| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tupolev Tu-70 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Tupolev Tu-70 has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 20, 2009. | |||||||||
 | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
.png)
Flyover errors edit
According to Parade the source in the Tu-4 article, there were FOUR Tu-4s, not 3, at the flyover, and it gives the date as 2 August 1947. - BillCJ (talk) 03:15, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Specs edit
The figures in Nemecek are different to those in the article, Span 43.05m Length 35.61m, wing area 161.7m2, Take-off weight 51,400kg, max speed 563kph, ceiling 10,200m, ange 4,900. MilborneOne (talk) 18:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Tupolev Tu-70/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Thurgate (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is reasonably well written.
- prose:
(MoS):
- prose:
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- 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, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Pass/Fail:
Comments edit
1. link for reverse-engineered
- Done.
2. You forgot to add the height in the Spec's section
- No height given in any source.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow you to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns. Thurgate (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Nice work Strum. Passed. Thurgate (talk) 00:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)