Talk:Airport seating
Latest comment: 11 months ago by Explodingtnt30 in topic Contradiction in article
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
 | Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 12 February 2011. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Contradiction in article
edit1."[seating design]deliberately sociofugal — discouraging any form of social interaction between individuals ...
2.{the seating space is}designed to encourage...connectedness among travelers.
This appears to imply that seating is designed to both encourage and discourage interaction, and that is not possible.
What do you all think? Geardona (talk) 03:15, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- I think we can keep both, but need to make them both in the design section and edit them to show how airports may use differing seating design, however in their current state they definitely contradict each other.
- Under design
- arrangement of chairs in rigid lines bolted to the floor was deliberately sociofugal and under comfortability trends
- To accommodate customer experience, airports have applied major efforts to increase comfort in the lobbies/seating areas. The space surrounding the seating area within an airport is designed to encourage comfort, happiness, and connectedness among travelers.
- I think it is important to add the context because without it seems to be an obvious contradiction, however now it seems to contradict a little less. Explodingtnt30 (talk) 06:24, 8 December 2023 (UTC)