Talk:Apollo 11: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:33, 14 April 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Apollo 11 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 90 days

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: Isn't this article incorrect where it says Armstrong and Aldrin "stayed a total of about 21½ hours on the lunar surface"? (No.)

They landed their spacecraft on July 20, 1969, at 20:18 UTC, and took off again the next day at 17:54 UTC. Therefore, they spent a total of 21 hours and 36 minutes on the surface, most of this time inside the spacecraft. Their moonwalk outside the spacecraft lasted just over 2 hours and 31 minutes. Both facts are recorded accurately in the summary.

Q2: The date for the Moon walk is wrong; it should be July 20. (No; it was July 21, UTC)

The dates of the Apollo 11 Moon landing and Moon walk are often reported as July 20, 1969, using time zones of the United States. However, the Moon is not within any Earth-bound time zone, and to avoid regional bias, the WP:WikiProject Spaceflight community has established a consensus (discussed here) to use UTC. The date and times of the landing and EVA were July 20, 1969, 20:18 UTC and July 21 at 02:56:15 UTC, respectively. Therefore, we use July 20 as the date of the landing and July 21 as the date of the EVA. Please don't "correct" the EVA date to July 20.

Apollo 11 has been listed as one of the Natural sciences 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 26, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
June 15, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept

Current status: Good article

Smithsonian Institution GA‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of Smithsonian Institution WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Smithsonian Institution and related articles 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.Smithsonian InstitutionWikipedia:GLAM/Smithsonian InstitutionTemplate:WikiProject Smithsonian InstitutionSmithsonian Institution-related articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Spaceflight GA‑class Top‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight 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.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Astronomy GA‑class Top‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Archives GA‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of National Archives project, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.National ArchivesWikipedia:WikiProject National ArchivesTemplate:WikiProject National ArchivesNational Archives articles
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 20, 2004, July 20, 2005, July 20, 2006, July 20, 2007, July 20, 2008, July 20, 2009, July 20, 2010, July 20, 2012, and July 20, 2013.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Apollo 11 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 90 days

Change wording

The first sentence reads "Apollo 11 was the spaceflight that landed the first humans on the Moon, " This wording is confusing. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were the first humans to walk on the moon, but the wording makes it sound like Adam and Eve were in Apollo 11. A better way to write it would be "Apollo 11 was the first spaceflight to land humans on the Moon, ". This would clear up any confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.221.144.98 (talk) 22:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. —sroc 💬 13:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1969/71

On Category:Apollo 11, I changed Category:1971 in spaceflight and Category:1971 in the United States, to Category:1969 in spaceflight and Category:1969 in the United States. Apollo 11 took place in 1969, not 1971, so what I fixed was an obvious mistake. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 19:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Request to edit The Apollo 11 mission had multiple problem during the adventure to the moon. For example, the crew had an issue while starting the ascent engine, a circuit. As a last resort they improvised and used a pen to keep the circuit in place during the trip to the moon.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellen.church (talk • contribs) 12:19, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The circuit breaker incident is already there, under Apollo_11#Lunar_ascent_and_return. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:11, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Request to edit Some people don't realize how large the crew was that made the trip to the moon possible. It was not just the astronauts that did everything during the mission, the scientists are the main reason that the mission was such a great success. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellen.church (talk • contribs) 14:48, 29 February 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

Not done. Please indicate exactly what you propose to be changed. TJRC (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

Change the first sentence to "Apollo 11 was the first spaceflight to land the first humans on the moon" --Therockisinthebuilding (talk) 00:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

change the first sentence to "Apollo 11 was the first spaceflight to ever land humans on the surface of the moon."--Therockisinthebuilding (talk) 00:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Armstrong became the first to step onto the lunar surface six hours later...

