Talk:Schiphol Airport

Banner - nice but generic?
I find replacing actually nice banners with "better" ones the last thing we should focus on now, but this banner does strike me as quite generic, even though on the other hand it is technically great and overall nice. Perhaps it could be used somewhere else for a travel topic or even as a general "generic" banner, and a more poignant banner for Schiphol could be devised down the road? PrinceGloria (talk) 02:03, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Amsterdam Airport Schiphol
The official name in English is Amsterdam Airport Schiphol. I think this article should be renamed to the official name. --WallyTheWalrus (talk) 13:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikivoyage uses the common name, not the official name, see Naming conventions. I think Schiphol is the common name, so I think it should be renamed to that. Globe-trotter (talk) 20:10, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Question about "Wait" and related discussion
Two sub-paragraphs use titles Before/After Passport Control. Other discussion uses the same terminology. Suggest clarification on whether this includes Security Control. Usually done simultaneously for international departures, are passports also checked for flights within the European Union? Am not qualified to clarified this. Regards, Hennejohn (talk) 20:30, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It should probably be security control. When you are traveling inside the EU (+Iceland, Norway, Switzerland) one does need some sort of official identification and that means either passport or one of these. At security they often want to see your ticket and your identification, but not 100% of the time. ϒpsilon (talk) 04:35, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually a bit more complex than that. Travel between two Schengen treaty countries (Say Germany and France) does not require passports, however travel no a non-Schengen country still inside the EU (Say Germany to the United Kingdom) will certainly require a passport. Not sure how this airport manages the difference. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 05:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Schengen countries do not normally have regular border controls but "you must be able to show valid identification papers whenever authorities ask you". A driver's license, library card and such isn't enough even if it has photo; the only documents they accept are passports and national ID cards made according to certain standards showing that you are an citizen of the EU. On the other hand, even though UK and Ireland are not Schengen members, while they actually check the passports of each and everyone arriving (and when leaving the Schengen zone passports are also checked) they do also accept those EU ID-cards. You can also get into all Balkan countries except Moldova with that blue card. ϒpsilon (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that the UK accepted EU Identity cards in lieu of passports. Very interesting. Also in the other direction I don't believe UK citizens can actually obtain an EU identity card? I do possess a UK driving license that has a photo, address and a blue EU flag on it, however you are suggesting that is not sufficient ID? --Andrewssi2 (talk) 11:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia says they do, so do Wikivoyage articles, so does the UK border agency and EU's official site. I got pretty surprised when I learned that e.g. Albania lets people in with just an European ID card. The EU site also says that only a passport or an "EU" style ID card is accepted and not driving licenses and such. In UK and a couple of other countries such standardized ID-cards aren't issued, so Britons normally always need a passport. A fun thing is that Nordic citizens can travel to other Nordic countries using pretty much anything with a picture printed on it. And when Estonia joined the Schengen area quite a few Finns went on a trip to the partying and drinking capital across the bay with only a driver's license and they weren't let in. ϒpsilon (talk) 16:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Alternative banner for this article?
I created a new alternative banner for this article (I initially created it first and foremost so that it would be used at the top of the parallel article in the Hebrew edition of Wikivoyage, yet I later decided to also suggest that the English Wikivoyage community would consider using it here as well). So, which banner do you prefer having at the top of this article? ויקיג&#39;אנקי (talk) 05:34, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The new banner is probably better, given that the existing banner doesn't actually show anything discernible at all. From experience I would say the cavernous checkin hall would actually make for a more interesting banner. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 06:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I haven't flown into or out of this airport (I visited Amsterdam by train from Düsseldorf), but between these two choices, as Andrewssi2 says, the new one is obvious. Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Given that someone argued for changing the banner on the top of this talk page as early as 2013, I guess changing the banner is rather obvious ;-) Hobbitschuster (talk) 08:10, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree we need a new one, but I really do not see the one as an improvement - generic and not very pretty. AMS has unique sights, actually the blend of colours you get from running on the travelator (as pictured) is a bit if an AMS signature. PrinceGloria (talk) 11:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * The new one is an improvement. Danapit (talk) 17:20, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I am not against very artistic banners but the current one is a bit too extreme I would say Syced (talk) 07:44, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

New infobox
The new infobox says:
 * While KLM's SkyTeam partner Delta Air Lines has its hub at the world's busiest airport, Amsterdam Schiphol offers a benefit in its own right. Going back in part to KLM's century-long history and the even longer Dutch tradition of global trade and exploration, Schiphol is one of the best-connected airports in the world. In terms of number of countries served by direct flights, only Frankfurt Airport and Istanbul Airport have Schiphol beat. And KLM (as well as other airlines serving AMS) of course do their very best to expand on their already excellent position.

I find this really hard to follow. The key point of this is that Schiphol is one of the best-connected airports in the world. This point is buried after a bunch of introductory text that is less important. Why does this box start off talking about Delta and its hub in Atlanta (which is confusingly not mentioned by name)? Here is a less confusing way of making this point:
 * Amsterdam Schiphol is one of the best-connected airports in the world. It goes back in part to KLM's century-long history and the even longer Dutch tradition of global trade and exploration. only Frankfurt Airport and Istanbul Airport receive direct flights from more countries than Schiphol. KLM (and other airlines serving AMS) do their very best to expand on this excellent position.

Comments? Ground Zero (talk) 15:59, 1 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Support. The text could be simplified, and as much as I like promoting my former hometown airport, you're right that it's a curveball to mention ATL only to say that it holds a completely different record. --Bigpeteb (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Done. Ground Zero (talk) 01:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

New pagebanner?
Looking back at the discussion from 2015 above, it doesn't seem that the current banner was received that warmly, and I am not a huge fan of it either. In my opinion, it simply looks generic and grainy, making it not that flattering of a banner. I've been searching through Commons for some fitting images that have a better quality to them, and I've come up with these two alternatives. Personally, I am happy with either of these two, but I have a slight tendency to list option 1 as favourite. Let's find out if I'm alone in thinking so or not, shall we? -- Wauteurz (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Option 1 is both relevant to the location and unique. --Comment by Selfie City  ( talk  |  contributions ) 16:44, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I haven't been to this airport, but I prefer Option 1, then Option 2. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:59, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * They're both nice, but since the most interesting part of option 2 will be covered by the article name, option 1 is slightly more suited.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 11:00, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Option 1. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 11:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)


 * looks like we have a clear consensus on option one. SHB2000 (talk | contribs | meta.wikimedia) 12:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks like it, yes. I've gone ahead and switched the banner for option 1. -- Wauteurz (talk) 12:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)