![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
I moved posts that were above the TOC to here. It makes the page more streamlined without removing previous posts. ( Edwardlay ( talk) 22:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC))
I removed the reference to a large new 737 order that was apparently to be announced at the Paris Airshow that had a reference to the flighblogger blog. The airshow has come and gone with no order from AA. It was also a rumor posted on a blog, so should it have been there anyways? 207.161.43.183 03:21, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
I re-reverted the change to the sub-type of American's Airbus aircraft, which is in fact properly designated as the A300B4-605R, not just A300-600 according to Simon Forty's book, American Airlines published by ABC/Plymouth Press in 1997.
Travelsonic 22:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The article claimed that American flew over 98 million route passenger miles in 2005. This seems off as a single airplane can fly many more than that. I deleted the statement. Does anyone have a correct figure?
-Aqeel
does any body know who is editing alaska airlines? they say someone is attacking us here!----------------
I slightly edited this page to delete an inaccurate paragraph. A paragraph stated that after the fall of Pan Am, Eastern and TWA in the early 1990s American Airlines became the most profitable publically traded airline. I'm not sure if this is correct. For one thing, TWA remained in business until 2001 when it was acquired by American Airlines. Additionally, I recall reading in multiple sources that United Airlines had made the most profits of any airline in history in the late 1990s, so it seems that there existed sufficient doubt over the validity of that paragraph for me to axe it.
If anyone has any information here which could go more into depth on this it would be worthwhile to discuss...
-Wgw2024
I think it's an injustice to Cord to call him a "corporate raider." Raiders are the guys who buy a company, sell off its component parts, and leave. Cord did shuffle companies around a bit, but he was trying to build an empire, not destroy something. He bought Duesenberg, then a makr of excellent cars, and turned it into a company whose cars still inspire awe 70 years later. Then he added Auburn, transforming that into a company whose products made people sit up, take notice, and buy. Then he started a new line, Cord.
I'm less familiar with his involvement in aircraft, but he did seem to be trying to build up something there, too.
Ivan Berger Fanwood, NJ
This [1] may be worthy of inclusion to some degree or another within the article. --AWF
Sekicho, Can you please explain why in the American Airlines External Links you deleted a link placed by 68.162.15.2 at 15:02 on 24 October 2004 (UTC) without a proper explanation, Putting "giving up and rv'ing to last stable version" is not a proper explanation. I checked out the site myself and there is legitimate material relating to American Airlines and the events of September 11, 2001 Terrorist attacks. It's not like it is a spam site and in fact there are several Wikipedia articles that link to that site and have been for quite a while. Misterrick 09:37, 25 October 2004 (UTC).
I agree with all of what you've just said. However:
(1) Visitors have many options in finding out more. They can click on September 11, 2001 attacks, they can click on American Airlines Flight 11, they can click on World Trade Center... they can even click on Betty Ong. We don't need an external link to provide historical information because virtually all of it has been wikified already.
(2) More importantly, a 9/11-related website is not "on point" to an article written about American Airlines. 9/11 makes up only a small part of American's history, and likewise, American was only an accessory to the incident. It makes sense to link Max Miller's site from 9/11 and AA11, because his web site tells a lot about both. However, a person is not going to learn more about American Airlines from Max's site. We don't have a link to Max Miller from al-Qaida or from terrorism, even though his web site has a great deal to do with both, because his web site doesn't tell people anything about either!
(3) "External links" are not merely "related links." Their purpose is to provide access to content that cannot be reproduced (for legal, technical, or whatever reasons) on Wikipedia, and they should be as relevant to the content matter as possible. In this case, while Max Miller's site is related to American Airlines, it is not relevant to an article about American Airlines any more than a web site about Columbine High School is relevant to an article about Michael Moore.
