Talk:ExpressJet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

first comments[edit]

this stub is already covered in much more detail under Continental Express.... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nelgallan (talk • contribs) 11:59, 29 July 2005 (UTC-8)

So do you want me to just redirect expressJet to Continental Express? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bkissin (talk • contribs) 05:01, 30 July 2005 (UTC-8)

merging[edit]

+Mion 03:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • code ==

same Icao code —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mion (talk • contribs) 20:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC-8)

  • what ? ==

expressJet is the holding, Continental Express is the public name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mion (talk • contribs) 20:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC-8)

  • Suggest ==

dump ExpressJet —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mion (talk • contribs) 20:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC-8)

  • Suggest ==

I think that for now They should be merged under the name Continental express. and in the topic say a large amount of flights are operated by expressjet (or something like that) and in the highly unlikely event that expressjet leaves continental, then they will be un-merged. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.249.245.130 (talk • contribs) 19:25, 5 April 2006 (UTC-8)

  • Suggest ==

Since ExpressJet is currently in the process of evaluatng whether or not to return 69 of its aircraft to Continental, it is possible that the airline could end up operating a substantial part of its service independant from Continental. The decision has to be made by September, so any decision on combining this article with Continental should at least be deferred until after ExpressJet announces whether or not they will retain the aircraft and pay increased lease costs toContinental. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.189.218.18 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC-8)

  • ExpressJet ==

I suggest consolidating under ExpressJet. The company is ExpressJet (XJT) and only does business as Continental Express. Other companies that provide feed to Continental are collected under the Continental Connection label. ExpressJet Holdings is the parent of ExpressJet Airlines and owns a few other small businesses. Like the previous comment mentions, XJT will soon be operating 69 airplanes in other business ventures. ExpressJet seems the best label for the company. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jrcampbe (talk • contribs) 12:04, 9 May 2006 (UTC-8)

  • Suggest ==

Keep ExpressJet and COEX separate. At some point two companies will be flying as COEX. ExpressJet is its own entity. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.177.236.116 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC-8)

CO's recent announcement that chautauqua will be operating 44 ERJs as continental express, not continental connection, means the pages should be kept seperate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.25.30.135 (talk • contribs) 12:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC-8)

Hubs[edit]

Who keeps changing SAT, AUS, and SAN around from hubs to focus cities and vice versa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.65.188 (talk • contribs) 11:46, 9 May 2007

-Some high school kid is trying to say that SAT isn't a hub. Very obvious he doesn't work for the airline. Just consider it a hub if it is considered a base and a lot of it's employees live and work from there, which is the case with SAT. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.9.36.48 (talk) 00:40, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

AUS is not a hub[edit]

Whoever keeps changing that is mistaken.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.203.188.161 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 18 May 2007

Kate Penland Incident[edit]

It's come to my attention that Sox23 (talk) removed the notation I made in regards to this incident. I have restored it, and altered it to fall under the heading "Customer Service Incidents". I agree that this is a page about ExpressJet, and not Ms. Penland - hence the alteration. However, incidents that generate notice from news agencies like the AP, CNN, and ABC should be noted. See JetBlue's section about its gaffes on its Wikipedia page for an example.

Feel free to discuss, but I believe that if it's citeable and written in a NPOV, it's notable here. 70.159.43.66 16:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the incident in question happened on a Continental Express flight, I am moving the incident in question to the Continental Express page. I was unaware there were separate pages for both entities. 70.159.43.66 16:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Kate Penland incident? That's rich. The incident was an ExpressJet incident in that an employee of that company insulted and mistreated a young mother and her baby and an ExpressJet pilot had the mother and baby removed from the plane. This outrage is now getting worldwide attention and if Xjt plans to circle the wagons and deny it - by expunging mention of it from Wikipedia for instance - it's only going to get worse for the company's PR. Btw, Wikipedia was never intended to be another marketing tool for corporations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.220.15.66 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 13 July 2007
It hasn't been removed...just moved to the Continental Express page since it happened on a CoEx flight. Sox23 15:06, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's disappeared from there, too, now... Swanny18 (talk) 13:27, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Readability/Flow[edit]

This article is factual. It is very poorly organized and does not flow well. I think a complete rewrite keeping the factual basics intact is in order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.18.255.105 (talk) 03:40, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ExpressJet HQ info[edit]

"BUSINESS BRIEFS." Atlanta Journal-Constitution. March 21, 1991. K12. WhisperToMe (talk) 09:07, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 02:16, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ExpressJet Airlines → ExpressJet – The official website and branding of the airline is called simply "ExpressJet". Snoozlepet (talk) 21:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move / Support - Other airline articles are like this, for example the Qantas article isn't called Qantas Airways Limited. Virgin Australia isn't called Virgin Australia Airlines. It will also all into the criteria of WP:COMMONNAME --JetBlast (talk) 21:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move / Support - While I tend to appreciate more formality in corporate names, I agree that in instances where branding is sufficiently strong, a common name should be acceptable, and the full legal name can be indicated in the opening sentence.Cdtew (talk) 05:38, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on ExpressJet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:15, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fleet table[edit]

Someone who knows tables better than I needs to delete the Delta Connection entries. The table is dated May 2018 but Delta terminated the relationship in 2017.Craigthebirder (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While the contract was terminated in 2017, the partnership is supposed to continue until late-2018.[1] We should wait until we have confirmation that they are no longer conducting Delta Connection flights. Mirza Ahmed (talk) 14:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Missed that in the article - have amended the text to include the 2018 date. Thanks for pointing it out.Craigthebirder (talk) 16:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "ExpressJet to end run as Delta Connection carrier". myajc. Retrieved 2018-05-30.

XJet listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect XJet. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 20:35, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:21, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:ExpressJet&oldid=1209104489"