Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Apollo 11

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history | Assessment
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.

Article promoted by Zawed (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 01:21, 9 December 2018 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Apollo 11

edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)

Apollo 11 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

Apollo 11 was the first manned landing on the Moon. We're trying to get the article up to Featured in time for the 50th anniversary, which is in July next year. Article has been overhauled, and is already rated Good, so bringing it here for review. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:35, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Minor comment The statement that "In 2015, the quarantine trailer, the flotation collar, and the righting spheres were moved" isn't supported by the source. From checking my photos, the Apollo 11 flotation collar and quarantine trailer were at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center when I visited it in 2009. Nick-D (talk) 06:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected. Consider uploading some of the photos. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've just uploaded a couple of photos of the quarantine trailer - [1], [2], though the quality isn't great. Nick-D (talk) 22:47, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by JennyOz

Hi Hawkeye, following are some comments, primarily on prose and very much from a lay person's reading. I also took notes on some refs and inconsistencies. Will add them separately soon.

lede
Background
Crew
  • table has Armstrong, Collins, Aldrin but opening line "The crew assignment of Neil Armstrong as Commander, Jim Lovell as Command Module Pilot (CMP) and Buzz Aldrin .." It 'looks like' an error - suggest adding 'initial' or 'original' between 'the' and 'crew'
    checkY Re-organised this paragraph. What I find fascinating is that five people had to die before Neil and Buzz got this mission. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Backup crew
  • Anders... In early 1969, he accepted a job with the National Space Council effective August 1969 - was named National Aeronautics and Space Council (1958–1973), use pipe? (Anders' article uses proper name of the period. Others this page use the 'then' name eg Manned Spacecraft Center ie not Johnson Space Center, Sabine D crater not Collins.)
     Done Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • would retire as an astronaut on that date - no specific date is given so change to 'at that time'?
     Done Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • At that point Ken Mattingly... at which point Anders would be unavailable - swap second 'point' to 'time'
    checkY Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lovell, Haise, and Mattingly would ultimately be assigned as the prime crew of Apollo 13 - not really 'ultimately' because Mattingly was grounded and replaced by Jack Swigert
    checkY Good point. Changed to "later assigned". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:30, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support crew
Flight directors
  • Director/s or director/s
    • Only capital if used as a title (e.g. Flight Director Kranz) Kees08 (Talk)
  • Extravehicular activity (EVA) - is cap E correct?
Call signs
  • director George M. Low - pipe?
    No need. Hawkeye7 (discuss)
  • Julian Scheer wrote to Manned Spacecraft Center director George M. Low to suggest the Apollo 11 crew be less flippant - ref?
    • @Kees08: Need you for this one. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      I like to write all my notes down when I find a more complicated answer, so the information is not lost. Page 392 and 393 of Hansen discusses the choice of Eagle and Columbia as them names, but has no information on Julian Scheer (related to this, at least). Since the book says Michael Collins was the main driver, I found in Carrying the Fire, pages 332-335. It discusses how Julian Scheer suggested Columbia, and how Collins thought it sounded more pompous than the previous Gumdrop and Charlie Brown names, but says nothing about a memo from Scheer. Page 635 of Chaikin summarizes what is in Collins' book. The current citation does not appear to even mention the names. I should have started with online searches, because Chariots for Apollo has the text. I will let you incorporate it, unless you want me to. I would suggest incorporating more background information from Collins' book into the section, there happens to be a lot of detail about naming the spacecraft. We could even include when it was announced to the public. Sorry for the long paragraph, figured it is useful to know where the information is in each book. Kees08 (Talk) 22:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      I've created a new article on Julian Scheer. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 12:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • During early mission planning, the names Snowcone and Haystack were used - explain Snowcone for the Command Module and Haystack for the Lunar Module (per the pdf)
  • put in the news release. - is that Technical information Summary pdf 'the' news release? Otherwise replace with 'in the Technical information Summary '.
    No, wrong document. It wants the Press Kit. I have a copy and will replace the reference. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    checkY Ah. It's in the technical summary as well, on p. 8
  • a personification of the United States - does Collins' book specifically say the 'personification' otherwise just 'historical name'
    checkY No, he doesn't so sure. Hawkeye7 (discuss)
  • Eagle for the national bird of the United States, the bald eagle - per bald eagle article, is both the national bird and national animal of the United States of America
Insignia
The crewmen of the Apollo 11 lunar landing mission leave the Kennedy Space Center's (KSC) Manned Spacecraft Operations Building (MSOB) to ride the special transport van over to Launch Complex 39A where their spacecraft awaited them.
