Talk:Melbourne Airport/Archive 1

31: 974:. The amount of space used on new services seems quite large, and it is generally my impression from dissuasions that it is felt that these should stay inline in the destinations list. However, I cannot find any guide or policy on this, but I feel that it is overfocus in violation with the GA criteria. I would claim that services already started, and without starting dates announced should not be included, while those with dates simply go in the destination list. 1195: 1149: 1085: 965: 891: 846: 1163: 1118: 955: 919: 905: 832: 2594: 2729:. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly. 1698:

I think the point of the "second exit of the Tullamarine et al." is that the A380 creates a large amount of patronage in a small space of time, and the roads were upgraded to handle that. I wouldn't disagree about putting that in another section specifically amount construction/development, but it is

1630:

under the bridge sometime after that. The carpark was all single storey until the 1990s as well. I almost forgot about the observation decks - I think the Ansett side had one as well as well, the Qantas side one last opened for the A380 visit. All this doesn't really help without references though...

1491:

I've just gone through the article and fixed a few lingering punctuation, grammar, and wording issues. There are, however, a plethora of passive-voice issues which run rampant through the article; since I am unfamiliar with the content, I didn't feel comfortable fixing these. If somebody with a bit

1320:

Melbourne Airport (IATA: MEL, ICAO: YMML) is located 23 kilometres (14 mi) northwest of the Melbourne city centre. With two runways and four terminals, the airport supports over thirty airlines operating flights to more than sixty destinations. Melbourne is the second most common domestic destination

1227:

Congratulations! You have just written a good article. All my comments have been seen to. As for further work on the article I am a little unsure where to point you, since it seems to me to be close to FA quality. My general advice is to get someone with good FA knowledge to copyedit, and perhaps add

601:

Sorry for the late reply, but theres no such airline as VB and PB. But i've heard of the airlines DJ and DJ. Considering Pac Blue flights operate under the DJ code, whilst at the same time being owned outright by DJ. Pac Blue may have their offices in NZ, but since technically flights operate under

564:

ANZ simply use Atlas Air's aircraft (ACMI), ANZ have their own cargo division, along with their own cargo service. It is listed in the schedule as an ANZ operated flight, using a 747 Freighter. This isn't DHL using the cargo hold of a Qantas aircraft, it is ANZ operating their own flight. It might

1324:

Melbourne is the second busiest airport in Australia, and has the most arrivals and departures of the four airports serving the Melbourne metropolitan area. It operates 24 hours a day, handling more domestic freight than any other airport in Australia. During 2007-08, the airport recorded nearly two

211:

That wasn't my point - I just linked that since there was discussion about this article happening off-site. My point was that valid information was being removed, and even when being added by many different people, no-one reverting thought that it was possible it may have been correct! A 10 second

2247:

I've got an idea for combining the airlines and destinations section with the terminals section. This was done in the London-Heathrow article until everyone got in the put airlines and destinations in tables craze. I propose combining the paragraph on the terminal with the airlines and destinations

1988:

I appreciate the vote of confidence. I was cleaning up some A-Class review requests and see that this one is still open. I appreciate the work that is being done on this article, but it may be time to close this one out and give it another look after the next round of tweaks. Please let me know how

585:

Whilst I can understand where this originated from they are actually two seperate companies entirely and they have head offices in seperate countries and have aircraft registered in seperate countries. Only link between the two is that PB is owned outright by VB, but that is in the background... VB

451:

There is a disused 'Domestic Express' terminal at the (southern?) end, past the VirginBlue Terminal. I have photos of it. It was used around 2001 by Impulse anirlines and Virgin Blue before the collapse of Ansett. It had 5 gates and was construced using demountable buildings. It was very similar to

2542:

It would be really handy if there were some information about what flights typically go to what airports. Are some of the airports only for freight, or for private light aircraft? In particular, when one books a domestic ticket to/from melbourne on any of the usual commercial airlines, it would be

1668:

I think this section needs to be cleaned up a little. For example "a second exit off the Tullamarine Freeway to reduce congestion on Airport Drive" may be a current piece of work going on at Melbourne airport, but I highly doubt it's going to only be Airbus A380 passengers using the second exit. I

