Talk:Iberia (airline)

Incidents

I have removed:

• An Airbus 320 en route Madrid-Dublin reported a fire in the back of the aircraft and made an emergency landing on May 03, 2006 late afternoon. Passenger were evacuated using the emergency chutes

This kind of thing is relatively common and does not need to be reported here I feel. Anyone disagree just leave me a message! --GoAround 19:57, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree, go around. I think the Madrid-Dublin fire was an incident and not an accident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Karljoos (talk • contribs) 22:18, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it is important to state or determine the cause of the fire. If it is the result of passenger action I agree. If it is the result of aircraft maintenance, failures in protocol etc that potentially affect the lives of passsngers, it should remain. I have already lived luckily through 1 aircraft fire. I was lucky. Many are not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.244.251.194 (talk) 12:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

History sub-articled

The history section has been spun-out into "History of Iberia Airlines" to help with readability and concentrate the main article onto the current aspects of the company. This "history" page also includes significant incidents and accidents. Please help out by expanding the article and feel free to raise any recommendations, omissions or objections → friedfish 11:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

B-747 photo?

I think you to show a photo of an Iberia B-747, because this aircraft is very interesting, and I think that if Iberia has 4 of these, you should show them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.60.133.117 (talk) 18:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

New Destinations

That list currently included in the article looks to be a little far-fetched. I'm pretty sure none of those routes have been announced or confirmed; it's all speculation, or possibly a wishlist. I think it should go! Jasepl (talk) 09:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

So do I. Deus Caritas Est (talk) 23:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Focus Cities

Don't know about the others but BCN is not a focus city for them at all. They only fly to Madrid and Heathrow form BCN and if two flights make it a focus city... I've removed it. --62.57.161.79 (talk) 22:01, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

BCN is a operational focus city for the Iberia brand due to the Iberia Regional services operated by Air Nostrum. --84.156.68.95 (talk) 21:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Former fleet-(helicopters???)

Hi! I need to ask why doesn't this article has a former fleet section like many other airline articles do?

Because, looking through Ebay for Iberia collectibles for my own collection, I found this: [1] and tried to look up here to see if Iberia actually ever flew helicopters, and so that's how I came to find out there is no former fleet section here. And anyways I know that new rules here specify no questions about the subject itself, only about the article on wikipedia pages but, if anybody who knows the history of Iberia here can help, did Iberia ever actually have helicopters?

Thanks and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Dildo Hispano hable 05:08, 23 November, 2009 (UTC)

Opinions

Why does the article say that Iberia has the worst service and that Spanish passport holders have preference on queues? It is an opinion and it has to be proved and no airlines quality issues ranking shows what the page says. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.153.120.226 (talk) 19:46, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Iberiaa3-1-.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Iberiaa3-1-.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Industry Ratings

I believe that the 'Industry Ratings' section needs to be carefully amended, as it is beneath the standards of encyclopedic writing. It's a bunch of opinions that are either unsourced, or that brazenly distort the facts to reflect bias against Iberia. I welcome other people's opinions. Here's what I disagree with:

Suffering from more customer complaints than any other full-service carrier in Europe..." Can you provide proof of this? What is your source? Surely not what you go on to mention below.

Iberia has developed a negative overall brand image from the general public and a reputation for poor customer service. You cannot make such a claim, period. You just don't have proper sources and this is biased opinion.

In 2011, reflecting very low customer satisfaction ratings, Iberia was ranked #10 in a Business Insider poll for The 10 Worst Airlines in the World.[16]" This very survey states that Iberia's overall rating, according to Zagat, falls between the 10-15 mark described as 'fair to good'. You do not ONCE mention Iberia's 'industry rating' as you call it with such adjectives, instead using words like 'poor' which are in the lowest descriptor (and which Iberia in not in). It is, additionally, utter rubish to depict Iberia as the world's 10th worst airline.

Also, passengers rated Iberia a mere 3.3 out of 10 on Skytrax's website, depicting its services as poor.[17] " I see a 4/10 overall score under passengers' comments, I don't know here you got the 3.3 number from. But the personal rating of 696 English speaking customers in a UK website hardly counts to depict an major airline's services as poor, given that millions have flown Iberia. I would accept something like 'passengers on the UK airline review site Skytrax' or something that quantifies your statement better.

