Talk:Antonov An-70/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 13:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
@Sp33dyphil: Extremely sorry for the delay. Will complete this soon. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:34, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- You're alright. I was just waiting for the article to settle anyway after having added more content. Thank you for taking this on. Regards, --Sp33dyphil (talk) 14:41, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: - have you lost track of this review? Parsecboy (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Parsecboy and Sp33dyphil: Sorry for the delay, and thanks for reminding. Take my word, this review will be done within three days. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, I was looking at clearing out some of the older reviews at GAN, and saw you might need a reminder here :) Parsecboy (talk) 02:05, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Parsecboy and Sp33dyphil: Sorry for the delay, and thanks for reminding. Take my word, this review will be done within three days. --Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Krishna Chaitanya Velaga: - have you lost track of this review? Parsecboy (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- Lead and infobox; all good
- Section 1;
- Link An-12 twin-engine turboprop aircraft
- Done. --Sp33dyphil (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Link Soviet Armed Forces
- Done. --Sp33dyphil (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- DASA depended on data provided by Antonov and was not able to test-fly the aircraft themselves; what is the reason?
- I couldn't find the reason for this, so it's been reworded. --Sp33dyphil (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- repaired it in record time; how much?
- Removed claim. --Sp33dyphil (talk) 21:52, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
- Link An-12 twin-engine turboprop aircraft
- Section 2, 3, 4, 5; All good. A very well written article, just a few corrections.
- Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Sorry for the delay. G'work.Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: