Talk:Bonza

Requested move 22 September 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 00:34, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

---

• Bonza (airline) → Bonza
• Bonza → Bonza, Banwa Province

– The airline is definitely WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with 11k views in the last thirty days, the town on the other hand has only 100. Aydoh8 (talk) 06:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)*

• Support, but move to Bonza, Burkina Faso, per WP:PLACEDAB. 162 etc. (talk) 14:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Comment the hatnote should be converted into Bonza (disambiguation) -- 67.70.25.175 (talk) 05:09, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Help me!

Moved from User talk:Jh15s

Please help me with... Hi there, a few parts of the article at Bonza (airline) that were written by me were removed by an editor who said I was advertising/promoting the airline and cited Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I had a read of the Neutral point of view page and I'm still not sure how/why the removed sections could be considered advertising/promotion.

Could you have a look at the removed sections and let me know if I've done something wrong and inadvertently advertised/promoted the airline (and what rules/conventions I need to follow)? I'm just really confused as to what I did wrong here. The edits in question are: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bonza_(airline)&oldid=1177888485 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bonza_(airline)&oldid=1177888596 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bonza_(airline)&oldid=1177888748 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bonza_(airline)&oldid=1177888817

Thanks in advance! Jh15s (talk) 06:36, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Jh15s: To be honest, this "Bonza Holidays" program isn't really that notable or significant in the grand scheme of things. Most airlines I know of offer some sort of packaged tours and holidays and the like to its customers, e.g. Virgin Australia Holidays (apparently that shut down in 2020, but besides the point), Qantas Hotels, Qantas Cruises, Amtrak Vacations, etc. I can see why it was removed by @DaHuzyBru, I get that your edits regarding this were most likely factual, but probably Wikipedia just isn't the place for that sort of info; Wikipedia isn't a travel guide.

As for the parts of the in-flight amenities section which were also removed, I don't really think each type of seat needs its own section heading, but @DaHuzyBru might have other reasons. When you can find a secondary source (or better, multiple!) that's raving about the different types of seats, and isn't just casually mentioning the different types in passing, then maybe it might be significant enough to include in this article. The airline is all-economy anyways right, how much better can it get?

On another note, you may find it easier to link to edit diffs like this: [[Special:Diff/NUMBER]] -- it shows the changes between edits rather than just the raw text of one edit.

Hope this helps, Fork99 (talk) 09:35, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

@Fork99: Thanks for the explanation - I guess I must have gotten a bit too carried away with adding stuff and didn't really check to see whether it was necessary to include Bonza Holidays - I'll try and make sure I check if something's noteworthy enough before putting it in next time. The in-flight amenities section was based on how it's done over at the Virgin Australia and Qantas articles - both articles have short descriptions of each different type of seat as well as a summary of the food and beverage onboard and the in-flight entertainment offered so I assumed that similar information should be provided in the article here. Jh15s (talk) 09:57, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Destinations Section

Looking for comment on what the "Destinations" section should look like. I think it should be "At the time Bonza ceased operations, Bonza operated scheduled services to the following destinations:" then the table be as per this edit: [1]. Rather that this edit [2] where the table just says "terminated" on all entries as it doesn't offer any insight into how airline operated its network before it ceased operations. The articles of V Australia and Australian Airlines describe the networks prior to them ceasing operations. Per WP:DEFUNCT-AIRLINES "All articles should have a list of destinations formerly served, and an asterisk (*) should be placed next to all airports which no longer have scheduled airline service." But I'd like to know the perspective of other editors. Otchiman (talk) 03:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Ceased field in infobox

The field, which shows as Ceased operations should be populated with just that; the last day of operations, which was 29 April, not 2 July; the date creditors voted to in liquidate on. Other examples that have the field populated this way are; Ansett Australia with 13 September 2001, Brindabella Airlines 14 December 2013, Compass Airlines 20 December 1991, JetGo 1 June 2018 and Tigerair Australia 25 March 2020. Rynelyne (talk) 03:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Airlines of Australia navigation box

The Airlines of Australia navigation box lists current airlines, not defunct ones, hence Bonza was removed recently and Tigerair when it ceased. Navigation boxes should only be used on articles in which the subject matter has an entry. When an airline's entry is removed because it has ceased, then the nbox should be concurrently removed from that article. Hence it is correct to include the box on the List of defunct airlines of Australia article, but not on individual defunct airline articles. That it is incorrect on other articles is not a reason to do so here.

By way of another example the Scott Morrison article had the Template:Current G20 leaders and Template:APEC leaders navigation boxes attached as Morrison was listed in these. Now that he has been superseded in those roles, he has been removed from those boxes and both boxes removed from the article.

An alternative would be to increase the box's scope and add a defunct airlines section, would need a discussion be held on the talkpage first. Alternatively a separate Template:Defunct airlines of Australia box along the lines of Template:Defunct airlines of the United States could be set up. Rynelyne (talk) 03:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

@Rynelyne: Again, the navbox template links to an article on a list of defunct airlines of Australia at the bottom of the navbox. Please look at the bottom of the navbox.

There's seriously no point in removing it, it just makes navigating Wikipedia harder. The navbox doesn't imply anything about whether or not an airline is still operational. See all other defunct airline articles, they continue to have the navbox, e.g. Ansett Australia, Tigerair Australia, Air Australia, Aboriginal Air Services, Impulse Airlines, Compass Airlines (Australia), Trans Australia Airlines, among others. Fork99 (talk) 03:53, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Yes one of the entries is List of defunct airlines of Australia. But none of the other articles you have listed are linked. The template has 40 entries, thus it should be only be used on the same 40 articles and no more. Bit disingenuous to claim it exists on the Compass Airlines and Impulse Airlines articles because you only just added them. I have reverted pending the result of this discussion.

Are any of the 40 not operational, not from what I can see? The navbox does only list operational airlines, hence every time one ceases, it is removed. Has occurred at least 10 times that I can see. The problem is nothing new, seemingly somebody has many years ago gone and added them to all Australian airline articles, operational or otherwise. Rynelyne (talk) 06:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

I've also invited WikiProject Aviation to comment as this is currently only between us two, and the pages you initiated a discussion at are rarely watched by other editors.

If any of the defunct airlines I mentioned are not linked at the defunct list, then that list is incomplete and they should be added. Fork99 (talk) 07:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

And apologies for the Compass + Impulse edits, I had multiple tabs open and thought that you had removed them. Fork99 (talk) 07:31, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Most other similar navigation boxes list all airlines, both active and defunct. e.g. Argentina, France, Germany, Indonesia, New Zealand, Singapore, South Africa. The only exceptions I have found are Canada and the United States that have separate boxes for defunct airlines, probably due to size.

@Rynelyne is correct in stating that the template should only be on the same articles that have an entry. However @Fork99 makes a valid point that excluding is not ideal from a completeness point of view. The best solution is to bring the Australian navigation box up to the same standard as others, i.e. list all airlines, active and defunct. I have added the 60 or so defunct airlines to the template and added the box to the articles where it was missing, hopefully this will solve the problem. Ballabend (talk) 02:39, 10 July 2024 (UTC)