Talk:Portland International Airport/Archive 1

Moved US Airways to Concourse C, and added United to D, as they are using a gate in D during construction. --Sql4umitch 23:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Updated airline list based on PDX July 2003 monthly traffic report. Removed Mesa Airlines dba United Express; they are nowhere to be found on the record of passenger flights. --Nate Silva 08:25, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

---

• Adds it back* Nate, UA XP flights are lumped into "United" as a whole in records of pax flights. WhisperToMe 04:09, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Cool. I see they're even listed in the Monthly Traffic Report now. --Nate Silva 17:35, 16 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Also, isn't there an article on the bad customs treatment ("DePortland")?

Removed destinations: Singapore (via NRT) and London (via ORD). I think the idea is to list cities to which one can fly nonstop. By saying "via whatever" we may as well list every city in the world.

Aircraft Type

Should the aircraft types be removed from each Airlines listing? I don't recall seeing any other airports pages using that in the listings. 24.113.22.73 03:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

SIN on NWA destinations

Why was Singapore deleted from the list under NWA? Bucs2004 16:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I have added back much of the history section that was previously deleted; however, I'm unsure whether to also add back the cargo carrier list. For one, it may be out of date. Jason McHuff 06:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleted then reinstated SIN

I originally deleted, but then re-added Singapore as a destination under Northwest.

While I think it is a poor policy, after checking the Wikipedia Airports project page, the policy seems to be to list all direct (not necessarily non-stop) cities served. That is, if the airplane continues on to a second (or third, or fourth) destination under the same flight number, it is considered a direct flight, and should be listed. 65.201.149.114 21:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• This has been going back and forth for months...we need a resolution. While I don't think SIN [or Mexico City for that matter] should be listed as a destination, the policy states otherwise. Seems misleading, but that's Wiki.Thedjb 21:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Swan Island Municipal Airport

Here are some sources for starting a proper article to split from this article:

• http://www.airfields-freeman.com/OR/Airfields_OR_NW.htm
• http://www.opb.org/programs/oregonstory/ports/timeline.html
• http://www.ccrh.org/comm/slough/airport2.htm

—EncMstr 20:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Future plans

I've updated the future plans section to the best of my ability. I've used information found at the port's website:

• http://www.portofportland.com/Prj_PDX_NREX_Home.aspx

24.20.184.141 09:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:WWIN (see the crystal ball part) I think some of the items should be scaled down, and rumors from a bulletein board should be removed. Also why is so much info about Salem's airport here? That info should be at that airport's article, otherwise why not include the commercial flight history of all the airports in Oregon? I hear the Hillsboro airport used to have commercial flights too! Anyway, with some work this could become GA class. Aboutmovies 20:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• I agree...SEA is having the same problem...nonsense conjecture about future service. I'd like to see it deleted all-together. Thedjb 20:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

---

I'm not sure if it's worth adding to the article, but part of the D Concourse is to be named for Victor G. Atiyeh

Runway renumber because of magnetic declination change

In August 1996 runways 2/20 became 3/21 because of the changes in the earth's magnetic field. This is apparently not uncommon, but I wanted to see if others thought it worthwhile to add to the article in the history section. I will check back in a week and probably add it at that time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.252.208.28 (talk) 05:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

NWA AMS Flight

Wow, there's about 10x the info on this one flight than the rest under the International section. It seems to be a little too wordy, and borders on being a flat out advertisement for NWA/KLM. Should be shortened to include only relevant information. --Resplendent (talk) 00:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

And the whole "too late" for connecting flights looks like WP:OR that should be kept out until a WP:RS is given, and even then limited to prevent WP:UNDUE, if not kept out per WP:WWIN. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:52, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

This issue created an edit war a month or so ago. I completely agree that the commentary has absolutely no place on this page. It is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to PDX as an airport. These folks (SandyWoods and Rockstar2000) obviously have a beef with NWA their AMS service and don't understand the purpose of Wikipedia. I love that they say "this information needs to be included to maintain integrity of article." Ironic, since it completely denigrates the quality of the article. Thedjb (talk) 18:11, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

If this continues, should a semi-protect be added? Obviously those re-adding this info haven't been stopped by the consensus of the rest of us. --Resplendent (talk) 18:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Semi-protect would be great, but I doubt it would be added as fortunately (for keeping an eye on it)/unfortunately (for semi-protect) they are not trying everyday, 5 times a day. Plus it is not quite vandalism, and semi-protect is more for that. Maybe an article RFC to get a wider consensus that the info should not be included, and then follow that up with a full protection request, as the two users above will be able to bypass a semi protect in a few days as their account(s) are no longer new. But another issue is the likely sockpuppet action of the two users Rockstar2000 and SandyWoods, which could get them blocked (which I believe would be on their IP address so no more edits from their main computer). Aboutmovies (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Computergurus (talk · contribs) added to the situation with this edit with the edit summary:

No good reason why this information needs to be removed. Kudos to person who did research to correct mistaken information in source!!

On the contrary, there are several good reasons:

1. Not all flights are well synchronized with their connections
2. Poorly scheduled connecting flights are not an airport issue: they are—at least—an airline issue.
3. Some passengers welcome a long connection times as a chance to do some sightseeing, etc. especially in an interesting place like Amsterdam.
4. Given the number of connections from Amsterdam, like 99% are well connected by this flight. The cases of a few African flights is noise.

