Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airports

WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT question

Per WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, rule #5 states: Differentiate between multiple airports in one city using ‘–’ (en dash) (e.g., ‘London–Heathrow’, not ‘London Heathrow’).

(1) I have noticed that several cities with multiple airports are not yet consistently following this guideline. Two notable examples are Singapore and Melbourne. Singapore is served by more than one airport, including Changi Airport and Seletar Airport. Similarly, Melbourne has multiple airports such as Melbourne Airport (Tullamarine), Essendon Fields Airport, and Moorabbin Airport. All of these airports handle scheduled flights, which suggests that disambiguation may be appropriate under the guideline.

I previously attempted to rename some of these articles to follow the recommended format (e.g., using the en dash for differentiation). However, my edits were reverted on the grounds that consensus had not yet been established. Given this, I would like to initiate a discussion here to determine whether the guideline should be applied more consistently to these cases. Specifically, should airports in multi-airport cities like Singapore and Melbourne be renamed to follow the “City–Airport” format outlined in WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT? Additionally, are there criteria (such as passenger volume or type of service) that should be considered before applying this rule?

I would appreciate input from other editors to clarify how this guideline should be interpreted and applied in practice.

(2) I have also noticed a potential issue with applying this guideline in the case of Istanbul. The primary airport is simply named Istanbul Airport, which lacks a natural disambiguator (it does not even include “International” in its name).

Possible approaches, such as using its district (Arnavutköy) or geographic qualifiers (e.g., European vs. Asian side), do not reflect common usage. For example, “Istanbul–Arnavutköy” is not an established name, and differentiating by continent (e.g., “Istanbul–Europe” vs. “Istanbul–Sabiha Gökçen”) may be inconsistent and unintuitive.

Given this, it may be more appropriate to ignore this and treat Istanbul as an exception: retaining Istanbul Airport as simply “Istanbul”, while the disambiguation only applies to Sabiha Gökçen International Airport as “Istanbul–Sabiha Gökçen”.

I would appreciate input on whether such exceptions are acceptable under WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT, or if a more consistent approach should still be enforced. RPC7778 (talk) 02:26, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Seletar, Essendon, and Moorabbin are so small that disambiguation is absolutely not required for the primary airports. If someone says "I'm flying to London", you may wonder which airport they're talking about. If someone says "I'm flying to Singapore", literally no one will be confused and think it could be a tiny general aviation airport that has just a couple short flights. Please don't add this unnecessary disambiguation. I agree that Istanbul can't be disambiguated, even if Sabiha Gökçen is. People will understand this.
Also, I disagree with this edit and numerous similar ones you've made. Navi Mumbai International Airport is literally in Navi Mumbai. 'Navi' is not a name for the airport like 'Heathrow' is, it's part of the name of the place it's in, is so 'Mumbai–Navi' is illogical. 'Mumbai' by itself is not ambiguous as the only airport in Mumbai and does not need additional designation even if both are in the same metropolitan area. — Reywas92^Talk 04:00, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Seletar, Essendon, and Moorabbin might be "too small", but looking at Sapporo provides a useful comparison. Despite the significant difference in scale between New Chitose and Okadama, both are still disambiguated. RPC7778 (talk) 06:00, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Just FYI, 'Heathrow' is not a made-up name for the airport. Just like Navi Mumbai, it is a geographical reference, harking back to Heathrow (hamlet). Likewise 'Gatwick' comes from Gatwick Racecourse, Gatwick Golf Club, and Gatwick Manor owned by the De Gatwick family. In both locations all traces of this history has vanished, buried under tons of airport concrete, so in that respect it is not entirely comparable to Navi Mumbai.

I can even remember the small group of four houses at Perry Oaks, sandwiched between 10L and 10R. And I once played football with the site manager, before the whole lot disappeared under Heathrow Terminal 5. But that's another story.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 13:31, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Mumbai and Navi Mumbai

While rule #5 of WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT states that "Differentiate between multiple airports in one city using a dash", the question is more about what constitutes a city. There has been a lot of to and fro, and edits/reverts on the question of Mumbai and its airports. Both Navi Mumbai and Shivaji airports are part of the larger Mumbai Metropolitan Region. However, Mumbai and Navi Mumbai are different cities officially. While it can be argued it can be argued that both Mumbai and Navi Mumbai are "different cities" and/or both belong to the same metropolitan region, the discussion is to create a consensus for the same. Thanks! Also, pinging other involved editors, @Danners430, @Hakuna Zar, and @Reywas92 for comments. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

People in general would agree that both are Mumbai's airports, as practically both are serving the interest of Mumbai, located in Mumbai Mteropolitan Region, and this kind of case also has quite few examples globally. Jakarta's main airport, Soekarno-Hatta International Airport is technically located in the city of Tangerang, not in Jakarta. Kuala Lumpur's main airport, KLIA is technically located in the state of Selangor, not in Kuala Lumpur. However, since both airports are located and serving the greater metropolitan region in Indonesia and Malaysia (Jakarta Metropolitan Area and Greater Kuala Lumpur), they still widely considered and officially stated as both city's airports. Therefore based on this case, I believe the naming of "Mumbai Shivaji" and "Mumbai Navi" is the proper way to address this issue Hakuna Zar (talk) 12:37, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I think the best similar example here is London. In London, you’ve got Heathrow (14 miles west of London), Gatwick (actually in Crawley), Stansted (in Essex), Luton (in, well, Luton), City (the only one actually in London) and Southend (in Southend-on-sea). Yet we do call them London City, London Heathrow or London Luton. Luton itself is a city in its own right… but it’s still called London Luton.