534:

Before I do it myself, want agreement that Ground/Cargo handlers should NOT be in the airline listing as they do not operate any aircraft or don't operate to MEL... examples Menzies and DHL. First is only a ground/cargo handler and second is a cargo carrier but doesn't operate (except VERY rarely)

418:

Very true, wikipedia isnt a crystal ball. In regards to Qatar Airways and their flights to MEL, Qatar Airways has confirmed and intended for years to make Melbourne their first destination in Australia during the Victorian Premier, Steve Bracks visit to Doha a couple years back. Here is my source.

2716:

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Knowledge. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good

1629:

From my memories, until the 1990s the 3 main terminals were all separate rectangle boxes, joined by corridors at the corners. The international terminal departure floor had windows along the entire airside, with the current shopping semicircle added 1992 or so. The departure terminal was extended

2548:

Currently the article is like an advertisement for one commercial entity. There are major sections devoted to individual terminals, but I don't think those are actually notable, and there seem to be not even a link to another page with information about the other airports. I suggest renaming the

1967:

It's good to see all this work going on, and Born2flie is a very good reviewer, so it's good to see his advice being put to good use. I haven't been able to get anyone else to comment on the A-class, mostly because project members are inactive. I might be able to get a review out of someone else

1007:

You are correct about the incidents. There are obviously two different definitions on notability out there, and I seem to have picked the wrong one. I was wondering why a hijacking was not notable. But someone either has to fix the Airport/Page content page or mark it as obsolete. Concerning the

2691:

We have a large number of photographs of aircraft which show nothing useful of the airport itself. I suggest that we delete maybe six of them keeping the first one showing an aircraft with the ramps (QANTAS). The rest could be almost any airport anywhere and add nothing but bandwidth demand.

1989:

you feel about that. My concern is that we progress articles, but that those articles be a quality that will sustain review at the next level. The idea being adopted from WP:Military History, that an FAC-Review should find little or nothing to correct for the article to be assessed as FA-Class.

1361:

My personal opinion for the infobox picture would be to have the United 747/Control tower in the infobox and put the Qantas Terminal picture in the history paragraph replacing the Hilton picture. The Hilton picture could be moved down the the other facilities paragraph or thereabouts. The QF

168:

That's true. However, the concensus here in WikiProject Airports is that one should only list the destination city in which a passenger can dis/embark. UA flies via Sydney, that is correct, but a passenger cannot ride on UA from MEL and disembark at SYD. UA has no rights to transport domestic

1091:

The list of awards seems excessive and causes a bias problem since it becomes and indiscriminate collection of awards; most airports have dozens of dubious awards, and I fail to see how the inclusion of this list helps to better understand the airport. Instead I would recommend that the most

992:

I would definitely agree that listing all service increases future, past and present is definitely unnecessary. I definitely believe that sourced, accurate prospective airlines/routes deserve to be there (and that has been discussed before). It's a question of keeping an archive of service

229:

I did not imply that that was your point. Regarding the source, it is a policy here in Knowledge that the editor that adds new information has the burden of providing the source. Thus, do not expect others to go out of their way and confirm information that was added by other editors. See

1580:, which usually include information about terminal, car park upgrades, etc. I've found a lot of documentation about Essendon's history which usually includes snippets about Tulla. (these are currently referenced in the article) Too bad the airport itself doesn't just have a history page… 1902:

is still going and one editor has raised some concerns about the lead. I'm gonna get stuck into this article when I have a bit more time. Hopefully we'll be able to get this A class review closed soon and I hope to bring this article back to FAC in December, pending a lot of prose work.

1330:

Melbourne was the recipient of the International Air Transport Association's (IATA) Eagle Award, and two National Tourism Awards. Skytrax classifies the airport as a four-star airport, and the airport has repeatedly been reviewed as being in the top-five airports worldwide for passenger

452:

the original VirginBlue terminal at Sydney Airport, east of the old Ansett Terminal (T2?). Last time I was at Melbourne airport it was still there and appeared to be mothballed. I imagine it wouldn't take much to bring it back to life. I can provide photos if anybody is interested. --

2337:

The last one listed there was originally published in The Australian but it seems to have disappeared on their website. I'll see if I can locate the original article on The Australian website. However, it is reproduced on that site. Hopefully that clears up any concerns you have.