—EncMstr 19:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

edit war

There seems to be a slow edit war over whether a few destinations have service, typified by a change between Singapore [ends May 30], Tokyo-Narita, Pusan [begins May 31 in place of Singapore])) and Tokyo-Narita.

The page is protected for 30 days. Please take this opportunity to discuss and agree on what the proper contents are. —EncMstr 08:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Just had this brought to my attention. But I think, other than the formating, the only problem seems to be whether Pusan/Busan will actually be a NWA destination. I tried to book nonstop flights in the middle of June from PDX to PUS and was told the flight doesn't exist. So as far as I can tell, the anon user is incorrect. NcSchu_(Talk) 15:42, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The governing rules for inclusion/exclusion should be WP:Airport. One-stop direct flights should be listed. Debates on what's direct is OK. Imposing "non-stop only" is not. HkCaGu (talk) 16:21, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I know, that's not what I was trying to say/do at all...What I was trying to do was demonstrate that no PUS flight exists now or after May 31 except by taking non-direct transfers. But now that I look again I see that despite a plane change, the NWA005 flight number continues from PDX to NRT to PUS. So indeed the flight should be included. NcSchu_(Talk) 18:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

But looks like NRT-PUS is a B757. If that's the case PUS should definitely not be included per WP:Airport. An aircraft type change implies a 100% chance of an aircraft change. HkCaGu (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

But what about the flight number? I found it strange that it said 757 too, but the flight numbers were the same. The guidelines under WP:AIR don't seem to solve this issue completely. On one hand there is an aircraft change so the flight shouldn't be added but on the other had there is no change in flight number so it should be added. However I note that in the flight search, it is possible to book just the NRT-PUS leg of NWA005. NcSchu_(Talk) 20:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I read the "spirit" of point #5 as "plane change means exclusion". It's what's known as faux-direct--like those Europe/Asia-US Gateway-US Inland. HkCaGu (talk) 20:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

There is no flight from Portland to Singapore. There are flights from Portland to Tokyo (a NWA hub) with connections to Singapore under the same flight number. For whatever motive, audude08 seems to think this should be included as a destination. It's a deliberate attempt to make it look as if there are non-stop flights between PDX and Singapore, which there are not. Including faulty information like this listed makes Wikipedia look bad. To be consistent, I added other direct flights under the same flight number, which meet the same criteria as he's using to include the NWA flight. He deleted those, using twisted and faulty logic to explain it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.109.35 (talk) 00:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Busan does not even operate under same plane.......SIN does! Audude08 (talk) 03:34, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

There are many Southwest Airlines flights that connect to PDX under the same flight number and on the same plane. Should we include those as well? 71.112.197.7 (talk) 02:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

According to WP:Airport, definitely. They are genuine direct flights. HkCaGu (talk) 05:56, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

But if it goes through a hub, then no. HkCaGu (talk) 05:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Tokyo-Narita is a hub for NWA, which means that the PDX-NRT-SIN flight that started this whole dispute should not be listed. As for WP:Airport, it should be changed to only allow for non-stop flights. If you look through the major US airport articles, you will be hard pressed to find many passenger flights that aren't non-stop.71.113.112.39 (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I would have to agree with the above statement. People are going to assume the list is of non-stops. --Resplendent (talk) 17:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Throwing out WP:Airport as wikiprojects can really only suggest guidelines, and I think they should work towards a consensus that turns into a formal guideline. Turning to an actual policy, Wikipedia is WP:NOT a travel guide, thus individual destinations should really not even be included. We don't list every book available at a library in an article about a library. Not every person who graduates from a college is listed in the alumni section of an article about that school. A few highlights are given in each case. That said, flights should be limited to non-stop flights, at the most. Anything else would be arbitrary as demonstrated by this discussion and the recent edit war that started this discussion. Limiting flights to non-stop flights provides a clear, bright-line rule that does not require research into plane types, hubs, or flight numbers. If a reader really wants to know where flights go after that, they can contact their travel agent or follow a link to the airport. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

You can't get a true picture of an airport (and compare one with others) without the destination list. "Not a travel guide" means we're not going to include the frequency, schedule, aircraft type, etc. Which airlines and destinations are served by an airport is very much encyclopedic. And if you do not think listing "direct" flights makes any sense, just think from a perspective of small-town or remote-island airports. HkCaGu (talk) 19:11, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't that be addressed by saying something like direct flights to Asia, Europe, and all major U.S. hubs? It gives the reader hope that further research will find specifics, provides the general flavor of the airport connectivity, is easy to read, and easy to verify. —EncMstr 19:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do we need to compare the airports? Are we ranking them? And are some destinations scored higher on the report card, and does it matter if some of the flights are direct or not? As to not including schedules, did you notice that often there are "service starts on this date" or ends on this date or [seasonal]? That to me is a lot like a schedule. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

That inspires a more direct approach: Comparison of US airport route connectivity.  :-) —EncMstr 19:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Where do we stand on the issue of whether WP:Airport should be modified to recommend only including non-stop flights? I recommend that we do so, for 2 reasons. First, I believe that most readers believe that only non-stop destinations are listed. Secondly, it's practically impossible to know if a direct flight is scheduled on the same aircraft, and whether the passengers are required to deplane during the stop, unless you fly that route regularly or are an employee of the airline in question.WikiBrown (talk) 08:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Now, you are all making me confused here. Why is Portland listed on the Singapore Changi Airport page as a direct flight until June 1 and Singapore not listed here??? Huh??? Audude08 (talk) 23:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Purported BA Flight

"British Airways has decided to start nonstop services to Portland from London's Gatwick airport. The flight will run daily with a Boeing 777 and will begin June 1st."