You seem to imply that I have some sort of evil motivation to wipe 9/11 from history. I don't. I'm just trying to exercise good editorial discretion. As a lawyer-in-training, I dislike the "parade of horrors" analysis, but it fits here: if we allow external links with only slight correlation to article content, we're going to end up with a ton of external links that aren't useful. There are a lot of articles that Max Miller's web site should be linked from. American Airlines and United Airlines just don't happen to be such articles. Sekicho 03:08, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
I edited this page to add a fact. It is true that when American Airlines became a subsidiary of AMR Corporation, AMR kept AA's original New York Stock Exchange ticker symbol. AMR stiil has it today.
Anyone is free to debate this fact.
-CJS102793
I deleted the first picture of the 777, because there is already a picture of the aircraft type. It looks a little bit better, because the airplanes are all different types.
-CJS102793
I changed the number of aircraft from 840, to 806, because in the book, "Ask the Pilot", written by Patrick Smith, he states that American Airlines has the largest aircraft fleet with 806 aircraft. CJS102793 13:36, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
You know, you're right. I need to go to AA.com more often. I just touched it up a bit. MOO! CJS102793 22:03, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
I have edited the AA fleet size to 705 due to the 8/5/05 decommissioning of seven 767-223 airframes due to be scrapped. 11 767-223ER and 1 767-223 remain in the AA fleet.
- Mike @ DFW
How does the web page noted verify LGA, JFK, and BOS as hubs? I checked it out, and it does not mention anything about those airports being considered hubs. Chaz 16:56, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I changed BOS, JFK, and LGA to hubs, since their caps on the site [3] Chaz 21:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Either the page goes by the "in caps" standard from AA's website, or it goes by the airports that realistically function as hubs. Since the majority seem to want to go by what AA says, San Juan is not a hub in that case, so I am removing it and will continue to do so. Dbinder 20:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
BOS is still listed as a hub. I changed the infobox to reflect that. Chaz 21:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Who keeps listing BOS as not being a hub? It's still in caps on their site, and I'll change it back to being listed as a hub Chaz 00:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
I'm not the one putting San Juan on the hubs list. Chaz 00:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
American Airlines does not have 5 hubs.... It only has DFW/MIA/ORD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.9.40.131 ( talk) 16:11, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
I have worked at American for 15 plus years...and never heard the eagle called the bug.
Template:OTA has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.
Seriously, this is an article with very little Texas content. Is this really necessary? Does everyone feel the need to emblazon their pet project's stamp on articles? — Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 23:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Reno Air should really have its own article and not just be a forward to the American Airlines article. Unforunately, I don't have enough info on them even to start a stub. I know they operated MD-80s, MD-87s, and MD-90s, and had hubs in RNO and SJC, and from this article we can get the date they were acquired by AA. For a short time, Mid Pacific Air operated Reno Air Express flights using Jetstream 31s. That's about all I can think of at the moment. If someone can at least come up with a year they started, that ought to be enough to create a stub. -- Hawaiian717 17:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
I have removed the following addition by MED777 to the Incidents and accidents section as I would consider a diversion due to a cockpit indicator, with a safe landing to be non-notable:
*An MD80 bound for Los Angeles (AA2261) was forced to return to the Denver International on May03th 2006 evening for an emergency landing after the crew got a nose gear warning. The aircraft, which departed around 9:30pm made a safe landing around 10:30pm.
