Talk:San Jose International Airport

Error

I cant tell if the 45% in the 1st paragraph is correct or the 54% in market share. Huskermax5 (talk) 01:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Article move?

Should this be moved to Mineta San Jose International Airport? The media seems to include his name in it now. --Jiang 06:19, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

If the city has an accent mark in its name, does the airport? RickK 06:24, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Let's just go by what its official website says. --Jiang 06:27, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

It does have an accent. --Jiang 06:27, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

No one calls the airport by its full name. Reverted the page move --Jiang 05:10, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

What do think a redirect page is for? --James Anatidae 05:13, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

no. It already redirects from Mineta San Jose International Airport and also from SJC Kgrr 07:13, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

I think the article name should reflect the official name of the airport, and have all previous names redirect to the new page. --Will74205 05:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Not sure why this page is titled for a name that's neither the official or brand name. San Jose International Airport isn't a name used anywhere. Airport master (talk) 23:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

How the airport is called? It's important because of confusion with San José de Costa Rica. Bouzinac (talk) 06:11, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Pictures?

Can someone post exterior and/or interior pictures of Terminal A and C? Construction pictures of the North Concourse would be good also. --Will74205 05:53, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Last time I was there, there wasn't really anything going on at all in terms of the construction of the North Concourse. It was just a fenced off area with construction trucks and whatnot. They've closed gate A1C, though, and when I go there, it's a nighttime. --User:butterfly0fdoom 16:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Can someone post exterior pictures of Terminal B and the North Concourse? We already have one picture of Terminal B now, but we still need more. Also since the ConRAC parking and rental car facility is almost finished it looks pretty cool now. Can someone also post pictures of the ConRAC parking garage and rental car facility. The Hands mural is almost done and looks cool, so I thought someone should post pictures of it. - Jmumman 17:36, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

I took some recently, I'll look to upload any good ones. Mgw89 (talk) 06:17, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

I added a Terminal C picture, as well as moving one of the Terminal A pictures to the left side to eliminate a big space. I'll look for an external B picture as well. Mgw89 (talk) 07:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for adding the photo. If I may suggest it, please upload to Wikimedia Commons where most of the images are so they can be shared among Wikimedia sites, including other language editions of Wikipedia. I was going to help with categorization under San Jose, the airport, etc - that was when I noticed it wasn't on Commons. Anyway, just a suggestion - it was intended to be helpful. Ikluft (talk) 10:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

• Ok, I'll do that from now on. Mgw89 (talk) 19:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

• Looks a lot better than before, thanks! Jmumman (talk) 19:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

• No problem. I'll see if I have any further ones to add that might work. Mgw89 (talk) 05:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

• Please do add more if you can. Jmumman (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested move (3 March 2006)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was no consensus move. —Nightstallion (?) 20:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport → San Jose International Airport – Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

---

• Support: It is general policy to prefer common names to official ones, especially in cases where the official name is rarely used. ProveIt ^(talk) 16:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
• Against: People had already discussed this last year. The move is unnecessary especially since the commonly used name already re-direct to this article. --Will74205 18:12, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I propose we move the page to San Jose International Airport since that is what people call it. ProveIt ^(talk) 15:27, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

• In this case I would say the common name "San Jose International Airport" takes precedent.Gateman1997 05:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move (28 March 2006)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) ^{Seen this already?} 07:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

---

San Jose International Airport → San José International Airport – Correct spelling, relfecting the official web page ([1]) and Wikipedia's own usage (read the article, and see the article on the city: San José, California — Mareklug ^talk 05:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support as nominator -- Mareklug ^talk 05:30, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. The correct name is still "San Jose"[2], according to the U.S. Board on Geographic Names. Gene Nygaard 05:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