It is also not a Skytrax Quality Approved airline " Again very biased writing, especially since Skytrax has given Iberia a 3-star ranking, awarded to 'airlines delivering a fair Quality performance, but with greater levels of inconsistency'. So again you would need to use words as 'fair' and not 'poor' quality to make this part of the article reflect reputable sources. Your descriptions rather match 2 or 1 star rated airlines, as a 3 star airline is not a bad rating at all, more middle of the line. I do not see a 3 star rating spun as a badge of shame for other other 3-star airlines such as Air Canada, Icelandair, American Airlines, etc which to me suggests a personal unbiased attack on Iberia.

especially given that between 2007 and 2012, Skytrax's rating for Iberia's cabin crews has fluctuated between two and three stars, well below the ratings of other European airlines' cabin crews. What's your source? What's the rating for 'other' European airlines cabin crew? Again biased unsourced opinions.

Please amend this section, or I will reword it. Iberia actually holds a solid reputation with many people, as one of the world's oldest operating airlines and the market leader between Latin America and Europe. I have had excellent experiences w them always, including a snow-in at JFK where Iberia set us up in a hotel for the night and the next morning I saw the same American Airlines passengers who were were stranded overnight and slept at the airport. Of course this doesn't mean anything so I wouldn't put this as general facts in Wikpiedia. I ask you to do the same and remove opinions that are baseless, or based on altered facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emanuel Kingsley (talk • contribs) 09:44, 15 December 2012

I have removed the Skytrax stuff, it is not a particularly reliable source for opinions and ratings per old discussions at the airlines project. MilborneOne (talk) 09:58, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Bibliography

I removed the Bibliography section as it doesnt relate to any of the references used, this removal has been challenged. Perhaps User:Cuentaprueba10 why we should make an exception on this one article. They may have been more appropriate under further reading but not being in English it doesnt help the reader. MilborneOne (talk) 20:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Needs to be restructured

The article needs to be restructured but retaining ALL the current pictures. --Cuentaprueba10 (talk) 15:07, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Cuentaprueba10 you probably need to say what and why you think something needs changed to be taken with any seriousness. Andrewgprout (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Try to see the article in the mobile version and you will see for yourself. All the pictures appear outside the text and is currently impossible to place them in the correct place in the two versions, pc and mobile.--Cuentaprueba10 (talk) 21:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Disruptive editions by YSSYguy

YSSYguy doesn't respect the previous editions of the article, doesn't put his proposals on the talk. Destroys the previous contributions, such as quotes, images and the fleet table in the brand colors.--87.218.80.49 (talk) 16:27, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I have semi-protected the article for the moment to encourage discussion, you need to work out on this page what the issues are rather than edit war, thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 16:32, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The IP cannot talk about disruptive editing when they were warring too. Separately, I think the behvaiour of both warring editors warrants full protection.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:33, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

When the version of YSSYguy stays, it must have been a coincidence. The fleet table is now without the brand colours by the way--87.218.80.49 (talk) 16:37, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

I'm not endorsing anyone's version. I'm just saying there are two warring editors, not just you. That's why full protection is required. So MilborneOne, can you please full protect the article?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:40, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Nobodys version "stays" the article is protected as it is when I noticed the issue, at the moment I will leave it at semi as User:YSSYguy is an experienced editor and knows the trouble it would cause if he continued to make changes related to the dispute. This allows the majority of others to continue to edit the article outside of the dispute. MilborneOne (talk) 16:47, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

The colours used in the fleet table made the header very difficult to read, they were in contravention of WP:ACCESS and it is certainly not necessary for a fleet table to have someone's interpretation of the airline's colours - it serves no purpose other than decoration. IP 87.218.80.49 complained in an earlier edit summary about the large number of images making the article look "destructured", so I removed some (there were previously two images of B744s for example, several of DC-10s, A340s etc.) and moved some others (left to right and arranged somewhat chronologically), now s/he seems to be unhappy that I removed images. Apparently my edits have been disruptive; I fixed punctuation and grammar, updated text, removed overlinking, properly formatted refs, moved images so the article conformed with MOS:IMAGE etc., all explained within the constraints of available space in edit summaries; and 87.218.80.49 undid all of it multiple times without explanation. YSSYguy (talk) 17:03, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

description of "Inaugural flight Madrid-Seville"

There are a mistake, I tink

It is impossible that it was in April of 39 because at the same time the Spanish civil war had just ended (just in April of 39) (Iberia evidently did not operated flights between 36-39), the national side being victor, King Alfonso XIII of Spain appears and this is impossible at 1939, because the monarchical figure disappears from 39 to return in 78 with the Spanish constitution of 1978 and his reign ends in 1931, and junkers g24 was no longer used in the 1940s. Is a mistake from the source. The correct date is 1929.--87.218.80.49 (talk) 04:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