2569:

Removed "The main reason a rail link is needed is because of the future tourist expansion. People from all over the world whose english is not very good would find difficulties getting into the city." -- seems to be a personal and emotive view rather than anything based on fact.

1338:

Issues with the information contained in the lead-in have been tagged in this recommendation. I couldn't find a source for Toll Priority utilizing Melbourne as a hub or base (specifically, the Toll Priority and Toll Holdings websites as well as the Melbourne Airport website).

1741:

I certainly agree. Unfortunately, it was removed because of non-free logos being included in it. I have contacted the author of the image to request him to create one without the Qantas/Tiger/Jetstar logos, so it will be fine on the page. Hopefully we'll see it return soon.

586:

don't even handle PB flights in AUS... I suppose the same can be said for Jetstar. I don't know if it is accurate to list the airlines the way we have been, as apart from being owned by a common company (VB own PB & QF own JQ) they have little in common.

346:

Just to let yas know, IPs could also change too (even on Broadband/cable), Also there are users that may still be on dialup, thus the varied IPs may be only 2 or 3 users. There are one or two out there that have had a history looking at the contribs.

1027:

I definitely agree about the incidents, having those two conflicting lists has caught me up a few times. Anyway, I've converted the long new services section to prose, keeping the more significant services and simplifying some. How does that look?

855:

and other words that should simply be removed. I would recommend changing the header to Operations or the like. There are a few instances of overwikilinking, for instance Ansett in the terminal sections. CBD should be deabbreviated. Also change

1321:

in Australia, and is a major domestic hub for both Qantas and Virgin Blue airlines. Melbourne serves as the home base for Jetstar Airways and Tiger Airways Australia, as well as the cargo airlines Australian air Express and Toll Priority.

2222:

I definitely think the lead should be extended to three paragraphs. But not much has changed since the previous candidacy, so I would be hesitant to re-nominate the article. However, I remain committed to bringing the article back to FAC.

1669:

think that the fact that Qantas will be using Melbourne Airport as the first airport to see it's A380 is notable. The rest of the construction work (bar gates 9 and 11 upgrades) should be under it's own section of current work in progress.

1325:

hundred thousand aircraft movements, a volume of over 24 million passengers. The number and frequency of flights from Melbourne to Sydney make it the world's fourth busiest passenger air route, and the second most traveled in Asia.

393:. I know one of the IP editors is a poster from the Skyscrapercity forum, and I ask, please do not add them on untill they officially announce the start date, as once again, Knowledge is not a crystal ball for unconfirmed events. -- 440:

Im wondering where the information has been received for a fourth terminal, especially domestic has come from. And besides, the only airline listed, Tiger Airways is providing a flight originating at Singapore, which certainly aint

1883:

Yes it appears so. The problems seem to be emanating from the prose. I am currently working on a new intro to address the A-Class reviewers concerns, but there is lots of copyediting that needs to be done throughout.

114:

Turns out that O'Connor is under Qantas Terminal - their flights depart from the same area as QantasLink and they are a Qantas Partner Airline. It's a little misleading I know, having Terminal 1 listed as the Qantas

2521:

There has been an edit war whether the section on Avalon airport should be included in the article. I have protected the page for one day so that there can be some discussion, rather than continuous edit warring. \

602:

DJ code, its still a full-owned and operated subsidiary. JQ on the other hand, is owned outright by QF, but has their own offices and flight code. So you could say JQ is technically a different airline. --

1169:

All the images have forced size tags. This is not a good idea, since it hinders accessibility and flexibility for users with special needs (either to force images larger or smaller). Please remove the size

467:

Where have you been, JU580? Tiger Airways has just launched an offshoot for domestic destinations in Australia, using the name Tiger Airways Australia, TT. Melbourne Terminal 4 is TT's main base. Sources:

2660: 1008:

inclusion of service entries, I would personally opt for a prose section, where important new services are included (thoughout the entire history of the airport). Take a look at the history section of

2620:; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. 2010:

section. The section seems to be one that includes the most recent information about happenings at the airport and may change frequently. I question why this section precedes the recommended section

686:

It's perfectly acceptable at other major airports, and the linked page has some omissions. In fact, some airports have a separate article in addition to discussing awards in the main article, e.g.

