Talk:United Aircraft Corporation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Russia Portal This page is within the scope of WikiProject Russia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

	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.	Aviation Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated projects or task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Aircraft WikiProject

this is quite an important article as this firm will in the mid term future become quite an important player in the aerospace market, as such we ought to keep this article up to date.

--Greg.loutsenko 21:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I updated the article as well as I could, and marked some of the older statements as needing citations. I also changed the abbreviation used in the text to UAC from UABC as UAC seems to be the most current abbreviation in use at the time being. You can verify that by looking at some of the references, as the older ones use UABC while the newer ones use UAC. Is this something that should be mentioned in the article? --Riyaah (talk) 02:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Public? Doesn't look like it'll ever be public

Just glanced on the summary thing on the right side of the article, which gives the impression company will got public in 2007. However, article says that the government will retain at least 75% of stock, so its really not public at all. Traded on a stock exchange, yes, public no. Or at least, its still state-owned.Yarilo2 05:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

If even one share is floated, it is considered publically traded. Them's the rules. It's the same in the U.S. for corporations that are mostly-owned by one organization. For instance, 92% of CNA Financial is owned by Loews Corp., but because 8% of it floats, it is considered public. The material difference isn't in the ownership structure itself — primarily it's the fact that the company now has to disclose its financial information in shareholder reports. Thus, even if the Russian government will own 75% of UABC, the fact that the remaining 25% is floated means that stock exchange reporting rules apply. Got it? —Joseph/N328KF (Talk) 05:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Using that logic, wouldn't Amtrak also be considered public? Apparently its issued both preffered stock and regular - check the wiki article.

My argument is that the company will always be state-controlled, regardless of whether "even one share is floated", hence the summary is misleading. I'm changing it to be just as true, but not as misleading.Yarilo2 15:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Oak.jpg

Image:Oak.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 00:13, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know where the deleted image came from, but I suspect it might be the same as is used on the Russian Wikipedia, [found here]. I don't know russian and don't know the rules for images on wikipedia, but the image seems to have the required copyright information, couldn't it be used here? Or does the russian wikipedia use different rules? Riyaah (talk) 00:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Antonov not part of UABC

It is true that Antonov is Ukrainian and not part of UABC. However, in the Soviet Union, there was a seperation between the Design Bureau and the production facilities. Several of the factories that produced Antonovs were not in Ukraine but in Russia or Uzbekistan. Sometimes a same factory builds several aircraft of different Manufacturers. The An-38 for example, is built in Novosibirsk, in Chkalov Novosibirsk aviation production plant, the same factory that manufactures Sukhoi SU-32 and SU-34 fighters. The NAPA factory in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, not only built An-12s but also the IL-76s.

So although the Antonov Design Bureau itself is not part of UABC, its very possible that several of the plants that manufacture Antonovs in Russia are.Hudicourt (talk) 22:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)