This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States Territories This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Territories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Territories of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States TerritoriesWikipedia:WikiProject United States TerritoriesTemplate:WikiProject United States TerritoriesUnited States Territories ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Polynesia: American Samoa Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the American Samoa work group (assessed as Low-importance). Aviation: Defunct airlines This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation This article is supported by the Defunct Airlines task force.

Iata SE is not used by Samoa Air any more (isn't this company closed ?), it's an XL Airways code now. Alabrena (talk) 10:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a website for Samoa Air saying it (re?)started in 2012: http://www.samoaair.ws/. Samoa Air is in the headlines of prominent newspapers for their charging by weight policy: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/wp/2013/04/03/airline-charges-for-weight-of-bags-and-humans/

Should this be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CF61:2D50:243B:BDCE:CE44:83B2 (talk) 09:47, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, the "new" airline is unrelated to the 1987–2003 company. A new article should be written if justified. WWGB (talk) 09:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the new airline is very small (current fleet: two 10-seaters and one 4-seater) they have gained a lot of global press coverage by being the first airline to charge passengers according to their body weight. So I think a new article would make sense. AK456 (talk) 15:01, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]