284:

Ah, true. I have to agree. I'll keep that in mind next time. The only thing frustating though is that sometimes adding {{fact}} does nothing; the newbie editor doesn't add the required citations.

2584: 2390:

Knowledge is not a guide: these sort of things belong on Wikitravel. If you personally need to know this sort of information, a taxi fare calculator is found on the Melbourne Airport website.

2651: 3275: 2725:. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the 3768: 3556: 3389: 3036: 2868: 493:

Zack2007, At the time i wrote the comment, all was knwon was Darwin and it seemed to be originating from Singapore. I knew they intended to open routes in the domestic Australian market.

2680: 1421:

I've been through the article a few times, and although I see nothing worrying about it, I have absolutely no experience when it comes to copy-editing to FA quality. Maybe we should ask

2840: 2248:

of the respective terminal. I think it would be best to have those airlines and destinations in bullets rather than in five separate tables. What does everything think about this idea?

1444:

You've done a great job copyediting so far! Too bad the League of Copyeditors doesn't exist any more - there must be some copyeditors at PRV though? There's no harm in asking, I guess!

2543:

notable whether the ticket invariable goes to the same airport (or whether intending parties need to be cautious not to end up attending the wrong airport from one trip to the next)?

313:

Yeah, I can see both sides as well - in the thread linked above, I suggested that they check the edit history if their edits have been removed, but I don't think any of them did! --

2171:

I'd be favour of keeping them in a list. It's like putting the Airlines and destinations table in prose. Some things make sense in prose, some things should be in lists and tables.

1526:

As is in the To Do list at the top, it'd be good to have an expansion of the history of the airport between 1971 and 1994. Although MEL certainly doesn't have the length history of

993:

increases. What about removing all increased services but keeping services that will increase in the future? Or would it be better to remove the whole service increases section?

3786: 3782: 3574: 3570: 3407: 3403: 3054: 3050: 2886: 2882: 687: 155: 2828: 1962: 1603: 1408: 1200:

I am placing the article on hold; fix the commented incidents and it will pass by a farthing. Good work so far and thanks for writing an interesting article on Knowledge.

2302:

Emirates and Singapore Airlines both havn't confirmed that they will be flying the A380 to Melbourne yet so shouldnt it say something about them not confirming it yet??

2199:

Is the article going to again be a FA nomination? I can't think of anything that would improve the article, although the lead could be possibly extended to 3 paragraphs.

2676: 2453: 1899: 2495:

Would be nice if the section 'Access' could be expanded. I'm sure there'd be interest in finding out whether taxi or bus is more economic when travelling into the CBD.

1385:

I see no problem with that - the tower picture is much better than the terminal picture. (No trees, glare, poles in the way.) If only that was a Qantas 747 though.. ;)

549:

Seconding this... ANZ Cargo should also be removed from the list as they do not operate their own freighters, they commonly use those of Atlas Air (listed seperately).

2721:. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the 2414:

Canadian and American airports generally contain a link to an aviation weather source in their external link section. Why should airports in this country be different?

591: 540: 151: 3347: 2436:

Just wanted to know why the Prospective user and routes have vanished from Melbourne airport? It is always very interesting to see which airlines/routes may start.

595: 1730: 1012:

for an idea of how to write this sort of thing. Important services are mentioned, but small changes left out. Large sections of lists read a lot worse than prose.

2087:

I've given the article a first, solid going over, fixing MoS issues, prose and other tweaks. I'd love any suggestions on how the article can be improved further.

644:

I think it's fair to say this article meets the criteria for B class. Plenty of citations, supporting material, grammar, spelling and is now properly structured

1370:) to have a picture of the control tower in the infobox and I personally think it suits the infobox better than a picture of one terminal. How does that sound? 580: 285: 235: 199: 170: 2558: 1893: 2143: 1983: 1785:, there are 82 different articles that have been linked at least twice. A major culprit is Qantas. In route developments alone, Qantas is linked three times. 74:

QR have not announced that they will be flying into Melbourne. They've only won the right to do so. Wait until QR make an announcement, don't jump the gun. --

544: 3516: 3323: 3311: 3263: 3251: 3239: 3219: 3187: 1693: 1617: 1571: 3299: 3287: 2314: 631: 3207: 2771: 1920: 1589: 1557: 1543: 1481: 1453: 1394: 1308: 3335: 3276:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080504175555/http://www.airports.org:80/cda/aci_common/display/main/aci_content07_c.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-7-46%5E21375_666_2__

3151: 2984: 2816: 558: 2841:

https://web.archive.org/20081004053913/http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au:80/domino/Web_Notes/MediaRelArc02.nsf/0/15957d548af147904a256b4a008163bf?OpenDocument

2600: 752: 607: 398: 352: 2457: 1845: 317: 288: 263: 238: 216: 202: 2711: 2537:

I think the system of air travel for Melbourne may be worthy of a wikipedia article, but that each single airport of Melbourne individually is not.

2531: 617: 529: 3837: 2075: 978: 762: 3656: 2471: 2310: 1781:

There is far too much overlinking present in this article. I know it is a long article, but articles are linked far too many times. According to

1096:

I've converted the awards section to prose. I've removed a few of the most insignificant awards, leaving what I feel is the more prominent ones.

742: 703: 550: 125: 3008: 2996: 2382: 1751: 2844: 2415: 2357: 2261: 2236: 2188: 1831: 1817: 3279: 2483: 2165: 2125: 1670: 1348: 691: 478: 3163: 2351: 1263: 1240: 1052: 1037: 1022: 671:, most major airports around the world have won some sort of award...there are so many awards out there given out by so many organisations. 574: 3623: 3456: 3103: 2829:

https://web.archive.org/20110226192940/http://www.transport.vic.gov.au/web23/Home.nsf/AllDocs/AB31264D6742EB4BCA2576D600119D1B?OpenDocument

2322: 2242: 1699:

certainly not out of place where it currently is. The fact that MEL is the first destination for the QF A380 probably should be mentioned.

1293: 748: 603: 494: 442: 427: 394: 348: 1708: 1594:

State and National Library also come up blank, as well as a few University libraries I queried. Is there a museum located at the airport?

2936: 1654: 1246: 971: 776: 362: 2333: 1937: 1860:

I know that you can't always compare different articles, but this article seems to be better than many FA quality articles. For example

1520: 1467: 460: 2832: 2403: 2370: 173: 2665:

Tullamarine Airport was designed with 707s in mind and by the time it opened in 1970, two 747s could not be parked at adjacent bays!

1734: 1438: 159: 3175: 2423: 3348:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090427180250/http://www.atsb.gov.au:80/publications/investigation_reports/2009/AAIR/aair200901310.aspx

680: 2706: 1141: 727: 133: 119: 109: 1249:, but they just closed down. You'll just have to hunt around a bit to find people I think. Alternatively you can take a look at 524: 88:

Why has O'Connor airlines been removed? Has it stopped flying, or just stopped flying to Melbourne? And if it has, then perhaps

2428: 2292: 1250: 3504: 2672: 2449: 497: 445: 1877: 1794: 100: 78: 2297: 2151: 1771: 587: 536: 1762:

Even though food and retail facilities aren't included on many pages, maybe it could be mentioned briefly in the article.

1379: 192: 3517:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724020100/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=123

3351: 3324:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724020305/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=328

3312:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724021938/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=210

3264:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080720030222/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=433

3252:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724012101/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=112

3240:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724021127/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=159

3220:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080721235815/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=316

3188:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724023004/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=134

3300:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724030618/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=75

3288:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080724012718/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=56

1678: 1210: 3208:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080720025819/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/fids/scheduled/pdf/Web_Weekly_Schedule.pdf

1726: 1639: 1501: 810: 804: 3336:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080723224816/http://www.airservices.gov.au/aboutus/facilities/centres/melbournecentre.asp

3152:

https://web.archive.org/20071023065808/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=138

2985:

https://web.archive.org/20071023065808/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au/about_airport/media_releases_item.asp?id=138

2817:

https://web.archive.org/20120324180211/https://www.bitre.gov.au/publications/ongoing/files/WebAirport_FY_1986-2011.xls

2579: 2508: 2104: 3628: 3464: 3111: 2944: 1645:

From that, it sounds like there's plenty of history to talk about. It's just a question of finding suitable sources.

653: 430: 408: 3648: 2216: 1002: 2647: 2527: 2139: 1958: 1933: 1889: 1865: 1689: 1599: 1553: 1516: 1477: 1434: 1404: 1390: 1289: 985:

sending dozens of people to hospital at an airport is also unprecedented. The QantasLink hijacking also satisfies

627: 622:

They do fly under different ICAO codes (VOZ, PBN). The 'DJ' IATA code simply indicates they are ticketed the same?

3716: 3684: 3520: 3327: 3315: 3267: 3255: 3243: 3231: 3223: 3191: 3155: 2988: 3303: 3291: 2820: 2776: 1284:

Hi, I reworked the introduction. Basically just reworded it to add some clarity and make the reading more fluid.

3785:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3676: 3668: 3573:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3406:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3211: 3053:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2885:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3339: 2516: 2479: 2409: 2318: 1928:

Finished new intro. I tried to keep the existing links and references so if I missed any, add them post-haste!

911: 3657:

https://web.archive.org/web/20120410234832/http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/dap/MMLAD01-129.pdf

981:. Both incidents are extremely unusual circumstances, a hijacking in Australia is virtually unheard of and a 3692: 3009:

https://web.archive.org/20080802170722/http://www.news.com.au:80/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24057028-661,00.html

2997:

https://web.archive.org/20090204042602/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au:80/to_from_airport/bus_services.asp

2722: 2718: 1534:, it'd be good to fill in this gap. Other than that, I think the article is becoming more and more FA ready. 2845:

http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/MediaRelArc02.nsf/0/15957d548af147904a256b4a008163bf?OpenDocument

1719:

Why has the terminal map/layout picture been removed off the page? I thought it was quite a nice addition.

83: 3832: 1950: 1009: 3280:

http://www.airports.org/cda/aci_common/display/main/aci_content07_c.jsp?zn=aci&cp=1-7-46^21375_666_2__

2362:

Does anyone want to post an average or an estimated taxi fare from the CBD to the Airport or vice versa.

3164:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080226090239/http://www.melbourneairport.com.au:80/about_airport/freight.asp

2643: 2523: 2135: 1954: 1929: 1885: 1685: 1608:

I don't think so but I've not looked at all of the airport to find out though (It's huge area to cover).

1595: 1549: 1512: 1473: 1430: 1400: 1386: 1285: 758: 623: 613: 502: 404: 358: 3804:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3592:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3425:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3072:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2904:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3647:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 2686: 2209: 1714: 796: 38: 3660: 3012: 3000: 422: 2378: 2015: 838: 435: 2833:

http://www.transport.vic.gov.au/web23/Home.nsf/AllDocs/AB31264D6742EB4BCA2576D600119D1B?OpenDocument

1492:

of knowledge could go through and attribute some actions to their rightful owners, that'd be great.

3708: 2726: 2266: 1231:

Thanks for your review and suggestions. Where would the best place be to find some FA copyeditors?

138: 2331: 1684:

Most of the page will be cleaned up in the next major copy-edit, which shouldn't be too far away.

925:

The Public transport section lacks any references, as does two paragraphs in the terminal section.

3823: 3176:

http://web.archive.org/web/20110921224109/http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200205/s547363.htm

1356: 877: 723: 676: 179: 3789: