MAXjet, Big Sky[edit]

Removed MAXjet, as it has now ceased operation. --Resplendent (talk) 20:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removed Big Sky, as it has ceased operations. --Resplendent (talk) 06:27, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

US Airways Shuttle[edit]

An IP editor (possibly Holding Company Guy) has added a section for defunct airlines within an airline. While he may be technically correct that US Airways Shuttle is no longer an airline within an airline but merely a marketing brand, I still feel it is misleading to list is there because US Airways Shuttle continues to exist. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 19:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dont think that a list of airlines is a place for any of the airline within airline marketing names. MilborneOne (talk) 21:17, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Hawaiian, I left you a note back at US Airways Shuttle. US Airways Shuttle was folded back into US Airways prior to its merger with America West and the US Airways group. I referenced this with a link. I did however leave your AWE ICAO code up there because it seems to be an issue for now. I think we could possily get rid of the airline box now because it is no longer an airline within an airline and might pose some confusion to people thinking it is. (Holding Company Guy!) (talk) 22:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

I removed it from the defunct list, as it is still a still flying. It actually fits the definition of an airline within an airline better now than it used to. Before it was folded back into US Airways it was an airline in its own right, now it is just a brand of US Airways, just like Metrojet was, and the other airlines within airlines were. I also removed Delta Shuttle for the same reason. —Cliffb (talk) 07:16, 17 May 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Scope Creep[edit]

An IP editor has been expanding the scope of this template to include defunct regional airline brands (e.g. America West Express) and defunct airline-within-an-ailrine operations (e.g. Ted). I'm in concurrence with MilborneOne's comment above that this really isn't the place for these sub brands, but I'm okay with living the currently active ones on the list (e.g. Delta Connection) since to the public they appear to be "airlines" and are useful to assist with navigation. In particular I'm concerned with the growth of the defunct section as there are lots of defunct airlines and airline brands in the US, so I really think it needs to be limited to the most notable ones. An argument could be made that since they are no longer US airlines at all that they don't belong (((Airlines of the United Kingdom)) doesn't list any defunct airlines and simply provides a link to the category), but I don't really want to go there right now. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 16:22, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed some air cargo and charter lines from the Defunct section. One of them was Primaris Airlines, which apparently had a fleet size of ONE aircraft. --Itsfullofstars (talk) 19:50, 17 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To BIG?[edit]

This template is too BIG especially if you compare it to the size of the stub article at AirStar Executive Airways. Perhaps it should be broken down into multiple templates. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 21:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why compare templates... Alan. I am sure the list of Airlines of Zimbawe would be much smaller than a list of Airlines of China for example. Comprehensive and accurate is the vast goal of Wiki for most of us. (talk) 01:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Midwest Airlines[edit]

Republic Airways Holdings has given up its operating certificate, therefore it is no longer an airline.

Why is it still included within this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:45, 25 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


With a fleet of five planes, and the fact that it does charter work, is it really a mainline carrier? I don't think so. (talk) 22:33, 17 December 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

5 airplanes.... yeah looks like 700 fleet airline major airline carriers get lumped in all the same.... did my part to try and correct this (talk) 23:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I've just removed Isla Nena Air and Island Air Service as both just failed AFDs for non-notability. If they ever get notable enough to merit an article, I'm sure they can be added back. In the meantime: Isla Nena AFD, Island Air Service AFD. --Mûĸĸâĸûĸâĸû (blah?) 19:03, 17 February 2011 (UTC)hReply[reply]

Direct Air[edit]

This is not an airline? They do not even have plans upon becoming an airline. Why include? Currently creditors are going after this business in relation to the failure of Pace Airlines which actually flew flights on behalf of Direct Air.

Aviation Advantage, d/b/a Southern Skyways d/b/a Myrtle Beach Direct Air, d/b/a Direct Air uses the aircraft of different Charter Airlines (talk) 18:23, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Does anyone happend to know the FAA DOT operating certificate number of these two airlines, or would we need to provide both to add to the info box?

Really cannot see it being justified on the list... have tried numerous times to correct error in WIKI but keep getting full time users of wiki like grupo - Milborne, - 717Hawaiian, - Vegaswikean.... finally looks like we were able to get Direct Air delisted, at least (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I decided to look at the editing history and low and behold I noticed whose baby go! Mokulele is... perhaps that is why it is unjustifiably still on the list of Airlines. (talk) 15:51, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]


If consensus is to remove Direct Air from the list, then I would say that it is reasonable to also remove go! Mokulele. If we do that, then we need to add Mokulele Airlines. go! Mokulele is essentially joint branding and marketing for the operations in Hawaii of two separately owned, separately certificated airlines: Mesa Airlines (formerly dba in Hawaii as go!) and Mokulele Airlines. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 16:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A go!mokulele joint venture travel advertising marketing brand is NOT an airline exactly as Direct Air is NOT an airline. BOTH need removal. Wiki has some standard at to what it is NOT etc... personally though I do not care that much for eventually we will have some sort of place to place marketing schemes confused as airlines like MetroJet, Ted, go!, and go! Mokulele and such. corporate transparency, is important to some of these companies, and some like to distort. Either way, if we have correct places to put the distorted or undistorted then headway will be made in terms of accuracy which I am sure is a goal of wiki32.177.248.172 (talk) 19:00, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm not sure what the point of this rant is. You're agreeing with yourself above, and because you refuse to register an account and use a variety of dynamic IP addresses, you could possibly be accused of using sockpuppets to create the appearance of consensus. You've been pushing this same agenda of exposing airline marketing brands for years now. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 19:32, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

NO AGENDA HERE, just get tired of explaning United Express is NOT an airline when asked. I might suggest returning to a drama free zone, as whoever happened to create the Wiki article go! Mokulele must feel slightly hoodwinked my Mesa Air Group and Mesa Airlines.

I forget, WIKI considers those registered as better than those not "registered." Excuse me for bleeting like a sheep on that particular "rant." (talk) 20:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC) Guess I should have looked at editing history sooner in my wiki carreer! May have been insightful!Reply[reply]

I started the articles go! and Mokulele Airlines, and help sort out how to handle go! Mokulele when the joint venture was announced. I'm fully aware that go! is a dba of Mesa Airlines operating under Mesa's certificate, and I've heard Mesa's "Air Shuttle" callsign being used by go! flights in Hawaii on the radio (I was on a United Airlines jet offering Channel 9 at the time). I want to clarify that I'm not opposed to removing go! Mokulele from this template, but I want to be sure that there is consensus for the change to remove it and Direct Air, not just the persistent work of a single editor trying to remove them. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes or two of the same registered betters users mimicking a third for that matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mesa Air Group Mesa Airlines division "go!"[edit]

Mesa Air Group and Mesa Airlines have decided to rename the internal business division of Mesa Airlines back to "go!" per published reports. Since go! is not an airline this needs to be addressed....... I however am not a registered user so I cannot remove go! Mokule from the list... maybe someone can remove this internal branding that is not an airline — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fixed. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 15:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thus I have removed go! Mokulele to its appropriate place on this template. That others are welcome to improve upon so we may differentiate between certificated airlines and simple airline brand divisions and pseudo airlines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:44, 4 July 2012 (UTC)‎Reply[reply]

I see you're still on your WP:SOAPBOX... -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 15:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Corporate Flight Management[edit]

Corporate Flight Management has begun operating the Essential Air Service flights from MDW to Manistee, Michigan under the marketing carrier "Public Charters". They previously operated flights for Branson AirExpress. Does this make them a commuter carrier or are they still a charter carrier? Regardless they should be on the template for offering regular passenger service. -Drdisque (talk) 03:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2014[edit]

Remove AirNow; local news report shutdown, company website down long term (talk) 23:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Thanks for pointing it out. oknazevad (talk) 23:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]


gone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:51, 3 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gone. And removed. Thanks for pointing it out. PS, new comments go on the bottom. oknazevad (talk) 13:30, 3 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Corvus Airlines[edit]

I cannot edit this but Ravn is actualy a brand like American Eagle, Delta Connection, [[United Express].

One may look at it similar to at Ravn and Ravn Connect much like Continental Express and Continental Connection.

Corvus Airlines [1] (talk) 07:31, 23 January 2015 (UTC) (talk) 07:37, 23 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Semi-protected edit request on 17 October 2015[edit]

Remove US Airways as it has recently fully merged with American Airlines. (talk) 15:45, 17 October 2015 (UTC)  Done. Thanks for keeping an eye out. oknazevad (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

National Airlines?[edit]

What is the criteria for inclusion in the "Mainline" section of the template? National Airlines seems to be far too small (in terms of fleet size and network) to qualify. (talk) 19:32, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The requirement is that you fly scheduled flights on your own part 121 certificate under your own brand with any "mainline" aircraft (such as any Boeing, Airbus, or McDonnell-Douglas aircraft). Size of the airline does not matter, because that would be a fairly arbitrary distinction and what would you call these, "small mainline airlines"? -Drdisque (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It doesn't appear that National Airlines flies any scheduled passenger service any more. I suggest removing it from the template.Avman89 (talk) 04:01, 7 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Regional vs Commuter Airline[edit]

What is the difference in this template between "regional" and "commuter" airlines? Most of the regional airlines listed operate as regional subsidiaries of mainline airlines (American Eagle, United Express, Delta Connection, etc), but not all: Silver Airways, Great Lakes Airlines, and Contour Airlines do not. The ones that don't often operate Essential Air Service routes, but so do the likes of Air Choice One and Boutique Air, which are listed as "commuter" airlines.

Aircraft size doesn't seem to be the distinction either; Cape Air (listed as regional) operates mostly nine-seater Cessna 402s, while Key Lime Air (listed as commuter) operate 30-seat Embraer and Fairchild jets.

Lastly, Wikipedia searches for "Commuter airline" redirects to the page for "Regional airline" suggesting they are interchangeable, or that commuter is a subset of regional.

Should the two sections in this template be merged into one?Avman89 (talk) 05:53, 28 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Air Taxi Deficiency[edit]

It looks like Oknazevad removed "Commuter" from the joint title of the Air Taxi section on 18 February 2018. This is certainly linked with the earlier discussion of Regional vs Commuter airlines as the correct header for most of these carriers would be one of the two. Almost none of the listed operators offer on-demand flights as a substantial part of their business. Most are independent regional carriers not operating under the banner of a larger mainline carrier. Since virtually all of the carriers listed are commuter carriers, not air taxi services, something needs to change about the section. I suppose the question becomes whether and how to distinguish between regional airlines that operate in whole or in part under the banner of a larger mainline carrier and regional airlines which are independent. Commuter Airline is a rather dated term, but it could be useful in drawing this distinction. Regardless, the Air Taxi section needs to be re-worked. Speaks3703 (talk) 20:55, 15 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah, I couldn't really think of better titles for the sections at the time, in part because the regulatory categories don't make a good distinction as far as I can see. I'd be open to any naming set up that makes sense to others. oknazevad (talk) 23:26, 15 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Regional airline page draws a distinction between affiliated and independent regional airlines. Perhaps we can have two sub-categories within the Regional section along those lines? I'm honestly not sure if the Air Taxi section is worth retaining once most of the operators are removed from it. Perhaps it should be combined with Charter?Speaks3703 (talk) 23:43, 15 July 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, navboxes should not be used on articles that are not linked in the navbox. I've already removed it from about 5 articles today, but I don't have the time to run down all the offending articles today. I'll try to get to it later next week, but I won't complain if someone else wants to help.out. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 21:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How large of an airline qualifies?[edit]

I am working on the page for Aleutian Airways, which is a 4 aircraft 6 destination airline in Alaska. Another user put a link to this template on the page, and I am wondering if there is an agreed-upon minimum size for inclusion. Name Omitted (talk) 16:19, 20 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]