This highlights the problems of using images as references. Are you saying that King Alfonso XIII is in the image? The Seville Airport article states that the inaugural flight was in 1929, but unfortunately it is not referenced. YSSYguy (talk) 04:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I have a book, "A estas alturas, Historias de la aviación comercial en España" of Carlos Pérez San Emeterio. Curiously the cover is a photography of this flight. The inagural flight of the line Madrid-Sevilla was 27 May of 1929 with a Junkers G24 with the name Poseidón. The G24 took off at 5 p.m. from Getafe to Tablada. I have references. I think this time I deserve to be heeded. I would appreciate that in the edition would be named my "ip user" for my contribution. Is difficult find this books. Thanks.--87.218.80.49 (talk) 14:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

As I said above, the information in the Seville Airport article is unreferenced, you could add the book with whatever page the info is on as a source there. YSSYguy (talk) 15:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Are you really going to refuse to put the correct information in the article? What is the problem? I can't believe that I show the correct date, I give a reference of a reliable source and you refuse to correct the wrong information in the article. What's wrong with you? --87.218.80.49 (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Cool down please. Mind WP:WAIT. I searched the Flightglobal historical archive for 1929 and found nothing regarding the matter. I'll check the reference given by the "IP user" so that they can be added in the article. Separately, let me tell you that I found the ″History″ section almost unsourced, and information for entire decades is lacking. Unnacceptable for such an important European airline. I'll be gradually incorporating information into this article, yet I currently have very limited time to do this.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 15:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Just a note it appears that the May 1929 flight of M-CAAF M-W-112 Poseidón was by CLASSA which according to other articles on wikipedia (and perhaps not that reliable) had nothing to do with Iberia. MilborneOne (talk) 16:11, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry it didnt become M-CAAF until Jun 1929 (and later EC-AAF) according to http://www.airhistory.org.uk/gy/reg_EC-.html MilborneOne (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Reading the book I just discovered that there was no farewell ceremony in Getafe or ceremony of arrival in Seville. Then that photography does not belong to the inagural flight Madrid-Sevilla.

Apparently the photo may be a visit of Alfonso XIII on 14 December 1927 to the air base of Getafe to visit the Roland VIII's of Iberia, in fact the shape of those engines look's like a Roland VIII engines and not like a Junkers G24 engines.

And yes, the inagural flight between Madrid-Seville of 27 May 1929 was operated by CLASSA.--87.218.80.49 (talk) 16:38, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

In any case we can mark the claim with a {{cn}} tag.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 16:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes but what is clear is that it was not in 1939, because Alfonso XIII was in Italy in this dates, and that photo is not of the Iberia ingaural flight Madrid-Seville because this line was operated by CLASSA and neither the CLASSA inagural flight to Seville because there was no ceremony or visit of the King.--87.218.80.49 (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Shall we remove the image from the article?--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Or that or delete the date, could be a great option, I will try to find out if Iberia had anything to do with the Junkers G24 or operated the line in these dates to clarify the issue. It seems clear that it is a Junkers now that I observe it by the undulating surface of its fuselage, it could be a good option "King Alfonso XIII of Spain in front of a Junkers G24 of iberia"--87.218.80.49 (talk) 17:07, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Let me search the Flightglobal historical database again to see what I can find.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:17, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I've added information regarding the routes operated by the airline at the end of the 1930s. One more comment: the ″History″ section has a link to History of Iberia (airline) but the lack of sources in this split article is just alarming.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 17:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Change the caption to "King Alfonso XIII of Spain in front of a Junkers G24 of iberia" or similar for me is the best option--87.218.80.49 (talk) 17:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, it's been four days, are you going to leave the wrong information in the article?--87.218.80.49 (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Cape Juby

"Cabo" and "Juby" is Cape Juby, one place, please insert the link. Thanks.--87.218.80.49 (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks--Jetstreamer ^Talk 19:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Re: Fleet Development

This table includes SNCASE SE.161 Languedoc 1952 1960 , however the article for the Languedoc only lists Aviaco as an operator.Darci (talk) 21:47, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

Is the entry sourced here? If not, mark it as unsourced. It doesn't matter what other articles say. Articles do not support each other, they are supported by reliable sources each.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:56, 15 February 2019 (UTC)