-- Hawaiian717 22:26, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Not sure how to do it myself, but I think that the bird logo and the sylized "American Airlines" should appear in the same box, with a white background. In the blue cell, it should have "American Airlines" in standard bold font, similar to other pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sean.estrada ( talk • contribs) 2006-07-20 23:11:37 (UTC)
I don't think the current logo is better. It seems too thin and the font looks wrong. I think [4] looks good but without the slogan (I don't think its current). [5] would be perfect if it were in color. I don't know how to convert the EPS to SVG though. -- Hawaiian717 00:24, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Is it just me (or my computer), or does the blue on the logo looks very different than the blue in the official logo? It seems too bright. The logos from Brands of the World look good, but the one uploaded to wikipedia looks different. Any way we can fix it? -- Rover007TN 02:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
According to List of largest airlines, AA is not the largest company in terms of passengers (and AF-KLM is said to be the 5th). Since I couldn't have any real confirmation I didn't change the article, but if someone could double check that would be great :) Lucasbfr 14:10, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I feel that the American Airlines (AA) article is missing just a few things. Altho I use Wikipedia often, I am just starting to figure out how to work the "behind the scenes" stuff. But I do feel that the AA article should at least mention Americans pionering of the "Admirals Club" and should mention that they are the only legacy carrier that has not (at one point or another) filed for bankruptcy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.29.160.167 ( talk)
Many other legacy carriers have not filed for bankruptcy.....Singapore Airlines, British Airways, Scandinavian Airlines, etc. In the US, Alaska Airlines is the only other legacy carrier that hasn't filed for bankruptcy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.212.107.104 ( talk)
As many major US carriers already have done so, we might as well do it for this page as well. See Admirals Club discussion page for more reasons why I believe it should be merged.-- Golich17 19:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
As many major US carriers already have done so, we might as well do it for this page as well. See AAdvantage discussion page for more reasons why I believe it should be merged.-- Golich17 19:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
On the incident's page, someone added the lines "crashed intentionally by our government" under the Sept. 11th crashes row. Please delete. ```` —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Spdr386 ( talk • contribs) 04:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC).
Also, this page is being edited to say that Flights 11 and 77 were not scheduled to fly on September 11, 2001. This conspiracy theory is based on an online database not having those two flights (United's 175 and 93 are there). It is a database of on-time statistics, and AA elected not to submit on-time stats for their two flights. Please keep an eye out for this falsehood being put onto this page. --
Joseph.nobles
19:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
There's a discussion at Talk:Delta Air Lines#Complaint Links about the removal of the links to the complaints bulletin boards (such as www.aacomplaints.com, these complaints bulletin boards are all from one company and have minimal information) from airline articles. I invite you to discuss this change there. -- Matt 01:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Microsoft owns American Air? I don't think so, can someone check this out? D-hyo 02:42, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Admirals club.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 16:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Image:Aadvantagelogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 17:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Dont you guys think an AA.Com section should be added to this website? Arigont 17:48, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking about adding some details on American's seats, like there are on other Airline pages. However, I thought it would be neat if we also listed seats under airline type, as this would be neat for anyone who was flying on American to see what is on that plane. I was thinking the normal section, just like the other pages, detailing all of the classes and seats. But then I would add a chart, with aircraft, type of seat, pitch, and future plans. The type of seat category would tell which type of seat from the details above. I think this would be a good addition to the fleet section, and is easy to do as American only has about 8 types of planes. I'm probably going to add this section soon, as I cannot see any objections, but if you do please just comment here and I'm sure we can make a very nice section. ( 68.246.150.30 14:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC))
That's enough Hextic. NYyankees51 22:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I want to know why this page recently had about twenty edits that ended up with the page in its 2006 form. I saw some member with an IP revert it, and now it seems normal. I am personally going to be watching this page for vandalism and will be deleting it. If you have something major to add, it should be mentioned here and waited upon until there are no objections. Thank you. ( Edwardlay 20:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC))
This article has been hit by so much vandalism because it hit the front page of digg.com yesterday. Apparently the line about Flights 11 and 77 not being scheduled on 9/11 and therefore could not have been hijacked was added by an IP address belonging to American Airlines. Some diggers didn't understand that all this means is that any of AA's hundreds of employees or customers on a WIFI connection they provide could have done that and retaliated against the company by vandalizing the page. This is no longer on the front page of digg and within a few days all should settle back to normal.
wraithfivefa
22:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I believe I have added any changes that were important that the revert deleted. Everything seems back to normal, please let me know of any other problems. Thank you. (
Edwardlay
03:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC))
OK, but the most important thing is whether the info provided is correct, regardless of the IP address.