• Furthermore, it is "San Jose Intl" in the ICAO list of airport codes.[3] Gene Nygaard 05:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose: Wikipedia policy is to prefer the common name San Jose International Airport -- ProveIt ^(talk) 06:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose: Please stop moving the article for no apparent reason. San Jose International Airport is the article name before January 2006 and is the most common usage. Furthermore, the official name is Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport, if one wants to change to the official name.--Will74205 09:54, 28 March 2006 (UTC)Corrected --Will74205 12:10, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Comment Actually, the correct spelling is Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport;the letters è and é are not interchangeable. -- Mareklug ^talk 10:09, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose, per Gene. Jonathunder 03:30, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

• IATA also lists it as "NORMAN Y. MINETA SAN JOSE INTERNATIONAL ARPT". [4] Gene Nygaard 06:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment : Suggest that verbalis/zing "San Jose" as {San Joe-say} is US/U.S.-centric. (Similarly, "Santa Fe" as {Santa Fay}, etc.)  "San José International Airport" seems less ambiguous (and also indicates the city's Spanish heritage). Regards, David Kernow 23:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

747 landing at San Jose

What is the history of SJC and 747s? That is how often have they landed there? and under what circumstances? Why don't the land there more often? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.97.10 (talk) 17:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Though the airliner runways 12L/30R and 12R/30L could handle the weight and are long enough, the compact layout of the runways and taxiways limit the wingspan of aircraft which can operate at SJC. The largest is a Boeing 777. American operated the daily non-stop flights to Tokyo using McDonnell Douglas MD-11 and later Boeing 777-200ER aircraft from 1992 to 2007. And even then, aircraft as large as MD-11s or Boeing 757s can't operate on some adjacent taxiways when a 777 uses a taxiway or the runways. See the wingspan restrictions at http://airnav.com/airport/KSJC (this page is a copy of federal publications about the airport). Ikluft 18:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I saw a Boeing 747SP take off from SJC at 4:18PM today (Nov 19, 2007). This is an extremely rare event, though apparently not the first. I looked up which plane it is on FlightAware.com and posted a screenshot so that it will be accessible here even after the web site where I got it expires the data about that flight. With some net-sleuthing, some friends and I were able to determine this aircraft (previously N747FU, recently re-registered N747A) belongs to Fry's Electronics which is headquartered in San Jose. I found a history of that airframe at 747SP.com. It says N747A just got out of being repainted and overhauled on Oct 19 at San Bernardino CA and began making shakedown flights on Nov 9 following additional work in Victorville CA. The FAA registration on N747A matches the street address of Fry's Electronics headquarters in San Jose. In the process of looking for this, a friend also found photos of a previous 747-400 charter plane at SJC in Apr 2007 at airliners.net. That page claims there was one previous 747 at SJC in the 1970's. I noticed the airport publications at http://airnav.com/airport/KSJC now have new instructions for "unscheduled operations by Group 5 aircraft (B747) and larger" to contact the airport manager first. And I checked the wingspan of a 747SP - it's 3 feet shorter than the 777-200ER which already operated out of SJC for the previously-mentioned Tokyo route. Note that 747-300 and 747-400 models have wider wingspans, which will have some additional effect on airport operations whenever they are present. So this changes the previous answer - 747's are still rare at SJC but now they're on the menu. Ikluft (talk) 04:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Additional reference: "San Jose Ballet's head-turning move", San Jose Mercury News, Nov 21, 2007. See the quote of an airport spokesman at the end of the article about two previous 747 landings at SJC before N747FU landed twice on Nov 19. So the total 747 landings at SJC appears to be 4, and will now go up with each return of N747FU. Ikluft (talk) 01:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Spotted a pair of Delta 747 on the GA side a few years back. Military charters for both, by the flight numbers. 184.23.131.229 (talk) 04:12, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

747-8F has landed (video here) ... super bowl 50 charter (video) ... and a blurb about the military charters... 2x/yr. One also brought Indian Prime Minister Modi on his visit to Silicon Valley. 184.23.131.229 (talk) 09:36, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Demolition of part of Terminal C

