Talk:Virgin Australia/Archive 1

Archive 1

Informal attitude

I looked here to find repeated comments about the use of humour during safety briefings. --Jumbo 06:15, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Leading?

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)

Disabled passengers

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)

Callsigns

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??

So does Virgin Atlantic at your site. Here. Is that website really authentic? Airline code website posted that Virgin callsign belongs to Virgin Atlantic. This is my source. Try google also. --Zack2007 12:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I originally removed the VIRGIN call sign because it is allocated to Virgin Atlantic, two operators can not legally use the same callsign. ICAO Document 8585 is the official source for ICAO Codes and Callsigns not an amateur website which may not be acurate and up to date, the ICAO data can be accesed here ICAO 8585. This show that Virign Blue does not officially have a callsign allocated. MilborneOne 12:20, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair points, then why DOES Virgin use 'Virgin' as there callsign if it is illegal?? I just listened to my scanner then and they definitely use Virgin.. The only reason I can see for this is they have an agreement of some sorts with Virgin Atlantic? Whatever the reason the call sign unofficially is Virgin and it should be noted.--Mcgrath50 23:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I still think the infobox should show that a callsign is not officially allocated, I have no problem with a mention in the text about them using VIRGIN if you can find a citable reference. I suspect it is just being ignored by the authorities, not sure what would happen if you had a Virgin Blue and Virgin Atlantic talking to the same controller!. MilborneOne 12:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I can confirm that is is used as Vrigin as the callsign but my say so aint a reference I will find it. Basically whenthere is a VOZ and VIR on the same freq it dosn't matter as the callsigns do not overlap (ie; they are VIRGIN102 and VIRGIN503 for example)--Mcgrath50 13:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay after a bit of research the following is in practise: Virgin Blue has an agreement with Virgin Atlantic to use the 'Virgin' Call sign domestically, they have an agreement between each other so Flight Numbers do not overlap. If they leave Australia Virgin Blue has to use a different Call Sign hence why Pacific Blue has 'Bluebird' and aircraft registrations are used for Maintainance flights to NZ.--Mcgrath50 00:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what the ICAO would think of this practice, highly dubious, but just another thought it would be OK if they were using the Virgin Atlantic VIR code and not VOZ for their flights? Just out of interest there is no reason why airlines without callsigns allocated cannot use the three-letter code as a callsign, for example "Victor Oscar Zulu 123". MilborneOne 11:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

It is not highly dubiuous there is an agreement in place between the two airlines to share the voice code DOMESTICLY which is why Pacific Blue is not Virgin and the soon to become Virgin International is going to be Bluey. ICAO I assume are fully aware of this they do not have there head in the sand.--Mcgrath50 11:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah I know that the reason Virgin Blue doesn't use the Virgin name outside Australia is they don't have the rights to it. There is an agreement with Signapore Airlines that the Virgin name is not used outside Australia in the airline game except by Virgin Atlantic Abeorch 07:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

History

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)

Events

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)

• Read the messages on your talk page. Discuss first, find consensus, then maybe things will be agreed to be removed.--VS ^talk 10:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

• I did discuss, "by 210.49.38.26 (talk) 02:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)".. The Events on the Virgin Blue Page are very subjective and should not be posted onto Wiki. Its only a very small percentage of the day to day operations at Virgin Blue
  • That is not a discussion - you are the only one in the conversation. Can I suggest you post a question (perhaps as a new thread below) and await the input of others?--VS ^talk 10:20, 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)

I changed the title from events to customer service but it could be anything other than events which is meaningless. Nothing stopping somebody adding a sentence about being voted the best in the Asia Pacific Region to balance the other comments. MilborneOne (talk) 12:16, 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)

If (heaven forbid) Virgin Blue was to suffer a crash that would be mentioned, while not necessarily being reflective of the airline's day-to-day operations. Similar sections to this exist in other articles, titled "Controversies". Just because you may want to portray the airline in glowing terms does not mean that these things should not be included, and there are other things that are not mentioned that get attention in other airline articles - such as the policy of forbidding men from sitting next to UMs. As MilborneOne suggests, add some positive stuff to balance the negative. YSSYguy (talk) 11:05, 14 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)

He/she doesnt control the content, nobody does which is why we have talk pages to come to a consensus to add or remove stuff from an article. We have loads of guidelines to help but in the end it is all controlled by discussion at different levels. Perhaps if you were to change tact and discuss each of the four items in events one at a time and explain why they should not be included and if others agree then one or more might be removed. It might work better than to suggest removing the whole section. MilborneOne (talk) 19:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

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)

Fair use rationale for Image:Virgin blue new logo.jpg

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)

Melbourne a Hub?

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)

Virgin Blue by no means has a "limited presence" at Melbourne Airport. They fly to fourteen domestic destinations, four destinations in the Pacific and will soon (although not strictly Virgin Blue but part of the wider Virgin Group) have V Australia flying to LA. Additionally, Melbourne serves some destinations exclusively for Virgin Blue. Destination counts are by no means the sole determinant of being a hub of course, but Virgin Blue has a strong presence at all three East Coast capital airports. These are Virgin Blue's hubs. MvjsTalking 08:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Controversy

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)

Incidents.

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)

A330 Seating Configurations

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)

Airbus A330 Delivery

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)

Archive 1