Get a sneak peek at whats next for Permanent Hazards on our April 7th Office Hours!
Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
I had wondered about maxing out on links. As long as the places have correct info and location, the only downside I see is that there would be two of them in the search, but we live with duplicates from Google in searches anyway.
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
Seems like any distinction would only cause confusion, unless there are different entrances or something. If both places get you to the rental car center, and they're both in the same spot, they should just be the same. Then users don't have to wonder "what if rental car center 2 is the wrong one???"
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
Maybe you could drop a map comment there too in case any well-meaning editor tries to "fix it." :) I agree that we should update the page with info about this situation.
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
I'm a fan of Hertz - MSY for a single location. No need to write more than that. If two locations I like Hertz rental counter - MSY and Hertz car return - MSY.

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
Concision is good, but one word won't make much of a difference with this, since the name will be fully visible in search. It also seems good to be consistent with title case (except when putting parenthetical information in, which is more of a description stuck in the name for visibility). So for this I think using Rental Car Counter and Rental Car Return in the names for separate rental & return places is fine. I do think it would be good to have consistency on using hyphens with places that start with the airport code, whether terminals or car rental facilities. I favor not having a hyphen in there, as shown in the current section on terminals.
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
sketch wrote:
kentsmith9 wrote: I believe this group of paragraphs is the same thought, which I believe is that for locations with separate Counters and Returns, you propose that the counter be named the short "Avis - DEN" matching the same name given for the Single location types as in:
  • Single location for counter and return
    • Avis - DEN
  • Split locations for counter and return
    • Avis - DEN
    • Avis rental car return - DEN
Where I am proposing we differentiate the name for single locations vs separate locations with:
  • Single location for counter and return
    • Avis - DEN
  • Split locations for counter and return
    • Avis rental car counter - DEN
    • Avis rental car return - DEN
I think the second way is better for people searching because with the split locations, your example does not clarify the counter location is not a car return. If I had previously seen an entry for "Avis - IAD" I know from experience that has the car return. Now with a split location, the name does not clarify there is NOT a car return under that same name. I think that will cause more confusion than if we clarify when a location is not both functions.
I can support this.
kentsmith9 wrote:Also, the naming to me is too long and similar in the above second example. I had originally proposed using slightly different terminology to help differentiate the two names with
  • Split locations for counter and return
    • Avis rental counter - DEN
    • Avis car return - DEN
I would prefer this, yes. At least with "rental counter". I am on the fence about "car return".

On one hand, "car return" is concise and descriptive, and would make sense if you search "avis" or "avis den". On the other hand, if you search "den rental car return", it would be beneficial to see both the generic facility and all the rental brand options presented in the results, and I imagine removing "rental" from the name would make that less likely.
kentsmith9 wrote:LOL. I didn't recognize that you were proposing the title case was only under the condition that "Rental Car Return" was used as the main place name and when part of the rental agency as in "Avis rental car return" it is sentence case.

While I can see the logic, I'm not sure it makes any different to me visually in the search results. I would prefer to keep it consistent since a "Avis Rental Car Return" is a place too, but if we can get some additional support to make the guidance as follows I will add it as such:
  • Avis rental car return - use sentence case when lead by the rental agency.
  • DEN - Rental Car Return - use title case when lead by the airport code without an agency.
I do think this looks better and makes the results easier to read. Say we eliminate the hyphen (as Kartografer recommends below, and I am okay with this), which list makes it more obvious which one stands out?
  • Avis Rental Car Return - DEN
  • DEN Rental Car Return
  • Alamo Rental Car Return - DEN
  • Dollar Rental Car Return - DEN
  • Avis rental car return - DEN
  • DEN Rental Car Return
  • Alamo rental car return - DEN
  • Dollar rental car return - DEN
And I just think it looks better too.
Kartografer wrote:Concision is good, but one word won't make much of a difference with this, since the name will be fully visible in search. It also seems good to be consistent with title case (except when putting parenthetical information in, which is more of a description stuck in the name for visibility). So for this I think using Rental Car Counter and Rental Car Return in the names for separate rental & return places is fine. I do think it would be good to have consistency on using hyphens with places that start with the airport code, whether terminals or car rental facilities. I favor not having a hyphen in there, as shown in the current section on terminals.
My problem with "Rental Car Counter" and "Rental Car Return" is not that they're too long, but that they're too similar. Kent mentioned this above. I would much prefer to see "Avis rental counter" and either "Avis car return" or "Avis rental car return". You're searching for "Avis" in this case.

On the other hand, when you are searching for a general facility, it is important to have the words "rental car" in the name because that's what you'll search for: "msy rental car" or something of that nature. This is why I would propose "Avis rental counter" but "DEN Rental Car Counter".

As for hyphens, I am in favor of removing them where the abbreviation is first in the name.
I think we got close to a consensus on this but then stopped. I think we should get this update into the Airport page. So based on what has been said, how about adding Kent's draft with the following modifications:
  • No hyphens where the airport code is first, so "IAD Rental Car Facility" and "KAE Rental Car Return
    Sentence case and "rental counter" or "rental car return" where the company name is first, so "Hertz rental counter - JFK" and "National rental car return - DEN"
Does this work? I almost just put just car return but then saw sketch's point about how that may exclude places in some searches
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
juliansean wrote:If I am a private pilot and I search for an airport I want to go to a place where I can go see planes. Should I be removed from using Waze because I don't just search for our regional airports? Of course not. The idea of Waze is to be used by all. I think we have all agreed with the idea, if there is an FAA identifier, someone has taken the time to make sure that airport qualifies as an airport. And, if that airport doesn't actually exist, it's our job as editors to remove it from the map.
It seems like the trouble really is with private airports, meaning four-digit FAA identifiers that are usually simple grass fields without any storage of planes, maybe used by a farmer or two to launch crop dusters. Sean, as a pilot would you find those results valuable? They do exist but may not be easy to see from imagery. I've mapped a couple around me, but they do show up in category search, along with general aviation airports and larger commercial facilities, as MacroNav pointed out. Could we draw the line between public and private airports, or am I oversimplifying?
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
It seems that many (not all) agree there's a line to be drawn across which an airport doesn't qualify to be mapped as an area place. As DL said, area places are for orientation, but they're also searchable and navigable, we should consider both sides of that coin. The line seems to be at least whether an airport can be used by the public (not whether it is publicly owned). Having visible facilities is also helpful for orientation, but those usually go hand-in-hand. Fly-in communities, which are mentioned on the road types page BTW, are just one type of airfield that is usually for private use.

So instead of coming up with complicated and subjective rules, let's just use the distinction already made by the FAA.
FAA paragraph 1-2-7e wrote:Two−letter, two−number identifiers are assigned to private−use landing facilities in the United States and its jurisdictions which do not meet the requirements for three−character assignments
If an airport has a four-character identifier, don't map it. All the examples given of places that shouldn't or should be mapped, on both sides of the argument, fit this distinction.
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32

Post by Inactive user -1697532064-
We're not talking about IATA or ICAO codes. All of the borderline kinds of airports being discussed here are too small to have either. We're talking about FAA identifiers, which are given to any aviation-related facility in the US. All public-use airports have three-character FAA identifiers. The bigger ones have three-letter identifiers, which are usually the same as the IATA code if one is given. The smaller public-use airports have two numbers and a letter. Private-use airports, whether they are jointly owned for fly-in communities or singly owned for use by one person or family, have four-character FAA identifiers, with two letters and two numbers. A lot of the info on airport codes is already in the airport page. Anyway, I was proposing last night to just say we don't map any private-use airports.

However, after looking up a bit more, there are a few private-use airports that might be noticeable for orientation or used as destinations, mainly within large fly-in communities like Jumbolair, so we need to provide for those. My idea for guidance goes closer to what DL proposed, but since many private airports are not fly-in communities, it should be more general, and I think we can agree that all public-use airports should be mapped, no matter how small. So how about adding this section at the top of the page:
Scope wrote: ==Scope==
Airport area places should be drawn for all public-use airports, regardless of size or facilities. Most private-use airports are difficult to see, even from the air, and should not be mapped. Private-use airports should only be mapped if they are visually obvious from public roads or could reasonably serve as a destination for drivers. For how to distinguish between public-use and private-use airports, see Names.

===Category===
The airport category should only be used on airport area places and on point places for airline terminals. For other airport-associated business places, such as charter services or air freight forwarders, use a different category.
Inactive user -1697532064-
Wiki Master
Wiki Master
Posts: 1308
Has thanked: 549 times
Been thanked: 703 times
Send a message
Galaxy S20 FE on Mint
Retired SM Ohio
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.
-John 8:32