I see on the revision history that there seems to be disagreement over which gates are remaining and which were removed at Terminal C for the Terminal B construction. Let me point out the updated map of SJC Terminal C shows the terminal now has gates C1 to C14. Whoever keeps saying that C12, C13 and C14 have been demolished, please wait until that happens. Yes, eventually all of the current Terminal C (the original San Jose Municipal Airport terminal) will be demolished. But let's keep an accurate pace with it. Ikluft (talk) 05:03, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The Feb 8 construction update also addresses the Terminal C partial demolition to make room for Terminal B construction. Some gates were relocated. Ikluft (talk) 19:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Image formatting

I added a pic of Terminal B departure hall, but the format is still bad. If someone with knowledge could look into this, I've run out of time. Mgw89 (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

•  Done OK. How's that look? Ikluft (talk) 08:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Money. I didn't have enough time to sift through the how to section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgw89 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Airport dest list

I've been looking at San Francisco International Airport's Wikipedia page and comparing it to Mineta San Jose International Airport's Wikipedia page. I noticed that right next to the destinations on SFO's page it has the terminals locations instead of the seperate airport dest lists. I propose that we make one huge dest list with all of the airlines, destinations and terminals. If you don't what I'm saying look at the examples below.

New Proposed version(example)

American Airlines| Dallas/Fort Worth, Chicago O'Hare | A —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmumman (talk • contribs) 06:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

• I have redone the airport destinations list.

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmumman (talk • contribs) 05:40, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Cargo Airport Dest List

On some other airports' it has destinations for cargo airlines. If you look at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, they have a dest list for cargo airlines. I propose we make another airport dest list for cargo airlines. Other airports that have dest lists for cargo that I know of are Narita International Airport and Delhi International Airport. I know that very few airports have this, but we should make a dest list for cargo airlines too. New proposed dest list(example)

FedEx Express| Memphis, Indianapolis

UPS| Louisville, Ontario

Air Transport International| Toledo, Sacramento, Chicago/Rockford - Jmumman(Talk)

Cargo destination lists are not easily verifiable. (Cargo doesn't care or know how it gets from point A to point B, and shippers don't care [critically] whether it takes 14 hours or 20 hours.) Cargo carriers are OK, but destinations, I think not. HkCaGu (talk) 08:45, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok so, no cargo airport dest list. -Jmumman(Talk)

Other destinations

I went to Mineta San Jose Int'l Airport yesterday, and I saw that there were flights coming from Tucson, and Colombus. I was looking at the arriving flights and it said that both flights from Colombus and Tucson were operated by Southwest Airlines. Were those flights charters? On FlightAware it didn't say anything about those flights, I don't know if those flights were charters. Can someone please go to Mineta San Jose International Airport's Terminal A, and look at the screen where it has arriving and departing flights and see if those flights exist?

• Those aren't on Southwest's route map. What can happen sometimes (and probably happened in that case since there was weather that day) is a flight may skip a stop where it will not be able to land, so that passengers for following stops don't also have to be delayed and the plane and crew can continue with the schedule where they need to be. For example, last year I heard on the radio that San Jose Tower asked a Southwest flight going to Little Rock if that was a new route. The pilot answered that they were supposed to go to Vegas first - but the Vegas airport was closed for snow. So they were going direct to their next stop. Ikluft (talk) 21:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Former Hub For...

I think we should make a section called Former Hub For... on the article. Considering that SJC was a former hub for American Airlines and Reno Air, I think people who read SJC's article should know that. I propose a section called Former Hub For... Here's is probably what it would like(example)

Former Hub For...

American Airlines- ? year-? year

Reno Air- ? year-1999

--Jmumman (talk) 03:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

• Thumbs up. I think this sounds fine, with the usual caveat... as long as there are sources for the info. Ikluft (talk) 23:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Frontier Pulling Out of SJC

I know that Frontier Airlines will end it's San Jose-Denver service. When Frontier Airlines pulls out of SJC, will Frontier take Republic Airlines with it? --Jmumman (talk) 22:10, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

i think so, but alaska and jet blue are adding new service so although sjc has lost a carrier- its future still looks very promising —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.50.81.118 (talk) 15:43, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

