This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I looked here to find repeated comments about the use of humour during safety briefings. --Jumbo 06:15, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Is there any evidence to prove that this actually is the leading Australian low-cost airline? On what basis is this statement made? 131.107.0.81 23:30, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Since no-one seems to have an opinion on this matter, I (same person as the paragraph above) have removed the reference to Virgin Blue being "the leading" airline. Pennoze 22:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
The following is from the press release:
Mr Wallace, who uses a wheelchair and is also a national board member of People with Disability Australia, was told he would not be able to board a (Qantas booked) Virgin Blue direct flight (DJ578) from Adelaide – Canberra scheduled for 4.05 pm on Sunday 8 October 2006 as he allegedly did not meet Virgin Blue’s ‘independent travel criteria’: follow the links from http://www.virginblue.com.au/bookings/ssrs/
The press release can be verified by contacting dacsecretariat@ozemail.com.au
Banno 06:41, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Every time I have been spotting the over the radio it has always been Virgin XXX. I have also checked with a friend who works for virgin, he says the call sign is 'Virgin. According to this links the Virgin Callsign is 'Virgin' Here I don't see where you are getting your info from??
I'm looking at pulling some information out of the history section and putting it back into the main section because it describes virgin eg para 'Virgin Blue uses a familiar formula ...' & 'Like other brands in the Virgin family, Virgin Blue takes an informal and humorous approach to business. ' etc - also I think that this needs to be put in context of the company's use of the Virgin brand since my understanding is that the airline is moving away from this as it attempts to capture more of the business market and (potentially) drop the association with virgin. Obviously don't want to do any major changes without consultation so let me know your thoughts.. Oh also might add something about Labour costs and unionisation since these are major aspects to low cost carrier operation Abeorch 07:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I would like to remove all events from the Virgin Blue Wiki page. Reason Being there is alot more events that happen on a day to day operation. Only listing a small number of events and by the looks of things, they are all negative. This is not a objective listing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.38.26 (talk) 02:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Is anyone here? I keep removing thse but they keep re appearing...... I have stated the Reasons and have stated the edit history.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.38.26 (talk) 10:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Well its not my fault if no one else wants to converse in some discussion..... how about you can read my comments and can get your opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zuluman29 (talk • contribs) 11:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I Agree with Zuluman, changing the name from Events to Customer Service is incorrect. Anyone viewing the Virgin Blue Page will read the section regarding "Customer Service" and will get a negative view. Whilst Virgin Blue has been voted with the best customer service for a LCC in the Asia Pacific Region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.229.129 (talk) 01:02, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Why can't we just remove the section?? I'd rather have complete accurate infomation than a small subjective list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zuluman29 (talk • contribs) 12:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
This sucks then.. who gives you the right to control the content on Wikipedia.......... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.38.26 (talk) 08:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Image:Virgin blue new logo.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 insure 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 20:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Should Melbourne be a hub cuz VB has limited presence at the airport, and shouldnt there be a second hubs section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.98.116 (talk) 01:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
If nobody Answers I will remove Melbourne as a Hub and put it in secondary eggs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.98.116 (talk) 06:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Sigh. This is an inherently POV section because it's all a bunch of "negative" info put in one place. Put the info in the history section, and then filter it on notability. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I believe that there is too much incidents in that section. Most of these used one source of information and I believe that they were all written by the same person who is bias against Virgin Blue. In my opinion most of these incidents aren't notable as no people were injured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebusofdoom (talk • contribs) 01:30, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed i think should some be removed such as engine failure. I only more serious ones should be listed
--Boeing747-412 (talk) 12:40, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
The airline now has 1 A330. Does anyone have any details of the seating configs please?
Thanks
--Boeing747-412 (talk) 12:36, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
There have been 2 edits that put the A330 in the Virgin Blue fleet. This is not yet in the fleet it will enter in June / July.
--Boeing747-412 (talk) 12:14, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |