till 20th busiest connections (passenger and freight) serves no purpose, especially when unsourced. The Top Ten is enough.

I request more eyes on this, to prevent an edit war. The Banner talk 11:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Etymology

In the article, the listed etymology is that it comes from "Ship's Hell", where ships would be pulled underwater and sink. According to Schiphol's own website, this is not true Reilandeubank (talk) 03:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for noticing this. I have corrected the vandalism. The Banner talk 09:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Destination-specific sourcing

Can we stop adding destination-specific sources to the Airlines and Destinations table? It's an abomination for readability and makes the page unnecessarily heavy. The solution we used at this page, to source the airline with a link to the destination page at their website, is a great compromise and I see no reason to leave that course. It has never been an issue. Destination-specific sources are only needed to source the date a destination begins or resumes. Hhl95 (talk) 01:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Impossible. That will be conflicting with the requirements set out by WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT. The Banner talk 03:18, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Disagree. WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT does not specify the level at which the destinations list should be referenced, as long as all information in there is covered by a reference. That means that one reference to the airline website with its destinations can be enough to cover all destinations listed with that airline. WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT only specifies, like I did, that when a start/resumption/end date is involved, there needs to be a specific reference to cover that date and schedule change. Hhl95 (talk) 19:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)