California Pacific Airlines

I hear "CP Air" is going to start service from Carlsbad to SJC sometime in April 2011. Anyone have the specific date? --Jmumman (talk) 21:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

FAA airport diagram

can anyone find an updated FAA diagram (the current one has Terminal C on it from 2005)? I've tried searching but haven't found one yet. Gamer9832 (talk) 14:36, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

• There's one here [5], but I'm not sure if it's a free image. Mgw89 (talk) 02:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd use that, I believe its a public free image. I'm not sure about that though. --Jmumman (talk) 01:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Alaska Airlines goes international at Mineta San Jose Intl Airport

Alaska Airlines has just recently announced San Jose-San José del Cabo. Alaska Airlines is in Terminal B at SJC, but since the flight is going to be international won't the flight have to go in Terminal A's International Arrivals? --Jmumman (talk) 18:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

• One would expect this. Do you have a ref for this? Mgw89 (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Busiest routes etc.

I've found this page has information about SJC's busiest routes, on-time percentages, etc. We should use this info in some way. I don't know how we should use this info, but here's the link, Click here --Jmumman (talk) 02:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Airport/Airfield/Renzel

I see in the text "In November 2001, the airport was renamed after Norman Yoshio Mineta, who is a native of San Jose, its former mayor and congressman, former United States Secretary of Commerce and former United States Secretary of Transportation. In December 2003, the airfield was named after former mayor Ernie Renzel.[13]"

In the article about Renzel, the date stated is 2004. In fact, the sentence in the article explains the distinction better...

How 'bout I fix that up? Any opposition? JByrd (talk) 19:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

AirCal 336 on Runway 19R?

The bit under incidents about AirCal 336 cleared for rwy 19R, landing on 19R, etc. can't be correct - SJC has no 19R. Was there ever a 19R at SJC? I doubt it - SJC is surrounded by highways and railways. Titaniumlegs (talk) 08:01, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Never mind - AirCal 336 was landing at John Wayne (SNA). Reading comprehension. However, this makes it a flimsy connection to SJC, given that the flight merely departed SJC, and the incident took place entirely at SNA. Titaniumlegs (talk) 08:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Runway 11/29 Closure

in Sept 2009 the runway 11/29 was announced to be temporarily closed for 90 days; and then subsequently was never re-opened, instead the closure was continued until finally the runway was permanently closed and incorporated in a new widened taxiway W on the west-side of runway 30L.

This closure was effectively closing the only general aviation runway in San Jose. Thetilo (talk) 03:03, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Moving nearby homes

At some point, the homes in the area between hwy 87, hwy 880 and Coleman Road were all moved out because of overhead air traffic. I am curious when this happened. I'm sure there is a story there. Kortoso (talk) 00:29, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on San Jose International Airport. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120304102307/http://www.sjc.org/about/newsroom/2010_releases/leed.htm to http://www.sjc.org/about/newsroom/2010_releases/leed.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

West Side Project

There is major construction going on on the west (general aviation) side of the airport. See this article - http://www.flysanjose.com/fl/about/newsroom/2013_releases/WestSide.htm. Somebody should update this article to mention it. Cloudswrest (talk) 18:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 10 July 2016

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved as proposed per clear consensus. bd2412 T 03:25, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

---

San Jose International Airport → San José International Airport – Ten years ago this airport article was denied its accent, which seems really strange to those of us who live near it and don't like to hear it pronounced San Joes. As for the Mineta part, on the other hand, still nobody uses that. Dicklyon (talk) 21:15, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