The info contained the reference http://www.bts.gov/
Any further thoughts anyone? I think this information is defiantly relevant to the article, if I am interested in incidents with this airline then I want to know this information. Catonz 06:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I edited the incidents section to include information about the veracity of the Pentagon claim. Before anyone gets into some kind of dispute or edit war, please do your research about the incident and verify that this event actually took place. To date, there has been no known photograph taken at the 'crash site' showing an identifiable evidence that this disaster ever took place; Placing blame upon AA is therefore technically wrong and therefore, this section should be amended to exonerate them. MiracleMat 16:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
== it look like advertise == This article clearly looks like advertise from the company that goes against the Wiki-policy
please do not split this article and it needs more information about de lay off they been doing the pass years How many people? why is not showing this here? and the administration going of the company--
Andresvzla (
talk)
13:49, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it just me or does this article reads somewhat like a commercial endoresement written by the company itself? The list of external References is quite telling. Shouldn't there be a section called "Criticism" where customer complaints etc are at least mentioned? Regards, Nsk92 10:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
I came here looking for information on the successful 1993 strike by American Airline Attendants that shut down the airline. I only found information on the unsuccessful 1997 strike by American Airline Pilots. Is that intentional? Looking at the comments here, it seems like this entry is controlled entirely by American Airlines. Can't they pay for their own bandwidth and leave history alone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.11.202.87 ( talk) 00:33, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Should LHR really be a focus city? Someone has added it to the airline's infobox and I was wondering if AA identifies LHR as a focus city? Bucs2004 18:51, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
I have removed the incident a number of times, it is not really notable, nobody hurt and the aircraft was not substantially damaged. An IP user keeps adding it back. Please discuss before you add it back why you think that a minor incident is notable enough. Thank You. MilborneOne 21:37, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
The American Airlines fleet section is overwhelmingly based on current events ("now-centric") and contains almost no historical information, which is where an encyclopedia should excel. What historical information there is is at the top of the article and is focused almost entirely on business aspects and organization. Furthermore, for some reason there's an entire article called "American Airlines fleet" which is almost exactly identical to the "American Airlines fleet" section. Can something be done about this? I don't want to start chopping up other people's work if someone is trying to nurture this area. - Rolypolyman ( talk) 14:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
the fleet is completely innacurate. the website ( http://www.aa.com/content/amrcorp/corporateInformation/facts/fleet.jhtml) that there are a combo of 300 MD-80 jets, and the number of 757's has decreased by 1 and as well with the B767-200's, which, in addition, nowhere in the website states that they are extended range aircraft. will someone please check this out? Duhhitsminerva ( talk) 06:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the text about only five passengers on a transatlantic flight twice (once from accidents and incidents) and user User:Inetpup has added it back in with the comment please discuss. This is not a notable or an uncommon event and needs to be removed again. Any comments from other editors. MilborneOne ( talk) 09:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
This section is confusing, at the beginning it says: "In the late 1980s, American opened three new hubs for north-south traffic. San Jose International Airport was added as a hub after American purchased Reno Air." This didn't happen untiln 1999 but then later it says that AA sold it's facilities to Reno Air, which according to the section was bought by AA years earlier. Could sombody please tidy this up? Thank you. 131.15.48.58 ( talk) 18:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)Richicago
It looks like AA has dumped this hub effective 03-September. What should we downgrade to? Secondary hub? Focus city? Let me know. Thanks! -- Inetpup ( talk) 05:16, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Is ORD still AA's second largest hub or is it now AA's smallest hub? 74.183.173.237 ( talk) 16:45, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
I am bringing this to this discussion as JesseW and I disagree as to the relevance of this section and information. I removed the catering section, as I do not see it as being relevant.
While it isn't binding, I think this article is quite relevant. Who caters American Airlines is important to Gate Gourmet and LSG Sky Chefs, but not as much to American Airlines. This is the slippery slope toward becoming a directory of links loosely related to American Airlines which falls under what wikipedia is not. I would argue that American Airline's internet provider (Verizon) is even more relevant than the caterer as almost all of their customers use their internet site/connectivity to their database to order tickets, whereas not everyone drinks a soda while onboard. But I wouldn't list AA's internet provider in the article.
At best this should be integrated into the article elsewhere, I checked and I am not sure where it would fit. —Cliffb ( talk) 15:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
We need to do something to ensure that this switching of the list back to order of operation size from aplhabetical doesn't happen anymore as it has become a rampant problem within this article and reverting and explaining doesn't keep it from happening again. Thoughts everyone?? -WikipediaFlyer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.162.189.243 ( talk) 02:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Can anyone find this rule? Half of the airline articles list hubs by size while the others list hubs in aplhabetical order...If someone could look up the rule they might end this edit war. Spikydan1 17:09, 25 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spikydan1 ( talk • contribs)
There is a link in the American Eagle article labled "Flaghsip Airlines" which must not be watched on a regular basis by anyone, but if you could click that and address the issues presented there and participate in the discussion that has been started on the article's talk page that it links to that would be great. Thanks everybody! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.52.36.127 ( talk) 04:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone know if AA demoted San Juan from a hub to a focus city? Since the change was suppose to take effect on September 3, should we put SJU in the focus cities section of the infobox or should we leave it as a hub? Cashier freak ( talk) 05:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Delta has a fleet twice the size with the Northwest merger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.105.67.252 ( talk) 20:21, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
I have reverted the removal of the table because it seems justified as a sourced data point for historical comparison.
The concern was raised that "1970" was an arbitrary choice. While I am not troubled by that, perhaps we should explore why "1970"? Proofreader77 ( talk) 20:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Very well, but I could properly cite any number or irrelevant things about American Airlines but that does not make them historically significant. If it has significance it SHOULD be stated as such in the entry. It should say why 1970 fleet distribution is important. Otherwise I could add a table of all the tail numbers that American Airlines has ever had AND properly cite, but that would be pointless. If 1970 is important because it is the "dawn" of the Jet Age then something should be added to that effect -Lobo04 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.219.216.107 ( talk) 21:00, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes, Virginia, sir. :) But there are exceptions to guidelines ... and in this case, I vote for exception.
FOR EXAMPLE:
“ |
|
” |
Let me stop, for now, with that (clearest, to me) case -- but there is a larger issue involved here, which has only with the trivia tagging become clear to me (a relatively new editor). That larger discussion is not for this page, of course, but I do want to thank the editor who tagged it for making me think this hard. Proofreader77 ( talk) 19:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
I have fruitless in finding sources that are specific in regards to American replacing its M82s and M83s with the 738. Right now, this article contradicts itself:
"American has begun the process of replacing all its MD-80 jets with Boeing 737s"
"A fraction of them will be replaced with Boeing 737-800's over the course of several years"
"All MD-82s and MD-83s are to be replaced with 737-800s Every 2 MD-82s or MD-83s to exit service, are to be replaced with 1 737-800"
aircraft"
So I can't figure out how to edit this article to reflect the fact that American will replace its entire MD-80 fleet. Does anyone have any thoughts? WasAPasserBy ( talk) 23:08, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- American already stated that what they really want is a nextgen narrowbody from Boeing or Airbus. This fleet replacement plan is only for the oldest MD-80s. A lot of sources that I have checked either stated 1/2, 1/4, or all. Most were 1/4. The 1:2 ratio thing seemed a little steep to me, that would be an extreme capacity cut, even in a time of economic downturn. According to "Airliner World" magazine, American only plans on a total cut this year of 6.5% (that includes from all aircraft, not just the MD-80, a lot of that cut would be from the A300 phase out too).
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:American Airlines/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Looks good for now. I have promoted the rating to B-class.-- Golich17 ( talk) 22:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC) |
Last edited at 22:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 14:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Need an expert or an employee from American Airlines to update the listing of hubs/focus cities in the infobox. This might help to prevent future IP edit warring. Thanks! 74.183.173.237 ( talk) 19:55, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
(I'm not by any means an expert in the field, but I am a New York-area plane spotter and run a hobbyist aviation site, so I like to think I know what I'm talking about sometimes.)
This appears to be one of those situations where the sources don't say exactly what we need them to say. If it were for me to decide, I'd say JFK was a hub and LGA was a focus airport. Both airports get a significant share of their traffic from AA, but there's very little transfer between flights at LGA, whereas there's a lot at JFK (generally between domestic and international flights). But from AA's press releases, it sounds like when they list their hubs, they use cities, not airports. So it would be better to say that New York is a hub, instead of LGA or JFK is a hub. Not necessarily more accurate, but more supported by sources. MirrorLockup ( talk) 19:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I think we shouls just list the hub list to just cities. 74.183.173.237 ( talk) 21:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Did AA not have a grey paint scheme on the body of their 757's at one stage? I know they just use the silver un-painted bodies, but I have seen die cast models and some odd pictures of AA 757's holding the grey paint scheme. Can anybody help. Thanks!
Okay, all I know about AA's changes to its hubs/focus cities is that JFK is now a hub; STL has been dehubbed to a focus city. Need to know if San Juan is still a hub or now a focus city. Another question is that is LAX now announced as a hub or is it still a focus city? Thanks! 74.183.173.237 ( talk) 05:12, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Those two changes are the only ones announced. There has been no change to the status of San Juan, and it remains a hub officially. LAX has no change either and is still not classified as a hub for AA.
I would question whether STL qualifies as even a focus city after next April. It will be smaller in terms of flights (36) and destinations (9) than other big AA cities which are not on the list. SFO for example, serves almost the same number of flights (32) and cities (8) as STL will, yet is not listed as a focus city. DCA serves the same number of destinations (9) yet has a lot more daily flights (60) than STL and has a considerably greater seat capacity. ( 82.45.56.46 ( talk) 20:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC))
This is idea for section headings:
This is clever idea that matching other theme which is includes: AAdvantage and TrAAin. If you are likes idea, please makes postings. Thanks! -- B767-500 ( talk) 08:32, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I wanting to adding this text, but User:Jasepl and User:NeilN does not likes my poor English:
Can you improving and I will do postings. Thanks. -- B767-500 ( talk) 18:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
The AA article misses listing the Stinson A trimotor which was operated in the mid-1930s. The aircraft were purchased as a result of E. L. Cord buying Stinson Aircraft. Cord controlled American Airlines. AA was the largest user of the Stinson A. Mark Lincoln ( talk) 09:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
AA also had Stinson Reliants for instrument training. They were not used for passenger flights. Mark Lincoln ( talk) 09:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
AA lost at least two Stinson A airliners. A fatal accident at Pavilion, NY (Genesee County Airport) 1 April 1936, aircraft NC15152 flying AM 7 , pilot Stanford Underwood with all occupants killed taking off in a snowstorm.
NC 14141 was lost in a non-fatal (barely) accident at Chicago, Illinois on 26 May 1936.
Ernest K. Gann conflated the two accidents and apparently 'fictionalized' one of the persons involved in the NC 14141 accident as the character "Lester" in his 1961 'novel' 'Fate is the Hunter'. page 16 Mark Lincoln ( talk) 11:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I was seen many articles which regarding to this lawsuit:
Other editor ( Dave1185) told me 'no editing!' due to 'broken English' so I just posting to talk page instead. -- B767-500 ( talk) 05:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hello! Hey, shouldn't the usage of "American Airlines" as the owners of the ships appearing in the movie, "Silent Running" starring Bruce Dern, count for something? I thought about inserting a line about it in the "Popular Culture" section. But then I thought better of it, by not presuming that I can put that in without getting a clarification first. LeoStarDragon1 ( talk) 03:27, 1 August 2010 (UTC)