The article wastes no time noting that Armstrong was the first "to step onto the lunar surface" and this seems to be in keeping with a prior tradition of designating Neil Armstrong as "first man on the moon". What I was hoping to find is some discussion on just why traditionally so much more has been published about Armstrong being "first" when he was only "first" for beginning an EVA. Surely the landing itself is universally regarded as simultaneously depositing both men on the lunar surface and that point both men were "on the moon" in every meaningful sense, the EVA only substituted a moon boot for the layer between their feet and the lunar surface in place of the vehicle floor and landing legs of the LEM that were under their feet at landing. If some mishap had forced an early launch and return in the 6 hours before the EVA nobody would dispute that both men had simultaneously been the first to set foot on the Moon. They were at rest on the Moon, not in space or some other non lunar location. Some of the sources currently cited in the article appear to imply that the decision to not afford simultaneous credit for "first on the moon" might lie with NASA in the sense that some early press releases note that Neil Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon and do not always appear to note that both men together were the first to arrive at the moon but I wonder about recollections of the broadcasts and other media. Was the distinction almost universally noted the day of landing or was the distinction only stressed later on? Are any editors aware if there been any discussion on the implication this stress on first to complete EVA over simultaneous credit for first landing and arrival for future possibly international missions where it might be more desirable to focus on the simultaneous achievement? If so I think some short reference to this discussion might improve the article.Zebulin (talk) 16:23, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 16:23, 14 April 2016 edit Driftwoodzebulin (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 2,552 edits →‎Armstrong became the first to step onto the lunar surface six hours later...: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 16:33, 14 April 2016 edit undo Driftwoodzebulin (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 2,552 edits →‎Armstrong became the first to step onto the lunar surface six hours later... Next edit →
Line 62:		Line 62:
	== Armstrong became the first to step onto the lunar surface six hours later... ==		== Armstrong became the first to step onto the lunar surface six hours later... ==

	The article wastes no time noting that Armstrong was the first "to step onto the lunar surface" and this seems to be in keeping with a prior tradition of designating Neil Armstrong as "first man on the moon". What I was hoping to find is some discussion on just why traditionally so much more has been published about Armstrong being "first" when he was only "first" for beginning an EVA. Surely the landing itself is universally regarded as simultaneously depositing both men on the lunar surface and that point both men were "on the moon" in every meaningful sense, the EVA only substituted a moon boot for the layer between their feet and the lunar surface in place of the vehicle floor and landing legs of the LEM that were under their feet at landing. If some mishap ~~has~~ forced an early launch and return in the 6 hours before the EVA nobody would dispute that both men had simultaneously been the first to set foot on the Moon. They were at rest on the Moon, not in space or some other non lunar location. Some of the sources currently cited in the article appear to imply that the decision to not afford simultaneous credit for "first on the moon" might lie with NASA in the sense that some early press releases note that Neil Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon and do not always appear to note that both men together were the first to arrive at the moon but I wonder about recollections of the broadcasts and other media. Was the distinction almost universally noted the day of landing or was the distinction only stressed later on? Are any editors aware if there been any discussion on the implication this stress on first to complete EVA over simultaneous credit for first landing and arrival for future possibly international missions where it might be more desirable to focus on the simultaneous achievement? If so I think some short reference to this discussion might improve the article.[[User:Driftwoodzebulin\|Zebulin]] ([[User talk:Driftwoodzebulin\|talk]]) 16:23, 14 April 2016 (UTC)		The article wastes no time noting that Armstrong was the first "to step onto the lunar surface" and this seems to be in keeping with a prior tradition of designating Neil Armstrong as "first man on the moon". What I was hoping to find is some discussion on just why traditionally so much more has been published about Armstrong being "first" when he was only "first" for beginning an EVA. Surely the landing itself is universally regarded as simultaneously depositing both men on the lunar surface and that point both men were "on the moon" in every meaningful sense, the EVA only substituted a moon boot for the layer between their feet and the lunar surface in place of the vehicle floor and landing legs of the LEM that were under their feet at landing. If some mishap had forced an early launch and return in the 6 hours before the EVA nobody would dispute that both men had simultaneously been the first to set foot on the Moon. They were at rest on the Moon, not in space or some other non lunar location. Some of the sources currently cited in the article appear to imply that the decision to not afford simultaneous credit for "first on the moon" might lie with NASA in the sense that some early press releases note that Neil Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon and do not always appear to note that both men together were the first to arrive at the moon but I wonder about recollections of the broadcasts and other media. Was the distinction almost universally noted the day of landing or was the distinction only stressed later on? Are any editors aware if there been any discussion on the implication this stress on first to complete EVA over simultaneous credit for first landing and arrival for future possibly international missions where it might be more desirable to focus on the simultaneous achievement? If so I think some short reference to this discussion might improve the article.[[User:Driftwoodzebulin\|Zebulin]] ([[User talk:Driftwoodzebulin\|talk]]) 16:23, 14 April 2016 (UTC)