• Support – Looks obvious. — JFG ^talk 15:33, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support – much easier for readers to recognise. Tony (talk) 02:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support. [See some sources below in later comments.] The track record at RM, for years, is that we include the accent if it can be sourced in "official" use, because we know that many sources avoid it out of jingoism or incompetence, not because dropping it is correct. This should re-open discussion at the city article as well. Judging from what is presently at Talk:San Jose, California/Archive 2, the city government itself (among other sources) regularly do use the diacritic, just not when writing in all-caps / small caps (and someone unilaterally decided to remove it from the city article, without an RM discussion). So, it should be included for the same reason we'd include in the name of a tennis player known to use it, even if we can find an instance of them not using it, and even if the tennis associations often drop it because they just can't be bothered. If we come back in 50 years and find that the city has formally abandoned the diacritic entirely, as has Los Angeles (formerly Los Ángeles, and with a much longer formal name, under the Spanish), then WP can follow suit, but WP:NOT#CRYSTAL until then. San Jose State University also needs to move, as it conflicts with it's own text, and the university's prominently displayed logo. Opened a separate RM there. This all appears to be fallout of the anti-diacritics campaign that was shut down and deleted, and then turned into a bunch of sporadic "English purity" tagteaming, especially at American sportsperson, actor, and place-name articles.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  19:49, 17 July 2016 (UTC) Updated: 07:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
• Is this not the airport for San Jose, California? Why use the accent here and not there? Jenks24 (talk) 08:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Threaded discussion about this comment has been moved to #Threaded discussion below.
• Notification: Talk:San Jose, California has been notified of this discussion. See also Talk:San Jose State University#Requested move 20 July 2016  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  09:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC) Updated: 07:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
• Sources: Some airport-specific sourcing: the airport's own website uses the diacritic [6]. More general sourcing: Books frequently retain the diacritics [7]. It's mostly newspapers that drop it, because (in 'Merica) they hate diacritics generally and drop them every chance they get. WP:ISNOT#NEWS and does not follow news style. The city government site uses the diacritic quite consistently [8] (except in "sanjoseca.gov", since they have a basic ASCII domain name like 99.999¯% of the Internet). San José State University also uses the accent, even in their all-caps logo [9] and even in internal, employee material [10] (though instances without the accent can be found on their main website, this seems to be a decision of their website people, presumably for text-entry expediency; printed material consistently uses the diacritic [11][12][13][14][15][16].  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  09:37, 19 July 2016 (UTC) Updated: 07:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • As I stated on the other RM discussion, I'm confused by your reasoning here. Yes, it is normal and routine for Wikipedia to include diacritics per WP:DIACRITICS, but they may be included as long as they follow WP:COMMONNAME and follow the general usage in reliable sources that are written in the English language (including other encyclopedias and reference works). First your comments are initially relying on the WP:OFFICIAL, which not necessarily may be the WP:COMMONNAME. Second you seem to be misapplying WP:ISNOT#NEWS to totally dismiss considering the usage by reliable news sources (WP:NEWSORG). WP:ISNOT#NEWS (and for that matter the entire Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not) is referring to article content and what is permitted on pages -- it is not related to WP:NEWSORG, let alone WP:RS, WP:COMMONAME and the like. I'm not defending the views of that ill-advised pseudo-wikiproject, whose sole purpose was to undermine WP:DIACRITICS and other Wikipedia policies, but I feel that you are misapplying WP:AT here. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support per SMcCandlish. The airport officially uses the accent mark, so use it. It's just as common as no accent mark. ✉cookiemonster✉ ^𝚨755𝛀 19:52, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Per WP:COMMONAME, "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title". Just because it is official does not automatically mean we should "so use it". The question, which does not appear to have been answered yet, is which one (accent mark or no accent mark) is most frequently used. And since this airport is located in the United States, WP:TITLEVAR and MOS:TIES should also apply: which version is more common in American English sources. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    • We don't necessarily use official names, nor most common necessarily. In this case the accent is comma enough, and serves WP:RECOGNIZABILITY better than a lack of accent does. Don't forget that WP:COMMONNAME – "Use commonly recognizable names" – is just a strategy for satisfying that criterion. Dicklyon (talk) 05:24, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
      • How does using the accent make it more recognizable when many reliable sources, particularly many American English sources and many sources in the San Francisco Bay Area, do not use it? This does not appear to have been established yet, so I do not currently see a significant benefit of adding it. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose, the city and airport are only occasionally named using the accent, and the airports website, while using the accent in its banner, lists its address for contacting them without the accent. the accent is used mostly as a stylizing element, likely to appear more international. i see no basis for it being the official spelling, and its overwhelmingly the unaccented version used across news, web pages, etc.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:25, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
• Support, per data and links in the above discussion. The use is not consistent ("consistent" means 100% of the time, which is often used as an excuse here for editors opposed to a certain name or style, and is probably one of the worse guidelines on Wikipedia) but it is correct. Randy Kryn 15:46, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

This discussion has been moved from the !voting section, since it has grown long.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  07:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC) @Jenks24: Re: "Is this not the airport for San Jose, California? Why use the accent here and not there?" – See what I just wrote above; the city article was unilaterally de-accented, despite the fact that there's proof the city government itself uses the accent mark quite often (mostly just not when it's in ALL CAPS; there are two discussions of this stuff in archive 2 of its talk page, including some guy saying, basically, "well, I just removed all the accent marks, so there" without any consensus for it.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  09:06, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: So basically your contention is that our San Jose article should be renamed? That's fine, but until such time as there is a consensus to rename it, I oppose. It makes most sense for the airport to be consistent with the city. Jenks24 (talk) 09:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jenks24: WP:NOT#BUREAUCRACY. It doesn't matter in which order they get renamed or at which page we hold the discussion. I'll just post notice at the other talk page since the discussion, regardless which page it's "officially" held at, will obviously affect both articles.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  09:15, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@SMcCandlish: Except a move wouldn't just effect these two articles, it would mean moving the dozens of articles that have "San Jose" in the title. And I bet that having a discussion at an out of the way page like this with only one pointer left would be a good way to create an outrage – just look at the recent New York debacle (and that was actually held at the talk page in question). Jenks24 (talk) 10:31, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jenks24: Nah. Not comparable cases; the underlying issue is different. This is not an "out of the way" discussion, given that I've just advertised it to the main article's talk page, and it's a formal WP:RM discussion, not some virtually secret conversation along LOCALCONSENSUS / OWN / VESTED / FACTION lines between a little tagteam of regular editors of an article. The whole point of RM is to draw RfC-style site-wide attention to move requests. With regard to other pages with "San Jose" in the title and which pertain to that city, they should move along with this article and the main city article. It's entirely routine to move a few pages and then catch the rest up later (it's also routine to do a mass RM, but the nom didn't; either way is fine, and a mass RM would have had to be constructed very carefully and with research, of the kind often better saved for individual RMs). The MOS:JR compliance RMs are a good example of doing it step-wise; it's taken about 4 months of piecemeal moves, but it's gotten done. There is no deadline, consensus can form anywhere, and consensus already actually has formed on this, a long time ago. WP does not hunt down and kill diacritics just because some off-WP publishers, especially in journalism and marketing, like to do so. We've been over this issue many hundreds of times for bio articles, and this really isn't any different. With regard to other pages with "San Jose" in the title that do not pertain to San José, California, whether they should move is a case-by-case matter, anyway, so a mass RM would not work. E.g. the title of a published work such as the San Jose Mercury News should remain as-published, and a corporate trademark like San Jose SaberCats should be retained as-registered). Aside from these exceptions, any others pertaining to this San Jose, or any of those in Latin America or Spain, probably also need to move, but it takes examination.

We can get started now. I'm not an expert on Romance languages, but it would not surprise me if the name "San Jose" exists in one of them (or a language influenced by one of them) without the accent; so there may thus be other places named San Jose that should actually be spelled that way, not as "San José". Checked so far: Portuguese has São José, Galician has Xosé; Catalan Josep, Occitan Josèp, Aragonese Yuçuf, Astur-Leonese José [also Joseph historically, and Xosé is attested, too]; Spanish-influenced: Cebuano José, Guarani Hose, Basque Josef. The only "Jose" I can find are in native/creole Philippine and nearby languages that picked it up from Spanish without the diacritic, including Tagalog/Filipino, Ilocano, Chavacano, Bikol, Pampanga, Pangasinan, and Waray, and nearby Indonesian. So, the "San Jose" places in the Philippines should be spelled that way, without the diacritic. This is borne out by looking inter-wiki at the corresponding articles for these places in the Wikipedias in those languages; none of them use the diacritic for the Philippine places. I see from the disambiguation page San José that pretty much all entries on the page use the "San José" spelling, except the Philippine entries, and a handful of American ones. "Jose" is wrong for both California and Arizona (at least it's correctly given as "José" for Texas and Puerto Rico, and for Mission San José, California). Arguably the "San Jose" spelling is correct for Illinois, which never had a Spanish colonial presence (and San Jose, Illinois appears to not have been a Hispanic settlement; despite an approx. 15% Hispanic population in the state, less than 1% of the town's population identify as Hispanic).  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  07:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't WP:TITLEVAR and MOS:TIES also be considered? Since this is located in the United States, shouldn't we consider which version is most common in American English? Articles like tennis players and other locations may have accents and diacritics marks because they have strong ties to other nations. The spelling of "Jose" without the accent may be "wrong" outside the United States but could be very common in American English sources. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:30, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Jenks24, are you suggested we not do the right thing, just because some work is involved? Dicklyon (talk) 04:29, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I went ahead and opened a corresponding RM discussion at Talk:San Jose, California. Dicklyon (talk) 04:47, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 12 February 2017

The following is a closed 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: Moved  — Amakuru (talk) 11:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

---

San José International Airport → San Jose International Airport – Consistency with the city itself, San Jose, California. We were assured last discussion that it didn't matter which moved first because obviously all San Jose-related articles would soon be moved soon, such was the strength of the argument in favour of adding the diacritic. However, that didn't happen. This article now sticks out like a sore thumb, just browse through the subcats of Category:San Jose, California. Jenks24 (talk) 11:31, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Use of the accent is sporadic and seems to be more of an affectation than serious usage. A quick perusal of the article's sources show a dearth of cases where it is consistently used. The local San Jose Mercury News does not use it and even the airport's own website only uses it about half of the time (e.g., the main page uses the accent in the header but not in the logo or anywhere else on the page). —  AjaxSmack  19:20, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and supporting evidence/arguments from nom and AjaxSmack. --В²C ☎ 19:54, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose – It's not an affectation; as the city's web site explains, it's an offiicial part of the name, always used in print materials, but typically not on web for some reason. The airport uses it consistently except in all-caps contexts (accents are usually dropped on caps in many languages). We don't normally strip names of their accents just because most web sites do. Dicklyon (talk) 21:18, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
  • It's not just on web sites that it's generally not used. Also in other reliable sources, like books[17]. --В²C ☎ 21:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
    • And not on all signs as this image shows. —  AjaxSmack  01:43, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
• Support per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONSISTENCY. We generally only use official names and styles when reliable secondary sources follow suit. Not enough of them do here. Now that we've had the other RM discussions referred to above, this article should return to its previous status quo. Dohn joe (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

---

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.

Air China Service Status

I believe it is premature to mark this route as being discontinued based on the dubious and threadbare content in the reference that is being used for it. The reference has no comment from either Air China or the airport and appears to consist entirely of a quick analysis of changes in OAG or the airline's reservation system. Both OAG and the booking system are likely to change for many reasons at random and I don't believe it should be taken by itself as an indication of whether or not the route is suspended or cancelled. This is a very high-profile route for San Jose airport, so something as important as a Chinese airline pulling out would undoubtedly be reported by a more reliable and reputable source than some random blog. No one in any official capacity to comment on the status of this route is quoted. I propose we leave things as they were prior to KLM's edit until we have a better source for any changes to the route. --Resplendent (talk) 23:09, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