Seeing as I can find no news release on the PDX website, nor anything on Google or the BA website about this route, I'd say it's false and should be removed. --Resplendent (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

And I did remove it. Something that speculative and open to skepticism should not be included unles it has a reliable source. Those guidelines are there for a reason. If nothing else, consider the black eye Wikipedia is taking at places like this: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/3937600 Ipoellet (talk) 16:21, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

(another) slow motion anon edit war

The article is protected again. There is a slow motion edit war which strongly resembles the previous one. Here are a variety of ideas to resolve it:

• Delete the airlines and destinations section: it is the most contentious; without it, the article continues to describe the physical facilities well, but less strongly the specific services.
• Rewrite the section to be more general: the timetable/schedule aspects are specifically not acceptable.
• Obtain agreement from everyone what the proper contents are and leave them that way.

Probably there are other ideas too. Comments? —EncMstr (talk) 01:01, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Not too long ago, a user added Busan as a destination from PDX due to the airline restructuring of flight numbers to Asia. I would keep SIN until May 30 since it does not involve a plane change and after that date then it can be removed. Also, WP:AIRPORTS as 2 topics about this issue. 74.183.173.237 (talk) 17:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Why "PDX"?

Why is the airport's shorthand "PDX"? Other are more obvious, such as PIT for Pittsburgh, bug I can't seem to find an easy explanation for PDX... PortlanD ...X? That would be interesting to add to the first paragraph as well; in general, I think the introductory paragraph of the PDX article needs improvement anyway. --elwood_j_blues (talk) 18:40, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I remember there was a naming convention for a short while where, to form TLAs, the first and last letter of the city was combined with various suffixes. X indicated "international" status which was a big deal at one time. See this list for how rare that is in the overall scheme now. Sorry, I couldn't find any source for that. It predates the internet by many decades. —EncMstr (talk) 19:13, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

third largest U.S. metro without direct flights to London

SanMateo12 edited with Stop this IDIOCY, Diderot. That's enough! which adds Third largest US metropolitan area (San Diego and Pittsburgh) without non-stop commercial service to London, England to the Statistics section.

Per Table of United States Metropolitan Statistical Areas—which shows Portland as number 23—that means that of the 22 larger metropolitan areas (N.Y.C., L.A., Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia, Houston, Miami, D.C., Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, San Francisco, Phoenix, Riverside-San Bernadino, Seattle, Minneapolis, San Diego, St. Louis, Tampa, Baltimore, Denver, and Pittsburgh) have direct London flights? Really? Even San Bernadino and Detroit? If true, a quirk of geographical fate makes Portland less likely to get such service anytime soon, especially since Seattle conveniently has several such flights.

If this fact can be well sourced, does it belong in the article? Do all those big east coast cities have direct flights to Hawaii? Would I care to read about that in an encyclopedia article about those airports? I doubt it. —EncMstr (talk) 21:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Oooh, and if we include this can we include whatever ranking it is for not having a direct flight to Moscow, Cairo, Melbourne, Jakarta, and Kabul? Plus the thousands of other destinations around the world? I think we might then need to split all of that off into Destinations not served by Portland International Airport or maybe List of destinations not served by Portland International Airport? Or we can do the right thing and keep it all out and focus on what the airport does have. Otherwise we would need List of airlines not serving Portland International Airport and List of people who have never been to Portland International Airport. Aboutmovies (talk) 23:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

cross posting to ual and pdx

I have some one who keeps editing without a cite, that united express is ending service RDM-PDX... we just had capacity additions announced recently so it sounds kind of odd... anyways anyone have a ref on this? 72.0.187.239 (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Hawaiian PDX-OGG - The "Seasonal" Issue

Greetings from across the Columbia River! An editor has requested that I post something about this issue on the PDX talk page. A certain editor - ZHoover123 (talk) - has made edits to both the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and the Portland International Airport pages, saying that Hawaiian Airlines' service to Kahului from both Seattle and Portland are seasonal. ZHoover123 has provided this page - [1] - as proof. However, there is no mention of seasonal service, let alone the word "seasonal", on this page. Further investigation yielded no evidence that ZHoover123's position is correct. I noticed that at least two other editors have tried reversing ZHoover123's changes, only to have ZHoover123 reverse their attempts... any thoughts on this issue? Thanks! Wickedlyperfect18 (talk) 03:23, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

WP:NOTTRAVEL and WP:PROMOTION

Before removing all the "facilities" be sure to read what those parts of WP:NOT actually say. TRAVEL means no prices and addresses, not what is there. PROMOTION means we follow NPOV when writing about these things. As in we don't write "PDX has the world's greatest and fastest WiFi hotspots!" We do write they have WiFi. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:38, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Store listing is not encyclopedic and is "TRAVEL". Most stores are in most every airport. Most airports have wifi. If there's anything notable (a very special store), then mention it, not every store. HkCaGu (talk) 18:16, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

