That's amazing! No, I hadn't seen it. The new aviation center has been in the works for quite some time, but the Delta donation/partnership will be huge for Auburn. The program has always had strong ties with Delta, taking tours of Delta's operations center each semester, but it's good to see it official. --auburnpilottalk19:19, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So, eh, how do I get to book the Auburn plane? I got a group of students I need to take to Cincinnati. (No, I don't have a pilot's license.) :) Also, between you and me, our new chancelor mentioned Auburn got a new plane in the same breath as the announcement that there would be no raises, no travel money for faculty, no nothing for students... Drmies (talk) 19:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
HA! Good luck. I can remember not even being allowed in the same hanger as the AUJets during my time as a flight student. One of the supposed selling points for justifying their purchase back in the day was that it would be a huge plus for the training program to have access to jets. Hard to train on them when you can't touch them! I'm sure the Air Transportation Department would love to hear your request, though. That's if Auburn's new president isn't using them, of course. --auburnpilottalk19:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I read that. Did I mention that paychecks for our classes this summer were prorated? I taught a class that was underenrolled because we have a be nice policy: if a student needs a class over summer to graduate, the class makes. So I taught a class of 4, for half pay. F*** these administrators with their planes and their boxes and their expense accounts... Alright, I'll call ATD and will keep you posted. Drmies (talk) 02:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All the work and half the pay? No, thanks. I've seen them fly the volleyball team on chartered turboprops and the football team on an Atlas Air 747, but they rarely let anybody touch the AUJet unless you've either made a huge donation or will otherwise bring in large sums of money. Fingers crossed! --auburnpilottalk20:36, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)@Valoem: The number of Google hits is never a reliable measure of anything, for several reasons. When I searched for -airfryer "air fryer" I got over 2 million hits, whereas -"air fryer" airfryer got about one million and three hundred thousand. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 18:57, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Valoem:, JamesBWatson fairly well hit the nail on the head. When I looked at your speedy request, and admittedly gave a fairly poor explanation for turning it down, I didn't see a convincing answer to either side of the COMMONNAME argument. Even within the article itself, "air fryer" out numbers "airfryer" 5 to 3 within the reference section (though sources are duplicated). --auburnpilottalk19:28, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to link your search results? I linked my search methods above, perhaps quotations affects the outcome. I tested that as well, "airfryer" with search yields 2,320,000 results, "air fryer" yields 359,000 hits, 6 times more results for "airfryer" as oppose to "air fryer", I believe WP:COMMONNAME recommends the title of the entry be the most commonly searched name, unless I am mistaken. We use reliable sources to determine which title is canon, my search suggests more reliable sources refer to this relatively new product as "airfryer". Valoemtalkcontrib20:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia's markup doesn't seem to like my link. That, or I'm just incapable of making it work (more likely the case). Regardless, I'm honestly just not invested enough in this issue to try to figure out which. Feel free to try your request for the move again, but use the correct {{db-move}} template so the next admin will get what you're trying to do. Best, --auburnpilottalk20:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