At the end of the day, in the case of Mumbai, it’s also about reducing the chance of confusion… if you have “Mumbai”, many people won’t know whether Navi or Shivaji is meant. They both serve Mumbai as a place, just like London City and London Luton both serve London - despite Luton being in a different city altogether. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:13, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

As I said above, "Navi" is not the name of the airport, it's part of the name of the city it's in, Navi Mumbai. The suggestion of "Mumbai–Navi" too ridiculous to take seriously (it's like calling Indira Gandhi International Airport "Delhi–New"). If anything it would be "Mumbai–Navi Mumbai", but "Navi Mumbai" is clear and unambiguous without the metro area and the appropriate way to write it in these lists. "Mumbai" is also clear and unambiguous, and it would be unnecessary to add a dash to the larger airport that is the only one in Mumbai. Navi Mumbai isn't an anonymous suburb like Crawley or Essex either. It underestimates people's intelligence that Mumbai alone would be confusing. Just because they are in the same metropolitan area doesn't mean they need to use the metro area's name! We call Newark Liberty International Airport Newark in the lists instead of New York–Newark. We also name Burbank and Long Beach rather than the metro area they serve. Sphinx International Airport is listed as Giza even though it serves the Cairo metro, and people know that "Cairo" doesn't refer to it. This table is able to list Glasgow next to Glasgow–Prestwick as Ryanair destinations without confusion. We also list Istanbul by itself without confusion. If anything, we should have fewer airports with disambiguators, not more: Montreal is one where no one will assume you're talking about a different airport. — Reywas92^Talk 16:28, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

I believe that it is not so about the location of the airport, and rather it is about the naming of the airport to avoid confusion. For Jakarta or KL, the newer airports might be located outside the city limits but they became the main airports, and they needed to be identified to distinguish from the existing ones. However, Shivaji airport has been and is the primary airport of Mumbai. Similarly, there are other examples. Say, Melbourne area has four airports but the airports are identified by their own names and not city with a hyphen. So, I am leaning towards keeping it simply as Mumbai and Navi Mumbai, in line with the JFK/Newark example, because "Mumbai-Navi Mumbai" sounds somewhat rather odd and more confusing. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

It doesn’t necessarily have to follow the exact same naming convention - certainly for me, as long as we differentiate between the two by making it clear that one is Navi and the other Shivaji, that’s all that matters. The original dispute came about due to the removal of “Shivaji” in the lists. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 05:51, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Originally there was no Shivaji in the lists, and it was simply listed as Mumbai. It was added when Mumbai-Navi was rather introduced. Either we can go with Mumbai-Shivaji or Mumbai-CSM similar to Newyork-JFK along with Navi Mumbai as option one or simply Mumbai and Navi Mumbai as option two. Mumbai-Navi is dubious (we should definitely not use partial names), and Mumbai-Navi Mumbai seems redundant naming. Thanks. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 10:42, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Personally I’d be for having the name include the city, and that goes for NY too. At the end of the day, the airlines sell tickets to “New York Newark” or “New York JFK”, at least in every instance I’ve seen - and the general reader (which after all is what Wikipedia is for, not just enthusiasts like ourselves) will be more inclined to be interested that the flight is to a New York airport, then which airport - New York Newark is much more obvious than just Newark. The same principle really applies to Mumbai. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 10:50, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

That might be true with New York, but in this case it is not sold as Mumbai-Navi Mumbai and is simply Navi Mumbai. Anyways, is it fine that we finalise the names as Mumbai-CSM (instead of using Chatrapathi Shivaji Maharaj) and Mumbai-Navi Mumbai. This preserves the names of the airports along with the metropolitan area. Magentic Manifestations (talk) 03:27, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

I believe our readers are smart enough to understand Mumbai and Navi Mumbai without additional wording. Moreover, like many airports with eponymous names, the eponym isn't even that generally used! "CSM" does NOT appear to be commonly used as an airport name and a Google search for it brings up results for Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus, not the airport. Mumbai Shivaji brings up the same and Shivaji Park. Even if usage of this is wikilinked, it's not clear that this dashed suffix is actually needed or usefully informs readers. Unlike London, where "London airport" would be unusual to see, I see many recent sources unambiguously referring to "Mumbai Airport" like . And New York–JFK is required to disambiguate with LaGuardia, not Newark. — Reywas92^Talk 04:11, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

That’s great but there are also plenty which refer to the airport by its full name. As I have pointed out, we also don’t have to hyphenate the name - we were discussing what to do right here, that can form part of the discussion. In the same way we don’t hyphenate New York JFK, we don’t need to hyphenate Navi Mumbai. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 06:22, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

@Danners430, Can you please elaborate what you are proposing here as a solution. Am I right that you want Navi Mumbai to remain as "Navi Mumbai" simply and Mumbai should be "Mumbai-Chhtrapati Shivaji Maharaj"?. Thanks! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 05:13, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Yes to Navi Mumbai, and the other one can be discussed as to what the best name would be - I’d be of the opinion “Mumbai-Shivaji” would make sense, but it depends on what the common name would be I suppose. The point I was trying to make earlier is that we need to differentiate between the two, but we don’t necessarily always have to use the format “City-qualifier”. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 06:46, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Western Sydney International Airport#Requested move 16 April 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Western Sydney International Airport#Requested move 16 April 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Qwerty123M (talk) 05:04, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Request for input: Possible move of Stepanakert Airport to Khojaly Airport

This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Hello WikiProject Airports editors,

I would like to request input from editors experienced with airport article titles regarding the current title of the article named Stepanakert Airport.

