Talk:Astral (company)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Py5chari0 (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Independent sources[edit]

I have gathered a few independent sources that I would like to share at the talk page of this draft. All the citations mentioned below have been properly utilized in the draft of the article.

1.Section Title:Case Study 2: Astral Poly Technik, Book Title: The Unusual Billionaires, Publisher: Penguin UK

2.Title:Using DuPont Analysis to Assess the Financial Performance of the Selected Companies in the Plastic Industry in India, Journal: GEDRAG & ORGANISATIE REVIEW, ISSN:0921-5077, Publisher: Amsterdam University Press, SCOPUS: Yes

Financial research reports prepared by independent analysts, in accordance with WP:LISTED, are accessible and uphold transparency by including appropriate disclaimers and declarations of no conflict of interest.

3.Title: Astral Poly Technik An 'astr'onomical growth story, Publisher:HDFC securities

4.Title: Astral Poly Technik, Financial Analysis, Publisher:Axis Direct

5.Title: Astral Q4FY22 Result Review, Publisher:IDBI Capital

Py5chari0 (talk) 09:13, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New independent sources[edit]

1.Title: Watch Women Shame Men Who Pee In Public, Publisher:NPR, WP:RSP

2. Page: 70, Book Title: Fearless Freedom. Publisher: Penguin Random House India

Py5chari0 (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Nomination[edit]

150.129.164.195 (talk) 03:11, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Astral (company)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 04:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a quickfail. In its current state, the article is a long way from meeting GACR. At only 400 words long, it is difficult to believe this is "broad in its coverage". Two sections are formatted as embedded lists rather than prose, which is an MOS issue. It would have to be expanded and reworked before it came close to meeting the requirements. ♠PMC(talk) 04:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.