Split sections

An IP user has added a request to split out Canada, China and the United States, would appreciate if he/she could add something to the talkpage on why they think they should be, thank you. MilborneOne (talk) 17:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I added a request to split United Kingdom to a single section. The sections of Canada, China, United Kingdom and United States are too large and the size is too big. -- 12:47, January 7, 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.97.197.90 (talk)

If the split article was going to have more detail or a table comparing them (size, # of aircraft, passenger numbers, etc.), I'd vote yes, but as it is now, I think it would create confusion to separate them out. (Then we have to debate what the size cut-off for splitting the lists out is and make sure we're fair to all other countries, etc. More trouble than helpful.) cluth (talk) 22:58, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Sort of this is what I was thinking. It already exists, but it's different than splitting out the plain list, as the list includes minor airlines that aren't on this page. No need to duplicate what's already there, and the article titles could get confusing (actually, I would vote to move the article I linked to to "Comparison of large North American airlines" or similar). cluth (talk) 23:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

OK I would agree it is to large, just dont agree that splitting of the big countries would help. Users can use the Category structure to find airlines of each country. It could be split into Asia/Europe/Africa etc but even then it should not be more than a simple lists. It is just to help users find articles and should be kept simple. Nothing wrong with adding links to a see also section to articles with details like the Largest Airline in foo type stuff. MilborneOne (talk) 23:39, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Please refer to List of airlines in Ukraine, List of airlines in Serbia, and List of airlines in Russia. I actually Afd'ed the Ukraine and Serbian lists, using the same line of thinking about categories, but the community at large believes these structured lists are preferable over simply lists. Therefore I have no problem with ALL countries having their own lists, as it can also be a useful article development tool --Russavia (talk) 11:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I think Russavia has a good point it might help develop redlinks, should this article just be a link to each List of airlines of foo articles ? MilborneOne (talk) 12:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
Although I am converted to the idea of Russavias about links to airlines of - I do not think the inclusion of random navboxes is the right idea! I have removed them pending discussion . MilborneOne (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2008.