I still think that I read WP:NOTTRAVEL correctly. There it states that "the resulting articles need not include every tourist attraction, restaurant, hotel or venue, etc. Such details may be welcome at Wikitravel, instead." Who else but a traveller (who might need a good travel guide) would be interested in which shop or restaurant are located at an airport? Per aspera ad Astra (talk) 20:58, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, but I don't think so. Could you please read about notability on Wikipedia. Most specifically, read the part where it says: "These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article. They do not directly limit the content of articles." (emphasis mine). So, if I get one more person to talk about something not being notable enough inside an article my head is going to explode. The only time, and I mean only time, that notability should be brought up is in the context of whether or not we should have an article on the thing in question. As in at an AfD. That's it for notability on Wikipedia. Now, NPOV may come into play via UNDUE, but that is an amount issue, and not if we cover it.

And, no, most airports do not have all these restaurants. The busiest airport in Oregon has one restaurant (maybe, it may have closed), no food court, and no real baggage claim area. You see, most airports are little one runway dinky operations. Now, most major airports may have many of the same amenities, but they do vary. Regardless, much like most cities have police departments and fire departments, we still mention these items. We also mention whether or not cities have a mayor, even though most cities do have mayors.

With notable stores, well Wendy's is a blue link, which means it is notable. If you mean unique to that location, well all the listings were removed even though Made in Oregon, The Real Mother Goose, Powell's Books, and Oregon Pendleton Shop I'm pretty certain are unique to PDX. Ditto with about 1/3 of the restaurants. Yet, all were removed.

As to reading TRAVEL correctly, that would only work if you had removed some of the listings and not all. As your quote says, "need not include every" as in that means we do list some, yet you removed all. And if you want to remove all, well then we should really remove all the airline listings as well, as who else but a traveler is going to care, right (hell, with the airlines we even add the concourses and destinations, talk about TRAVEL)? Also, the last four times I was at the airport I didn't board a plane, yet on at least two of those occasions I did partake in the food service offerings, which means non-travelers like myself might want to know what there is there. And I would venture a guess that the people who work there and are not travelers also just might eat at an airport. Also, please do note that PDX in particular was apparently an early adopter of shops at an airport, and also did a big expansion just before 9/11 that included a bunch of places that were designed in part to attract the general public at large to visit them, but with security changes after 9/11 it sort of fell flat.

Lastly, many items in the article are really only relevant to pilots, so should we cut out things like runway numbers, runway lengths, airport diagram, and runway surfaces? P.S. what is encyclopedic notability? Aboutmovies (talk) 08:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the list of shops reads well. If there was something to say about each of the stores that made it significant then I would say keep it, but as it stands it's a list with no real meaningful content. My interpretation of WP:TRAVEL & WP:PROMOTION makes me think we should axe the list. Dawnseeker2000 14:49, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Could you quote me the part of PROMOTION you think it fails? I ask because I see a bare list in paragraph form, nothing about how great one restaurant is, thus it seems to me to be "Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to describe the topic from a neutral point of view." Aboutmovies (talk) 01:31, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Nope. I don't think the list has much value. That's it. It's promotional in tone because it's simply a list. Dawnseeker2000 02:00, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

i don't understand why some editors insist on deleting perfectly npov cited text. what, do you want wp to be as short as possible? I for one like the details and I see no reason to get rid of them. god forbid anyone should ever want to know where to eat at the airport.66.220.124.56 (talk) 08:10, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Consensus

The above discussion clearly shows the disapproval of the shop list that's been re-added by Aboutmovies. Looks like three of us spoke up. If that's not consensus or agreement, I don't know what is. I'll remove the material now, and if need be we can all re-voice our opinion here. Dawnseeker2000 17:25, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Well I should've looked before I leaped. Aboutmovies trim job looks great. Thank you for doing that. Dawnseeker2000 17:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks on the second part, but 3 to 2 is not consensus. That's a slight majority, and consensus is more about applying the guidelines and policies, the one thing you didn't want to quote. Which is more of WP:IDONTLIKEIT than anything else. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for removing it. Wasn't quality material. Dawnseeker2000 04:27, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Direct routed from PDX image

Stupid me, I have prepared an updated image on June 15th, 2010, but cannot seem to figure out how to make sure it shows up on the actual page. I am quite frustrated, so any help would be greatly appreciated. Sorry for a mess on the File page, I coudn't find such a thing as "undo" or "delete" on that page. Meechooilka (talk) 11:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Attribution template removed

I have removed {{AFHRA}} as it was added without any actual text. Thus it seems highly unlikely that anything was used from that source, since there is a total of two short sentences mention anything about the military. But if there was, please use all the parameters from this template to show which source was used. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Currently, the largest aircraft to service PDX is the Airbus A330, Delta uses it for its Amsterdam service. Boeing 767s are used for Delta's service to Narita Tokyo, and the two Hawaiian Airlines flights. Boeing uses a hangar to the south of the airport to paint 777s, you can see them take off and land periodically, and while no passenger Boeing 747 aircraft use PDX, Air China does fly a cargo 747 in and out of PDX. ```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unclewilbur (talk • contribs) 02:18, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

No 747s

Portland International doesn't traffic Boeing 747's. Should this be mentioned in the article? I mean, the airport seems like it would be big enough, right? --24.20.129.18 (talk) 03:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

There's really no point in listing such things. Portland also doesn't see A380 service, 777 service, A340 service or service to London, but it's all really not relevant. --Resplendent (talk) 06:59, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Lack of A380, 777 and A340 service would also be mentioned along with the 747. To put it a better way, what's the largest aircraft the airport currently caters to? --98.232.188.173 (talk) 21:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I've been told PDX isn't quite big enough to handle 747's and comparable aircraft, but at the same time, you can see a C-5 Galaxy parked in one of the side areas. --50.137.171.62 (talk) 04:18, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Destinations

I just noticed the destinations list is getting longer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:2C1F:32D7:7C34:EC96:12BE:3D17 (talk) 06:43, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Future Plans

Okay before being too quick to delete my comment consider why I said it (which should have been more clear, I guess). The news on McNary Field will likely render some of the statements in this section inaccurate. Refer to the wiki on McNary Field, they're keeping it up to date last I checked. Leovenous (talk) 18:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I have updated the south runway rehabiltion project to reflect progress. Also, south runway 10R/28L is now concrete, and no longer asphalt. See citation 32 for more info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.150.68 (talk) 21:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC) The portland business journal reported that the airport is looking into expanding concourse A by 200 feet and moving around some airlines.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.224.90 (talk) 06:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Edit request on 28 January 2013

Total passenger count for 2012 is 14,390,784 passengers. The source is from Port of Portland 66.239.228.215 (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Could you provide a link to the source? I'm having trouble reconciling your figures with these figures. Rivertorch (talk) 07:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

<--Answer--> Go to

www.portofportland.com then look under inside the port and under airline statistics. Thanks, GB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.239.228.215 (talk) 21:42, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I see what the discrepancy was; the BTS data was for October thru October, rather than December thru December. I've updated the infobox. Rivertorch (talk) 06:36, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

The international stats haven't been updated for a year, can I get info on how to obtain the stats? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:2C2D:2725:51A4:6B42:10E:FC8A (talk) 05:56, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

ups

Is UPS expanding into a hub at pdx? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alinare (talk • contribs) 21:24, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Not per http://www.ups.com/content/us/en/about/facts/worldwide.html. Conifer (talk) 03:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Can you provide a source saying that UPS is making a PDX a hub? Conifer's source provided does not mention PDX as a hub. Citydude1017 (talk) 02:19, 13 January

2015 (UTC) It was more of a question. I noticed the list of airports serviced by UPS was getting longer. The destination list of UPS flights is longer than Anchorage, is this correct. It looks like UPS is expanding here.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:426:88E9:0:10:C713:CB01 (talk) 14:21, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 May 2016

Hi, I think there's a misspelling here. I think the article says ttyat services like wifi are "complementary." I think it should be "complimentary" (as in free wifi). Thanks! Des48 (talk) 02:11, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Done Stickee (talk) 02:21, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

PDX Carpet

Resolved

No mention of the PDX Carpet in the article? At all?? 50.139.48.217 (talk) 04:18, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion—I've added some information about the carpet and its replacement. If you have anything to add about it, go ahead. Conifer (talk) 05:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

See also: Portland International Airport carpet

---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:43, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

I have the new PDX-International statistics to go under the statistics section

I have the new PDX-International statistics to go under the statistics section

When may I add them in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dsg450 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

So adding a reference is vandalism now - some people have strange ideas

Bemused by [[2]] IP6 user:2601:1C0:4700:AFF6:EDFA:9046:6822:9EDB deleting reference which he/she seems to think are redundant and vandalism. How can adding a reference be Vandalism? Andrewgprout (talk) 02:53, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

The IP removed it is because that the route has already started and that references are not needed for routes that are running unless it is in the airline's timetables and that it contradicts it. 97.85.118.142 (talk) 04:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

@97.85.118.142: I think you need to further explain your comment - No-where on Wikipedia is it correct to simply remove a valid reference, replace it yes, improve it yes - or perhaps delete it with an explanation if it does not support the fact it is supposedly supporting, but simply deleting is not something anyone should be doing. Everything on Wikipedia including Airport Destination tables are subject to the same wikipedia core principles WP:CCPOL, WP:V is the most important one here. Thanks Andrewgprout (talk) 05:09, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

@Andrewgprout: The cargo carriers needs to be sourced, the airline's website lists all the cargo carriers operating at the airport (the list is probably incomplete) and Cathay Pacific Cargo and a few others is not listed on that page and several other carriers missing. I am not sure if that page is not updated or not but all the rest of the cargo airlines needs a source from there official cargo timetable stating that PDX is served as a cargo destination otherwise we need to tag that section as citation needed. I don't know about the passenger carriers though. 97.85.118.142 (talk) 05:19, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks - What you say makes me even more perplexed about why my restoration of the reference proved so controversial.Andrewgprout (talk) 05:51, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Edit requests 16 November 2016

Request #1: For the Airport Ratings section of the article, the J.D. Power and Associates subsection needs to reflect the 2015 study, which is significantly different from the previous study. Source:

Request #2: PDX has only one terminal, so in the Terminal section of the article, the "South Terminal" and "North Terminal" headings over the concourse gate count bullets need to be changed to either north and south "sides" or north and south "concourses." The sentence that follows, "There are a total of 60 gates located withing the two passenger terminals," similarly needs to be changed to one terminal.

128.193.52.32 (talk) 02:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  15:26, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 2 February 2017

For Alaska Air operated by Horizon the Alaska timetable shows Horizon will fly to St Louis replacing the Alaska by SkyWest flight May 1. Also July 18 Horizon Air begins flying to Dallas Ft Worth and the Alaska by SkyWest to Dallas becomes seasonal. 2601:601:C602:1D90:7523:A6D4:73BA:2376 (talk) 07:56, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  06:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Pictures

All of the pictures on the right side of the page in the Airlines and destinations section seem to "break the page". Perhaps they should be scattered more throughout the article or put in a "Gallery" section at the bottom. --Resplendent (talk) 03:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you on the "Gallery" idea. How about you do that? 67.171.172.44 (talk) 02:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

It's done but the International image needs to be updated. --Resplendent (talk) 03:43, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? 67.171.172.44 (talk) 01:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

MEX is no longer served from PDX. --Resplendent (talk) 01:10, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

How should you or I update it? 67.171.172.44 (talk) 18:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Can we remove/replace some of the pictures in the gallery at the bottom of the page? They don't really represent PDX or its operations, as C-5s are extremely rare visitors, and America West Airlines hasn't existed for years! --LakerNDB (talk) 16:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

@LakerNDB: Yes please! Be Bold! —EncMstr (talk) 17:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 May 2018

Change this sentence "The airport is a secondary hub for Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air, with Seattle–Tacoma International Airport as the primary hub for Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air." to this "The airport is a secondary hub for Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air, with Seattle–Tacoma International Airport as their primary hub. -sugargabby 5/3/18 Sugargabby (talk) 20:21, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

 Done with thanks, NiciVampireHeart 20:35, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2018

In the Public Transportation section, after the first sentence, a new sentence should be added: "TriMet bus line 272-PDX Night Bus provides all-night service to the airport." The citation is here: https://www.oregonlive.com/expo/news/erry-2018/08/7c26bc6c725773/trimet-brings-24-hour-transit.html Jbikales (talk) 14:00, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

 Done Saucy^{[talk – contribs]} 03:33, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Our favorite sockpuppet is back :-(

Once again we appear to be under attack by a sock puppet for user "Luis22pdxedu‎", who was banned several months ago for repeatedly vandalizing the page, against consensus. Now he's back - having vandalized the page at least 3 times in the same way. Could an admin please protect this page again? Ross Finlayson (talk) 09:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

His vandalism seems to be a bit more varied this time. I've reported his IP at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism; it should get blocked soon... Ross Finlayson (talk) 09:16, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 August 2019

Suncountry adding seasonal nonstop Portland-Cabo San Lucas(SJD) from December 18 https://www.columbian.com/news/2019/aug/06/sun-country-launches-portland-cabo-flights/

Also, Westjet is year round on PDX-Calgary Dsg6500 (talk) 03:35, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

 Done Suncountry was already done, Westjet added since their website now displays it as non seasonal (I updated the accessdate). --Trialpears (talk) 23:36, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

handling Promotional content

 Done —EncMstr (talk) 05:47, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Noha307 correctly flagged the "Airport ratings" section as promotional. However, much of that content goes toward notability, not that there is doubt whether PDX is notable.

I suggest moving that section near the end of the article (perhaps between "Accidents and incidents" and "Gallery") and summarizing in one sentence at the end of the lead (something like):

PDX receives top honors among many polls: 2013 Travel + Leisure magazine readers' poll for best US airport; Condé Nast Traveler in 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2010, top airport for business travelers; #1 in 2015 and 2016 by J.D. Power and Associates for US "Large Passenger Airports" and overall highest amongst passenger satisfaction; the 2015 ALPA Airport of the Year.

—EncMstr (talk) 16:26, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

"New York–Newark" to "Newark"

Could someone please change "New York–Newark" to just "Newark" in the Alaska Airlines & United Airlines sections of the Airlines and destinations table? This format is consistent throughout other airport pages. Thanks. 73.67.145.30 (talk) 22:51, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done: see Special:Diff/922600446. Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 03:54, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

New flights to Madison, Wisconsin

New summer seasonal flights announced by Sun Country Airlines to Madison, Wisconsin start June 3rd. References:

Thanks, 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:650A:10AF:915C:F1B3 (talk) 22:39, 5 November 2019 (UTC)

(non-admin closure)  Done. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:240A:8D09:321:AFE3 (talk) 04:10, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

References

Which map used?

I recently changed the map to from PDXFAA2011MAY2.pdf to PDX - FAA airport diagram.png. I then had my edit reverted by 67.204.182.18, who said in the edit summary that he "rvt very olde faa map". Is it true that PDX - FAA airport diagram.png is older, because it is certainly is better because it is less blurry. If it isn't older, I will change the map back to PDX - FAA airport diagram.png. David1217 (talk) 03:27, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The .png is indeed older, as it dates to pre-10L/28R lengthening and 3/21 shortening. Ideally we'd have a clear .png/.svg version of the .pdf. --Resplendent (talk) 07:06, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Update: Uploaded an .svg version of the current diagram. --Resplendent (talk) 07:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! David1217 (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

This FAA Airport Diagram is current as of Nov. 2019: https://aeronav.faa.gov/d-tpp/1912/00330ad.pdf#nameddest=(PDX) can it be added in place of the old one from 2005 that is currently displayed on the page? (I can't edit due to the page being semi-protected) Thanks! LakerNDB (talk) 01:17, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Southwest ABQ

Could someone please remove Albuquerque from the seasonal flight list for Southwest Airlines on the airlines and destinations table, as this route has not been flown for a very long time now. Thank you. 172.58.35.169 (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Interstellarity (talk) 14:19, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Airport facilities as first paragraph?

Seems a bit out of place. Could we reorder the paragraphs so that the airport facilities is somewhere towards the end of the aritlce? Cumulus (talk) 14:38, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2020

Remove, “The airport is a secondary hub for Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air, with Seattle–Tacoma International Airport as the primary hub.”

There is no citation and this language is not consistent with the language used by Alaska Airlines and the existing Wikipedia sites for four airports that already identify Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Anchorage as hubs for Alaska. While Alaska Airlines calls Seattle home, the other four airports are appropriately referred to as hubs not secondary hubs. Delta does not label airports outside Atlanta as secondary hubs.

See: "Cities served - Alaska Airlines". Newsroom - Network. Alaska Airlines. January, 2020. “Alaska Air Group serves 115 destinations with 1,200 daily departures in the United States, Mexico, Canada and Costa Rica. The airline offers more nonstop flights from the West Coast than any other carrier. Though Alaska calls Seattle home, the company has hubs in Anchorage, Alaska, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Portland, Oregon. Other focus cities include San Diego and San Jose, California.” Jason Portland (talk) 16:47, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done feminist (talk) 11:21, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 September 2020

Please remove

90% of passenger air travel and more than 95% of air cargo of the state.

and add

90% of the state's passenger air travel and more than 95% of its air cargo.

"of the state" is grammatical but doesn't sound quite normal. 64.203.187.74 (talk) 20:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

 Done Conifer (talk) 23:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2021

Delta is adding year-round nonstop PDX-ICN (Seoul–Incheon) flights starting September 9, 2021. Please add this to the airlines and destinations table.

Source: https://news.delta.com/deltas-athens-service-returns-may-vaccinated-travelers-new-portland-seoul-route-launching-fall-2021

Added! --Resplendent (talk) 15:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:7C14:BC49:A126:FB7C (talk) 16:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2021

A user deleted one of the airlines serving PDX without reason. Volaris needs to be added back. The destination they serve is Guadalajara. Source: https://cms.volaris.com/en/travel-info/coronavirus-update/ Oregonflyer (talk) 04:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

I think you are right about PDX-GDL. Here is the edit you are referring to. @Isacra121416: do you know if there's a reason for Volaris to stay removed that I might be missing? Otherwise, it may have been a temporary removal that I can go ahead and restore. TimSmit (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

TimSmit, I think you're all set to restore. That user has never posted on a talk page. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

ScottishFinnishRadish, thanks for taking care of it. I didn't want to revert immediately in case there were some extra details that I missed. Your edit looks good to me. TimSmit (talk) 20:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

I was suprised to see Volaris be removed and not be put back if it indeed was a temporary removal. Also it looks like that user did not specify why they removed Volaris for the airline list in its entirety. If it can be added back that would be great. Thank you! Oregonflyer (talk) 23:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done I think I restored what needed to be put back. I did remove one of the routes from the table as the source doesn't have that route listed. All good? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:01, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2021

Change Alaska Airlines destinations to add Boston, as service has resumed as of late May. Mtrimm2023 (talk) 23:04, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:38, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 June 2021

Alaska is adding PDX-TPA seasonal nonstop flights. Reference.2601:1C0:4401:24A0:295D:2D99:9DF5:D723 (talk) 14:40, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

PDX-MSY is also being added: Reference. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:295D:2D99:9DF5:D723 (talk) 14:50, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Anybody wishing to actually update this is free to do so, but I've raised my personal objections about the concept itself here. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:54, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Melmann 11:30, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

@RandomCanadian: If you are against the consensus of listing destinations, then you shouldn't be responding to semi-protection edit requests. I'm not necessarily saying that I disagree with you, but at least wait until a full consensus is reached at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Airport_destination_lists before declining the request. FWIW, it looks like someone else already took care of this anyway. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:6463:127E:E490:C360 (talk) 16:26, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

I did say "not done for now", not "not done". RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:37, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

PDX to CUN

There is a direct, seasonal flight from PDX to CUN (Cancun) on Alaska Airlines that is not included in the "Airlines and destinations" section. Sources: Cancún International Airport and Schedules-Alaska Airlines . If someone with access could add to the page, that'd be great. Thanks

Taken care of. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:F491:4CDA:93B1:903 (talk) 20:00, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2021

Please change "Mqrch 2021" to "March 2021" in the Statistics section within the domestic top destinations table. Thank you. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:F491:4CDA:93B1:903 (talk) 20:04, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for pointing this out! Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:14, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 July 2021

Alaska Airlines also serves New York-JFK from PDX 98.246.58.65 (talk) 03:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 09:38, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

South Korea

The article stated that there are flights to South Korea from Portland. My understanding is that there was an agreement that eventually that would happen, but it has not yet started. Davidpdx (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

That is already stated within the article. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:F491:4CDA:93B1:903 (talk) 20:00, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

I think there is some confusion based on what you stated. The only other reference in-text to the Portland to Seoul flight is this one:

"Delta Air Lines added a flight to Seoul in 1988, coinciding with the 1988 Summer Olympics; the Seoul flight was later extended to Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, and Taipei."

That flight has been discontinued and does not currently exist. Any mention of it should be removed from the article. Davidpdx (talk) 11:19, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

My apologies. I happened to look at Delta's website and there is a flight now between the two cities. Davidpdx (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 September 2021

Remove Redmond/Bend from Boutique Air's destination list. PDX-RDM flights have been removed from Boutique's schedule and route map, as per reference link already featured on the page (https://www.boutiqueair.com/p/schedule). 91.125.193.161 (talk) 08:39, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done Danski454 (talk) 21:13, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 September 2021

Remove Billings and Missoula from Allegiant Air's seasonal destinations list. These have been removed from the carrier's route map and schedule at:

https://www.allegiantair.com/interactive-routemap

Add above link to corresponding Refs section. 213.223.81.149 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done and dusted. -³²²UbnBr₂ (Talk | Contributions | Actions) 14:59, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2021

Please remove New Orleans from the seasonal destinations section of Alaska Airlines. The airline canceled plans to start this route, as it is no longer on their "new flights" page: [3]. 2601:1C0:4401:24A0:298E:4158:442:5812 (talk) 20:06, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Signed, I Am Chaos (talk) 19:47, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

United airlines destination

Please add Washington DC IAD to list. United flies there everyday. 2600:100F:B100:6C0D:D16F:748E:A865:476D (talk) 04:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2022

In Reference section,, Reference #1, change effective date of Form 5010 for PDX. Change December 20, 2007 to December 30, 2021. Thank you. 2601:581:8402:6620:8968:40AA:7BFB:AD6D (talk) 22:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

@2601:581:8402:6620:8968:40AA:7BFB:AD6D:  Done 1063996738 —Uzume (talk) 01:41, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 January 2022

Allegiant has removed Portland to Monterey and Santa Maria from their route map. (see [4]). Please remove these two entries from the airlines and destinations table under Allegiant Air.

In addition, Alaska Airlines is no longer offering direct flights from Portland to Redmond/Bend. (see [5]). Please remove the "Redmond/Bend" entry from the airlines and destinations table under Alaska Airlines. Thank you. 95.24.11.245 (talk) 19:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done casualdejekyll 00:36, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2022

Add Los Angeles as destination for Delta Connection. 73.254.58.23 (talk) 19:26, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 20:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

@[[User:MadGuy7023| net aprobrame 75.118.12.33 (talk) 23:18, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

2021 international passengers

Busiest international routes to and from PDX (2021)
Source:

1. Guadalajara, Mexico | 62,072 | Volaris
2. San Jose del Cabo, Mexico | 20,577 | Alaska
3. Vancouver, Canada | 19,112 | Air Canada, Alaska
4. Reykjavik-Keflavik, Iceland | 11,771 | Icelandair
5. Puerto Vallarta, Mexico | 9,921 | Alaska
6. Cancun, Mexico | 2,434 | Alaska
7. Calgary, Canada | 478 | WestJet

Andgo100 (talk) 23:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)andgo100

Pet bathroom

PDX is adding a indoor bathroom for pets [6] - please add to article. Thank you!— Preceding unsigned comment added by CookieMonster755 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Horizon Air section

Why does Air Canada Express, American Eagle, and Delta Connection have their own sections, but Horizon is lumped in with Alaska? 2601:1C0:6F01:5E70:ADE6:E706:3A5C:EE81 (talk) 20:22, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2022

Can someone change the start date for Delta's service to Seoul–Incheon from September 8, 2022 to March 25, 2023 as per https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/220817-dlnw22icn 97.82.30.107 (talk) 14:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

 Already done Aaron Liu (talk) 22:05, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2022

Can someone change the date for Delta's service to Tokyo–Haneda from October 29, 2022 to March 25, 2023 as per https://thriftytraveler.com/news/airlines/delta-tokyo-flights/. 97.82.30.107 (talk) 19:13, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

 Done see revision [7] and fix at [8] (I accidentally wrote March 15, not 25 💀) A diehard editor (talk | edits) 10:18, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

PDX to LHR

Can someone add “England” to the list of international destinations in the second paragraph? Note 54 describes the BA flight, "Touchdown in Portland: British Airways Launches First Direct Route from Oregon to London". www.flypdx.com. Retrieved August 12, 2022. Jason Portland (talk) 23:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2022

Alaska Airlines resuming service to Vancouver on May 18, 2023. Source: https://www.aeroroutes.com/eng/220928-asnw22intl 73.254.58.23 (talk) 02:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

 Done — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:40, 29 October 2022 (UTC)