I believe this article title may need reconsideration under Wikipedia’s article-title policy, especially the criteria of recognisability, naturalness, precision, consistency, and use in reliable English-language sources.

The airport is located in Khojaly, Azerbaijan, around 10 km northeast of Khankendi (formerly known as Stepanakert). Since 2023, the airport and surrounding area have been under the effective control of Azerbaijan. Azerbaijani official sources now refer to the airport as Khojaly Airport, and recent English-language sources also use “Khojaly Airport”.

For that reason, I believe the present title, “Stepanakert Airport”, is no longer the most accurate or neutral title for this subject.

I understand that English Wikipedia does not automatically use an official name merely because it is official. However, the current title appears to rely on the former Soviet-era usage and may no longer reflect the present factual, administrative, and geographic reality of the airport.

By analogy, it would seem unusual today to title the airport serving Kaliningrad as “Königsberg Airport”, even though Königsberg is historically significant and remains relevant in historical contexts. In the same way, “Stepanakert Airport” may be appropriate in historical discussion, but it may not be the best title for an airport now described by current sources as Khojaly Airport.

I would appreciate input from WikiProject Airports editors on the most policy-compliant title.

Regards, Lumberrr (talk) 13:13, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Note - there is an existing discussion at Talk:Stepanakert Airport, so please respond there Danners430 _{tweaks made} 13:28, 20 April 2026 (UTC)

Self-updating templates

The discussion at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Self-updating citation describes an issue when {{AIP FR}} is used in a citation, rather than as an external link (the issue could also apply in the latter case, but be less problematic).

There are a number of similar templates which self-update in this way, including {{AIP AU}}, {{AIP NL}}, {{FAA-diagram}} and {{FAA-procedures}}.

We should prohibit their use in citations, unless a link to specific, archived version of known date is used), AFAICT, we cannot do this with code, as we can for specific name spaces. We can and should update the template documentation to that effect. Do we also need a bot to check for such usage? How widespread is the issue? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:15, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Haven’t looked at the question at hand, but just to comment - can’t we update the templates to include an access date parameter similar to cite web? That way there’s article-level traceability of the source Danners430 _{tweaks made} 11:34, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

That would be contrary to the purpose of having them self-update. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:50, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

True. Looking more closely at the template it does need work… not least to comply with CS1. Perhaps AnomieBot can be used to automatically substitute it when inside ref tags? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 11:57, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

As they stand I full agree - we need to allow people to see and verify the source of the data, so they should not be used inside references. I like Danners430's suggestion of looking at modifying the template to include the reference so it's always added to an article where the template is called. 10mmsocket (talk) 11:44, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Destination lists - naming of airports

There’s been a fair bit of discussion lately about the naming of airports, such as above about Navi Mumbai, and separately about New York Newark. It’s a little surprising given the established guidelines for destination lists states Use city names for destinations (not the airport names), and only disambiguate using airport names when there are multiple airports serving the same city, and separately Differentiate between multiple airports in one city using "–" (en dash) (e.g., "London–Heathrow", not "London Heathrow"). Obviously special cases will exist (Navi Mumbai may well be one of them), but for example New York Newark seems pretty cut and dry… what do other editors think? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 11:54, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

I wonder if New York–Newark comes under the same bracket as Luton Airport, or should that be London–Luton? The airlines have a vested interest in promoting an airport's proximity and connection with a major city, whilst the local residents might prefer to see themselves as entirely separate. Who exactly qualifies as WP:RS in these cases, and does Wikipedia get the casting vote?

Don't forget that according to Ryanair, some quite obscure and remote airports can be linked to major cities if it suits them. See Hahn airport.

At the request of Ryanair, the major operator of flights to/from the airport, the airport was named Frankfurt-Hahn Airport from 2001

WendlingCrusader (talk) 13:55, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

My personal view is that WP:COMMONNAME is tangentially applicable here - the list is a list of places you can fly to, so surely it should be what is most commonly listed in booking systems and news articles? So if you’re booking a flight, does it show up as “New York (Newark)” (ignore the formatting for now) or does it show up as simply “Newark”? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 14:10, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

That sounds like being contrary to the "Wikipedia is not a travel guide" principle. Jan olieslagers (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean? There’s been umpteen RfCs as to whether these lists should exist at all, none have decided to remove them… so the lists are here to stay, this is just about how to name the airports in the table. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:28, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Indeed, that is (or "was", at least) Ryanair's standard policy. Before they would fly to them, Ostend airport had to be renamed "Ostend/Bruges" to attract more (stupid) tourists, and Charleroi had to become "Brussels South". These commercial names to airports are so evaporative that I should like to NOT apply WP:COMMONNAME to aerodromes, but rather use the official name, as can be found in the AIP for major airports, and for many smaller aerodromes. Jan olieslagers (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

@Jan olieslagers per the talk page guidelines, please stop placing your reply above others. Replies go in chronological order. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 15:34, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm going fishing. Bye bye! Jan olieslagers (talk) 15:37, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Fish won't byte :( I always learned to reply just below the phrase I am replying to, with indentation increased one step. Been doing so for many years, and yours is the first ever complaint about it. Enough said? Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:25, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I do get what you're saying - but if you notice, my reply is ALSO replying to that same comment... we're both replying to the same comment, and responses should be in chronological order. Indeed, if you click the "reply" link, it will automatically place your reply at the bottom of that thread. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 16:27, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I am not in the least surprised that you dont't get my meaning. Let me try to put it another way: if replies in this kind of thread were really wanted and intended to be posted in strictly chronological order, there would be no, zero, nada added value in our indentation system with accumulating ":" signs. Or what do you think we have it for? As I was taught long ago, it serves to keep answers associated with the point they answer to; regardless of chronology. Which seems wise and useful and handy to me, and - for as far as I can see - to all contributors except you. Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:02, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

That's great - except it goes against the talk page guidelines....... Danners430 _{tweaks made} 17:11, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, but - excusing my stupidity - could you please point me to the exact passus in the talk page guidelines that you keep referring to? It seems not impossible that we are interpreting the text differently. Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:41, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I'm specifically talking about Help:Talk pages#Replying to an existing thread - Add your comment below the last entry in the discussion. If you want to respond to a specific comment, you can place your response directly below it. Use a colon (:) to indent your message to create a threaded message. See Indentation below for more information on indenting talk pages with colons., and the section on threading below that - Each comment should be indented one more level than the comment it replies to, which may or may not be the preceding comment. The best explanation is the example box in the threading section, which clearly shows subsequent replies go after intermediate replies (excuse my clumsy wording there). Danners430 _{tweaks made} 17:46, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

[quote]If you want to respond to a specific comment, you can place your response directly below it. Use a colon (:) to indent your message to create a threaded message.[/quote] This is exactly precisely what I was referring to, and what has ever been normal practice for me. Can we agree up to here? Apologies gently accepted, I know only too well how easy it is to stumble over phrasings, however clumsy or clever! Kindly from Portugal, Jan olieslagers (talk) 18:06, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

I do agree up to there - however, I’d recommend having a look at the example shown in the threading section. You can see two replies - and the first reply has itself received a reply, yet the second reply to the original comment is underneath the first reply. That example is pretty much exactly what happened here.

I’d also recommend the section on the reply tool - it’s the easiest way to respond to messages. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 18:25, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Basically, replies should be indented like this-

First post in a thread

First reply to first post

Reply to first reply to first post

Reply to reply to reply to first post

Second reply to first post

Reply to second reply to first post

Reply to reply to second reply to first post

Reply to reply to reply to second reply to first post

Third reply to first post

Reply to third reply to first post

Reply to reply to third reply to first post

Etcetera. The exact timestamps don't matter here - following the threads downwards does. If the second reply gets two follow-ups before the first one does, the first one's second and third etc, followups still go before all of the second reply's thread. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:02, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Airport Subtitle Format

Is there a preferred format for airport subtitles in the article lede? There isn't any guidance WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT and I've seen varying approaches:

• Erie–Ottawa International Airport, (Carl R. Keller Field)
• Middletown Regional Airport, also known as Hook Field
• Ohio University Airport or Gordon K. Bush Airport

I would tend to lean toward the second example as the first is confusing due to the absence of a non-bolded word between the official name and subtitle and the third seems to imply a false equivalence between the two names. However, I want to know what others think.

As a secondary question, should the subtitle be included in the infobox in some manner? I've encountered a few cases (1, 2, 3) of the navtivename parameter being improperly used for this purpose. Perhaps a subtitle parameter in the infobox would solve this? –Noha307 (talk) 23:44, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Notes

AIRPORT-CONTENT

Just to let the WikiProject know, I've boldly updated WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT to reflect the closure of the most recent destination list RfC, as well as add the one before that. I've also made a few tweaks. Please feel free to tweak as needed! Danners430 _{tweaks made} 16:05, 30 April 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Uyuni Airport#Requested move 10 April 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Uyuni Airport#Requested move 10 April 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 12:00, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Distance from...

There is a wide variation of distances given in the lead of airport articles. A few examples in the UK include:

• Foobar airport is 5 nautical miles (9 km; 6 mi) north of Dullsville
• Foobar airport is 6 miles (10 km) north of Dullsville
• Foobar airport is 6 miles (10 km; 5 NM) north of Dullsville
• Foobar airport is six miles (ten kilometres) north of Dullsville

So I looked but cannot find definitive guidance in this project. The last example, spelled-out, I dislike intensely, but I have no strong feelings on miles vs kilometres vs nautical miles, I just like things to be consistent across airports in the same country.

Thoughts / pointers to existing guidance? 10mmsocket (talk) 07:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

My 2 cents: Nautical miles not te be used in this context (but some AIP's give the information like this); use decimal or imperial depending on what is usual in the given place, with autoconversion. Jan olieslagers (talk) 10:54, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I believe in many cases, at least in the United States, it is taken directly from the FAA's Airport Master Record which has "CBD TO AIRPORT (NM):" as point #3 on the form and which takes a value of, for example, "03 SE", or "3 nautical miles southeast". –Noha307 (talk) 03:19, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I have been editing (removing) these nautical miles for about a month now, so I welcome this discussion, although it's a pity I have only just noticed it today.

1. Whilst airports have a specific reference point, I don't know how that applies to towns and cities, except in the case of London with some people regarding Charing Cross as the notional centre. But what about other places in the UK? So it is a plain fact these distances can only be approximations.
2. Further evidence of this comes because the numbers are invariably rounded to whole nautical miles, as listed by the OP above.
3. Against that, other countries may use fractions of NM, as in Antwerp airport is "2.9 NM SE of Antwerp". As to exactly where in Antwerp that relates, I don't know, but my guess is that the authorities in Belgium measured the distance in km first, rounded it off, and then converted it to 2.9 NM. Most probably a classic case of false precision?
4. My viewpoint is that if we were dealing with anything that was not an airfield, and we didn't have the benefit of the CAA loading the gun, we would simply cite miles and km, rounded to an appropriate accuracy. For example, take Slough. No, really, please take it!