San Jose Airport Commission is not the airport authority

Just to help other editors recognize this, we seem to have a vandal who has been changing, among other recurring erroneous edits, the infobox "operator" field to read variations of San Jose Airport Commission or sometimes San Jose Airport Authority. It isn't clear why the anonymous editor has a fixation on this. Based on the other false edits from the anonymous IP, it's probably just meant to look plausible to delay getting reverted. The correct value for the "operator" field is to leave it blank because the owner (City of San Jose) is also the operator. The San Jose Airport Commission is a panel of advisors appointed by the City Council but with no actual authority. The City Council has authority at SJC. This incorrect edit caught my attention because I have served on the San Jose Airport Commission before. (If that's something that interests you, they accept applications from San Jose residents whenever there are openings.) You can verify it yourself at the city's "Airport Commission" page. Ikluft (talk) 23:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

New Busiest Domestic Destinations statistics

Hey everyone! Check out the new domestic destinations. The period from November 2018-October 2019 came out today — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.182.194 (talk) 18:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Disruptive editing/Adding of SJC as Delta Air Lines focus city

Hey everyone, it seems that a user has been engaging in an edit war on this article page (Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport), as well as the Delta Air Lines page regarding the status of SJC as a Delta focus city. The consensus from airline editors is that the airport is not a Delta focus city as of early 2020, and we've addressed this previously on the Delta Air Lines talk page and hidden text. Recently, the aforementioned editor has repeatedly added edits with poor spelling and sourcing, and despite being warned with no penalty, he/she engages in re-adding the deleted edits over and over again. This user seems to have a history of doing such actions to other pages, and has not responded to prior conversations on their user talk page as well. We ask for assistance in this regard to ensure the "no original research policy", as well as Wikipedia admins to escalate this case. Thank you. Theoldkinderhook (talk) 09:23, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Comment: Here are four potential sources I found doing a simple Google search - Potential Source 1, Potential Source 2 (Paywall), Potential Source 3 Potential Source 4 Would any/all of these be considered sufficient? --Resplendent (talk) 15:28, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Reply: For these articles, only earnings calls, direct interviews with top-level senior executives, and direct primary sources count. Unlike other airlines, Delta has a unique definition for what they define as a focus city. For instance, the current Delta focus cities (Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky and Raleigh-Durham) have flights to other Delta hubs and each other, as well as upwards of 7-10 additional flights to "spoke" airports. Some destinations, like Cancun, Las Vegas, and Orlando, are omitted in this list of "spoke" airports, as they are primarily leisure destinations. So far, SJC lacks the flight capacity to be a focus city, and there are no primary sources from Delta stating that it is one. As far as the sources you've kindly provided, it appears that a quote from a Delta official was blown out of proportion, as she was speculating/suggesting about what airports could be focus cities in the future. Theoldkinderhook (talk) 04:51, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

COVID-Related Route Suspensions/Discontinuations

So at this point there has been no announcement for when the routes I removed will be launched or resumed (or that they have permanently been discontinued). While airline websites seem to be our only source right now for a lot of this information instead of a more reputable news article, I think we need to set some kind of barometer for when they should be removed/re-added instead of just "it shows up as available on a booking engine/airline website for some date in the future."

Granted, this would mean anything not actively flying right now could be potentially removed, but there has to be a middle ground between "needs a news article citation" and "is or isn't available to book on an airline's website". --Resplendent (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Please remember Wikipedia is not a directory. There is no encyclopaedic requirement that every detail is absolutely up-to-date, I would just leave detail as it is until it becomes obvious it is either gone or staying.Andrewgprout (talk) 02:20, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

SJC is no longer the Bay Area's second busiest airport

During the pandemic SJC lost the position it briefly held (in 2018 and 2019) as the second busiest airport in the Bay Area, seeing fewer passengers than OAK in both 2020 and 2021 (and also most years before 2018). In 2021 SJC saw 7,357,441 passengers, OAK saw 8,142,320 passengers, and SFO saw 24,343,627. This means the article should be updated to reflect that SJC is the third busiest airport in the Bay Area, probably with a note that SJC and OAK have jockeyed for the position in recent years. I'll make the update this weekend unless someone has a good reason we should leave as is. If it had historically been the second busiest airport I could see leaving it for now considering the pandemic, but it has not been and OAK saw a more rapid increase in passenger traffic by % growth than either SJC or SFO in 2021. --Cowboywizard (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2022 (UTC)