Footnote; I am using the following template {{convert|5|NM|mi km|0|order=out}} which starts with NM but outputs 6 miles (9 km)

WendlingCrusader (talk) 14:36, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

For the UK, the number in NM can be referenced because it's on the second row of the NATS page for the airport, e.g. for Heathrow. So we could use the number but I think it's of little encyclopaedic value, so using your conversion example is a good idea. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:50, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• To me example one and four are not great because these are aviation articles and miles nave not been defined. Using the {{Convert}} currently has a problem but I may just be missing the answer. See Template talk:Convert#Multiple output. CambridgeBayWeather (#1 deranged), Uqaqatigijaa (talk), Huliva 04:38, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

  And that problem has been solved. CambridgeBayWeather (#1 deranged), Uqaqatigijaa (talk), Huliva 06:49, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Western Sydney International Airport#Requested move 19 May 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Western Sydney International Airport#Requested move 19 May 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Qwerty123M (talk) 03:13, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Short form of Navi Mumbai International Airport

Moved from Talk:Navi Mumbai International Airport

When linked to as a destination from other airports, can we agree to call this simply "Navi Mumbai"? I'm seeing some edits using "Mumbai-Navi", but we don't call NYC "York-New". Asamboi (talk) 22:26, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

The question is whether the airport serves the city of Mumbai (which it does) or whether Navi Mumbai is its own district. New York is a different matter - although yes, by our guidelines we should be using “New York-JFK” for example. It’s probably best a question asked at the WikiProject level rather than here, since it affects many articles, not just this one. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 06:03, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Navi Mumbai is administratively a separate city, it's not a part of the city of Mumbai. Asamboi (talk) 12:13, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Literally even the lead of this article states that it's in the Mumbai metropolitan region. Same as how London Luton is referred to as London despite being miles away. But again - it's a debate for the WikiProject since we're discussing edits in other articles. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:16, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Newark Liberty International Airport is in the NYC metro region, but its agreed short form on Wikipedia is "Newark", not "New York-Newark". Asamboi (talk) 12:18, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

It hasn't necessarily been agreed - it's only been brought up once when discussing something unrelated… and I'd argue strongly against it being known simply as Newark - you fly to New York (Newark) airport, you don't buy a ticket to Newark.

Now I'm going to close this and move this to the WikiProject as for the last time, this isn't a discussion that can be had here. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:37, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

@Asamboi Discussion moved here as the appropriate venue. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Also pinging @WendlingCrusader and @Jan olieslagers as you participated in the related discussion above Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:40, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I have already given as my opinion that aerodromes should be named in WP as they are in the AIP, overruling WP:COMMONNAME. Jan olieslagers (talk) 16:51, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

This is nothing to do with naming of articles - but how they are listed in destination lists. I would still disagree however - COMMONNAME is policy. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 16:55, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Please read more carefully. I did not mention the naming of articles. I did mention the naming of aerodromes. Jan olieslagers (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

… you said “aerodromes should be named in WP…” - to most people that would read as though you’re talking about what that airport should be called on Wikipedia which usually refers to the article name. But understood if that’s not what you meant. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 18:05, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

This does, in my opinion, raise the question of whether the blanket rule for airport naming where there are multiple airports serving a single city is appropriate, or whether we should start a list of exceptions. For example:

• Navi Mumbai, the subject of this discussion - even the article itself is named Navi Mumbai as the COMMONNAME
• New York airports - Newark for example is currently simply called "Newark" (I personally would like to see it changed to New York Newark, but that's besides the point)
• London airports - the majority of London's airports are already named in the format "London [Airport]" - albeit without the hyphen.

Personally, and of course I'm open to discussion here, we should keep the existing guidance in WP:AIRPORT-CONTENT - but include a list of exceptions, which we can agree on here or on a case-by-case basis. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:57, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

(Please forgive me if this response is in the wrong place; I don't wish to intervene in the scrap involving Jan.)

So, the penny has just dropped regarding the name Navi Mumbai. I now read that it means New Mumbai, hence the OPs reference to York‑New. Presumably "Navi" is obvious to some people, but as this is EN-Wikipedia, many would only see the "Navi Mumbai" as two words that make up a foreign-language name. In that context, the OP has a fair point that 'Mumbai - Navi' is inappropriate. The nearest equivalent situation I can think of is... (ironically), Delhi versus New Delhi airport. In fact the situations appear all but identical, with two closely related cities, and an airport serving both.

A quick poll of destination lists (Heathrow, Cairo, Helsinki) shows that flights to New Delhi airport (in the city of New Delhi) are typically reduced to a simple Delhi in destination lists. By that measure, flights to Navi Mumbai airport should always be listed as simply as Mumbai. Sorted!

WendlingCrusader (talk) 18:48, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

The issue with Mumbai is that Mumbai has a second airport - Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport, which would be shortened to Mumbai-Shivaji, since both are listed as serving the metropolitan area of Mumbai. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 19:45, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

CSMI is not Mumbai's second airport, it's Mumbai's only airport.

A better analog for Navi Mumbai is Noida International Airport, which is in the greater Delhi region, but is located in the city of Noida, Uttar Pradesh (think Newark, New Jersey). Asamboi (talk) 21:22, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

The lead of Navi Mumbai literally says it serves the metropolitan area of Mumbai… Therefore the metropolitan area of Mumbai has two airports. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 21:45, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

The Mumbai Metropolitan Region (note capital letters) spans 6,328 sq.km and extends far beyond the city of Mumbai. It is roughly analogous to the New York metropolitan area, which contains the airports of JFK and LaGuardia (which are in New York City proper) as well as Newark (which is in the metro area, but not in New York).

The agreed short forms for the airports in New York proper are New York-JFK and New York-LaGuardia; the one outside NYC is Newark. Likewise, the short form of the one airport in Mumbai proper is simply "Mumbai", and while the one outside it is "Navi Mumbai".

This is all incredibly obvious to anybody who is familiar with the cities in question, and it's rather frustrating to have to debate this with people who, with all due respect, clearly are not. Asamboi (talk) 08:27, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I feel like one thing needs to be made very clear… Wikipedia is a worldwide project - it’s not written for local people, it’s written for ALL readers - whether said reader is familiar or unfamiliar with the local area. If there are nuances that are only known to people who is familiar with the cities in question, then said nuances either need explaining to the reader (such as you would with an abbreviation) or excluded altogether.

Please don’t take this the wrong way - but Wikipedia is NOT written for the people of Mumbai. It’s written for everyone.

In this specific case, the nuance is the fact that Navi Mumbai is not in the city of Mumbai itself, but rather a suburb - but still part of the same metropolitan area. So tell me - how exactly do you expect someone who isn’t intimately familiar with Mumbai to know which airport is being referred to when all they see is “Mumbai”? Answer - you can’t. Because they don’t have the background knowledge. So how do we solve that? By differentiating the two airports - one is Navi Mumbai, the other Mumbai-Shivaji.

Oh and by the way, you still haven’t pointed to where it was ever agreed that New York (Newark) be referred to simply as “Newark” when it too serves NY, same as JFK and Laguardia. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 08:35, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

First up, my initial plea was that we call Navi Mumbai airport "Navi Mumbai", not "Mumbai-Navi" (shudder). I see you've come around to agree with me on this, so that's great.

If you want to start calling BOM something else, that's actually a different debate, both whether it's necessary (no) and what the disambiguation would be. Again, locals would not call it Mumbai-Shivaji (it's in fact a running joke locally that everything in Mumbai is called Shivaji), it would be Mumbai-CSMI, just like the airport in NYC is not New York-Kennedy but New York-JFK. (And the I in CSMI is important, because CSMT is a railway station!)

Finally, calling EWR "Newark" is an established consensus that I had nothing do with. If you'd like to try to overturn it, be my guest, but the burden of proof to form a new consensus that this is superior is on you. Asamboi (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

If you look at the post I posted above... this is a bigger debate than just Mumbai. There have been other disagreements about such naming schemes beyond simply Mumbai - so it's time to stop having individual discussions, and have a broader discussion as to whether the current guidelines are fit for purpose. Because if we apply the current guidelines, Navi Mumbai does become Mumbai-Navi, JFK becomes New York-JFK, Newark becomes New York-Newark, LaGuardia becomes New York-LaGuardia, and Heathrow becomes London-Heathrow. I think we're all in agreement that this may be appropriate in the majority of situations where a city has two airports - but in many cases, such as those under discussion, it doesn't work. So we need to come up with something better, or establish a list of agreed-upon exceptions. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 08:58, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

... and the something better and/or the agreed-upon exceptions should work equally well regardless of whether or not the reader has local knowledge. "Mumbai-Navi" for NMI makes a local shudder, but "Mumbai" (undisambiguated) for BOM is potentially confusing to non-locals. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

... where have I disagreed with that? I'm simply trying to get a wider discussion going... Danners430 _{tweaks made} 09:14, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I was just attempting to clarify the requirement, not suggesting that any of the current participants hadn't understood. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:21, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

The current guidelines state Use city names for destinations (not the airport names), and only disambiguate using airport names when there are multiple airports serving the same city.

Since Mumbai and Navi Mumbai are not the same city, the correct airport name is "Navi Mumbai".

Even if you believe they are the same city and thus need disambiguation, the name would be "Mumbai-Navi Mumbai".

But there is no universe where NMI is called "Mumbai-Navi", because neither the airport nor the city is called "Navi". It's an inseparable part of the name, just like we don't call JFK "York-New". Asamboi (talk) 11:25, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

That’s essentially the point I’m making though - that the guidelines need overhauling Danners430 _{tweaks made} 11:28, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Uhh, no, I'm stating that the guidelines are fine and it's only your interpretation of them that's wrong.

If you want to propose revising them in general, then I suggest you create a new thread for that, because the title of this one is scoped to NMI. Asamboi (talk) 11:36, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Except the guidelines are far from fine. We’ve agreed on an exception for Navi Mumbai (I’m not going to argue the point here - it’s an exception to the norm), and we’ve identified further exceptions such as NY Newark. I’ll happily create another thread, but I resent your assertion that my interpretation is “wrong”. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 11:48, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

How is it an exception? The current guidelines say you use city alone (Navi Mumbai) or city and airport (Mumbai-Navi Mumbai). You can't get "Mumbai-Navi" out of them, because "Navi" is neither city nor airport. Asamboi (talk) 12:18, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Read Rosbif’s response below regarding what the majority of people understand to be the city of Mumbai. I’m not arguing with you on this any further. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:21, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Quoting myself: Even if you believe they are the same city and thus need disambiguation, the name would be "Mumbai-Navi Mumbai". The name of the airport is not "Navi" and it cannot be abbreviated "Navi". Asamboi (talk) 12:30, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I consider this discussion closed. You’re arguing over a nonsensical point even though we’ve already agreed to call the airport “Navi Mumbai” which is what you wanted in the first place. WP:DROPTHESTICK. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:37, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

While I appreciate your frustration, the problem is that we're discussing the link text for use on the destination lists of other airport articles, and the majority of readers of those articles will not be familiar with, and probably not even care about, the distinction between the various cities forming the metropolitan area, any more than they care whether London City Airport is in the City of London (it isn't). All they care about is the area that each airport serves. If they wanted to visit Mumbai, they would presumably be equally well served by flights to BOM or NMI. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:41, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I agree with this. Neither "Mumbai" nor "Navi Mumbai" need disambiguation. — Reywas92^Talk 13:44, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Navi Mumbai doesn't, since "Navi" is, in effect, the disambiguation. However the other airport in the Mumbai metro area - Shivaji - does need disambiguating so it's clear it's not the same as Navi. Again, we may know it as an obvious fact... but the general reader does not. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 13:59, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I think the current common usage already makes the distinction clear enough. When searching on airline booking platforms, the airports are shown simply as “Mumbai” and “Navi Mumbai”, That reflects how passengers and the general public actually identify these airports. “Mumbai” alone is still overwhelmingly associated with the main airport. “Mumbai-Shivaji” or “Mumbai-CSM” feel artificial and are not widely used by normal travelers. UrbanGridIndia (talk) 18:26, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I’m sorry but I fundamentally disagree. If you have simply “Mumbai”, any reader that doesn’t happen to know about the existence of Navi Mumbai then the reader has no idea which airport is meant. Obviously if Navi Mumbai is also served by the same airline that confusion doesn’t occur - but that’s very rare… readers would normally only see “Mumbai” or “Navi Mumbai” in isolation - and seeing “Mumbai” without the context of the existence of Navi makes for confusion. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 18:52, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Can you please stop saying silly phrases like "the existence of Navi"? As you know, it's not called Navi! Newark isn't confusing because of the existence of New either. Just because Navi Mumbai exists does not mean that "Mumbai" isn't straightforwardly Mumbai Airport. Unlike Rome Airport, London Airport, New York Airport, Moscow Airport, Paris Airport, and others of Category:Airport disambiguation pages, Mumbai Airport is known to be the airport in Mumbai, and both readers informed and uninformed of the Navi Mumbai airport opening can understand that. No one says "Mumbai Shivaji" like they say "London Heathrow" or "Paris Orly". The preexisting airport is not (yet) called any other way besides Mumbai airport or its full official name. Reywas92^Talk 20:16, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh I didn’t realise it was mandatory to say certain things. Sorry, I’ll say what I please.

It doesn’t matter that nobody says “Mumbai Shivaji” - if a normal reader, ie one that doesn’t know the difference between Mumbai City and Navi Mumbai, reads a destination list that only lists “Mumbai Airport” - what do you think they will think? They won’t know whether it’s the airport actually in Mumbai City, or whether it’s the airport in Navi Mumbai… because there’s no reference point for them. Nobody is disputing that the metro area of Mumbai has two airports - one in the city itself, and one in Navi Mumbai. But to the casual reader, who at the end of the day is who Wikipedia is written for whether we like it or not, the two airports need to be differentiated. Easy enough with Navi - it’s simply “Navi Mumbai Airport”, listed as “Navi Mumbai”. But the other one, because it’s also called Mumbai and in the same metropolitan area, can’t simply be called “Mumbai” because it will cause confusion to said regular reader - hence the disambiguator. If you have a better disambiguator than “Shivaji”, by all means suggest it. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 21:12, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I applaud @Danners430 for struggling against the tide of inconsistent dissent here. On the one hand we have @Asamboi freely admitting that the whole city (of Delhi) is frequently but mistakenly called "New Delhi", whilst @Reywas92 earnestly insists that readers both informed and uninformed of the Navi Mumbai airport opening must surely understand that Mumbai Airport is known to be the airport in Mumbai. Let me give you a reality check and remind you that this is EN-Wikipedia, and that many readers here struggle with the basic definition of what exactly is London, let alone the megacity of Delhi or whatever makes up Mumbai and its metropolitan area.

Those of us with a degree in local geography might point out that London City airport is best placed to serve the East End, whilst Heathrow is much closer to the West End, and both Luton and Stansted are perfect for North London, except that term is typically only used in the context of a football derby between Arsenal and Spurs.

Ridiculous? Yes. Now try to imagine how your arguments might sound to others. And I don't believe it is just me.

@Danners430 is working his socks off to try to arrive at a solution here, that hopefully assists all readers, even if doesn't suit all editors. He deserves your support in that endeavour.

WendlingCrusader (talk) 23:05, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Readers both informed and uninformed of the Navi Mumbai airport opening must surely understand that Mumbai Airport is known to be the airport in Mumbai. Well, yes, having Mumbai Airport link to Mumbai Airport in Mumbai would seem pretty obvious even to the uninformed :)

Slightly more seriously, names are complicated and we have to assume some degree of familiarity, particularly in the tight confines of an airline destination list. Luzhou can be confused with Liuzhou, Xi'an Xianyang Airport is not Xiangyang Airport, Kertajati is the main airport for Bandung while the airport commonly known as Bandung Airport isn't, etc.

And TBH even the disambiguations don't help if you really have no idea: quick, is the main airport of Kuala Lumpur Kuala Lumpur-Subang or Kuala Lumpur-Sepang? If I'm visiting Sao Paulo, should I fly into Congonhas or Guarulhos? But if a reader is unsure, they can always click on the link and find out. Asamboi (talk) 06:13, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

It's actually not analogous at all. New Delhi is a district of the city of Delhi, and it contains no airports at all. (It is, however, the capital of India, which is why the whole city is often but mistakenly called "New Delhi".) Indira Gandhi International Airport aka Delhi International Airport is in Delhi, but not New Delhi. Asamboi (talk) 21:19, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

(I'm a resident of Navi Mumbai) I don't want to take part in whether disambiguation should or should not happen, just providing name suggestions:

• BOM: Mumbai, Mumbai-CSM, Mumbai-BOM, Mumbai-Chhatrapati (Shivaji is just a random word in the name)
• NMI: Navi Mumbai, Mumbai-NMI (Navi just means new)

I would also like to point out an interesting fact, NMI isn't in the city of Navi Mumbai, it's not even in the same district. The closest city is Panvel, which comes up to the border of the airport in the east. These parts of Panvel, along with Ulwe on the western side of the airport, were supposed to be part of Navi Mumbai when they were built, but that didn't end up happening. A lot of people, even in Mumbai, treat these as part of Navi Mumbai, but they are as much a part of Navi Mumbai as Navi Mumbai is of Mumbai. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 10:49, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Airport naming in destination lists

Since the above thread has devolved into nonsensical arguments… I’d like to propose that we need to update the guidelines relating to what airports are called in another airport article’s destination list. The current guidelines state that where a city has multiple airports, they should be written in the format [City]-[Airport disambiguator] - for example Rome-Fiunicino. While this works in the majority of cases, it doesn’t always fit - for example Navi Mumbai instead of Mumbai-Navi.

Do we revise the guidelines, or do we create a list of exceptions? Danners430 _{tweaks made} 11:51, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

• Oppose. The guidelines are just fine in general, and they also work just fine for the specific case of Navi Mumbai.

The whole thread above, which explains all of this in excruciating detail, seems to resolve around the misconception that there's an airport called "Navi" that is in "Mumbai". But it's not: Navi Mumbai International Airport is thus named because it's in the city of Navi Mumbai, and "Navi Mumbai" is a single inseparable unit like "New York". You can't call the airport Mumbai-Navi any more than you can call JFK "York-New JFK" or MSY "Orleans-New". Asamboi (talk) 12:29, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I’m not going to get into another pointless debate about Mumbai. There are thousands of other cities around the world with multiple airports in a single city aside from Mumbai which I’m addressing here. And your point about “York-New” is absolute nonsense, since New York is the city name - “New” isn’t the disambiguator. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:32, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

And in the case under discussion, "Navi Mumbay" is the name of the city. The parallellism with "New York" is obvious: calling the airport "Navi-Bombay" is ridiculous. Just as ridiculous "York-New" Jan olieslagers (talk) 12:39, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

To anyone except people that happen to know about Mumbai geography, the city in question is Mumbai. For the last and final time, this discussion is not about Mumbai - it is a general discussion about the naming of all airports. The discussion about Mumbai is above, not here. Asamboi, you wanted me to split out the discussion since it was about a broader topic, I have done so. Stop circling back to the topic being discussed elsewhere. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:46, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

“York-New” is absolute nonsense, since New York is the city name - “New” isn’t the disambiguator. That's exactly right! And "Navi" is not the disambiguator either! You're so close to finally understanding this now :) Asamboi (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

I’m going to pretend you never wrote that last sentence, as otherwise I’d be leaving a note about WP:CIVIL on your talk page. And you appear to have completely ignored what I said above. This is nothing whatsoever to do with Mumbai. Seriously pal - WP:DROPTHESTICK. Danners430 _{tweaks made} 22:49, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

The difficulty here is that literally the only example you have proposed to argue that the current scheme is broken is Mumbai. If there are others, please list a few of them, tell us how the current guidelines are failing them, and propose alternatives. Asamboi (talk) 05:55, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

The relevant part of the guidelines states Use city names for destinations (not the airport names), and only disambiguate using airport names when there are multiple airports serving the same city.. It seems to me that the primary issue is the definition of "city" – EWR is not in New York City (nor even in the state of New York), NMI is not in the city of Mumbai, none of London's airports are in the City of London and only two of the six are in the London boroughs, and so on. It would be tempting to suggest simply replacing "city" by "metropolitan area" in the guidelines, but the administrative definition and the general understanding (as interpreted both by locals and by others who are less familiar with the locality) of what constitutes each city and its metropolitan area varies considerably. Compounding that, we have airports marketed as serving given cities but not actually located anywhere near the city or its metropolitan area (XCR purporting to serve Paris despite being 150 km from the city centre, for example). Rosbif73 (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

My personal thought would be to apply a form of WP:COMMONNAME honestly - what would the general public (ie the reader) know the airport as? The most extreme example I can think of is Frankfurt-Hahn - thanks to Ryanair’s aggressive marketing, pretty much everyone knows it as Frankfurt Hahn, despite being closer to Luxembourg!

So in cases like London, not much changes - it’s still London Heathrow, London City, London Gatwick etc. Same with New York (New York JFK, New York Newark) and Mumbai (Mumbai Shivaji, Navi Mumbai). Note the latter - there needs to be flexibility to allow for situations like NMI where the standard format doesn’t really work, to allow us to name it “Navi Mumbai”.

Other airports, such as Rome Fiunicino, would remain unchanged unless we decide to change it Danners430 _{tweaks made} 12:55, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Note that I've just made a BOLD change which I trust will satisfy participants here without substantially changing the intent of the guidelines. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:11, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § RFC: Should we remove mentions of public transport access from infoboxes

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § RFC: Should we remove mentions of public transport access from infoboxes. Zackmann08's proposal seeks to remove the parking= and publictransit= parameters from several infoboxes. Thryduulf (talk) 22:26, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

3rd opinion - flag icons

There seems to be a bit of an impasse at Talk:Amsterdam Airport Schiphol over the use of flag icons in the stats section of the article. Some other opinions would be welcome at this point. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:08, 25 May 2026 (UTC)