  • The Apollo 11 mission insignia - was the design used only for cloth patches (ie not as a logo on letterhead etc)? If so, call it 'mission patch insignia'?
    No, it was used as a logo. Collins calls it the "mission emblem", as does the press kit - went with that. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:16, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Momentos
  • personal preference kit - explain what it is? i remembered from his article he also had a World Scout Badge. This kit is different to the 'bag of memorial items'?
    Yes. Added a bit about the PPK. The link takes you to Collins' PPK, which is in the NASM. The memorial bag was of official items. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:16, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Site selection
  • result of two years of studies - apostrophe on years
  • Site 1: 34° East, 2°40' North, in the Sea of Tranquility (hmmm degrees minutes seconds?) The ref has Site One: 34° East, 2°40" North - so is the 40 minutes or seconds? (ditto all 5 site coordinates)
    Nota bene* Remember what happened in This is Spinal Tap? I don't think the ref is correct. @Kees08: Need you for this one. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    We could detail the zone they were interested in, instead of the exact locations. We could mention that three locations are selected per launch, to allow for launch delays. The paragraph should detail where they were looking to land (the zone), the down selection process, the requirement to have three landing sites, and perhaps the location of the final landing site. So I would remove the specific locations and do that, but I will leave it to you. Kees08 (Talk) 00:00, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The site needed to be smoothness, with relatively few craters - either 'to have smoothness' or 'to be smooth'
     Done Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:02, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Preparations
Mission
Launch and flight to lunar orbit
Lunar descent
Landing
  • ACA - explain?
  • "Out of detent. Auto"- fullstop?
  • 413 - explain?
    checkY Added: "ACA was the Attitude Control Assembly, the LM's control stick. Output went to the LM Guidance Computer (LGC) to command the RCS jets to fire. "Out of Detent" meant that the stick was moved away from its centered position. It was spring-centered like the turn signal control in a car. LGC address 413 contains the variable that indicated that the LM had landed." Kees08 is probably saying, "well, duh". I think this was added to give the reader a feel for what it sounded like. In addition, one notes that the CDR, not the LMP pilots the LM. The LM could be piloted automatically or the CDR could take manual control. Every CDR did. But it was just pointing the stick at where you want to go; the computer did all the rest. So it was more like the joystick in a computer game. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • about 25 seconds of fuel left - apostrophe on seconds?
    I don't think so. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • with "Engine arm is off", before - fullstop after 'off'
    No, because we are continuing the sentence after the quote. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • and his communion kit was prepared by the pastor of the church, the Rev. Dean Woodruff - this can go? non notable church and reverend. Is in Aldrin's article.
    Keeping it in, but removed the sentence starting with "Aldrin described". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • had been awake since early morning - add how many hours
    checkY Deleted this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:06, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Lunar surface operations
Lunar ascent and return
Splashdown and quarantine
Celebration
Legacy
Spacecraft
Moon rocks
40th anniversary events
  • Life.com released a photo gallery - digital only on their website, not in print?
    They don't publish in print any more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • In addition, it is in the process of restoring - update?
  • set up an Adobe Flash website that rebroadcasts the transmissions - does it still?
  • Re 40th anniversary too much info? - presumably 1st, 5th, 10th, 20th, 25th etc were also commemorated. Maybe a sentence. Will need a section for plans for 50th which must be underway by now?
    Nota bene*@Kees08: I'm tempted to remove the entire first paragraph. How do you feel about that? Do were have anything on the 50th? I know NASA will want to celebrate, but it will not be a good time politically in the US, so it may not be as big as the 40th. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    NASA has settled on a logo for the 50th [3], so that's the hard part done. NASM is celebrating [4] and the US mint has issued a commemorative coin [5] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:52, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I would be fine with changing the section title to Anniversary events and creating a main article List of Apollo 11 anniversary events. I recall events for both the 40th and 45th anniversaries, I am sure there was something on the 25th, and there will certainly be events for the 50th. We could then summarize the major events that occur during the anniversaries here. Thoughts on that? Kees08 (Talk) 23:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know any clarification needed of my comments. I saw a list somewhere of articles being considered for 50th, can you remind me where it is pls? Regards, JennyOz (talk) 02:05, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:S2019 is the shortcut. The DYK page has the most articles. A co-run of Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Michael Collins, and Apollo 11 would be fantastic on the anniversary, but that is a conversation for another page. Kees08 (Talk) 02:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: hope I did not step on your toes Hawkeye, saw there were a lot of comments so started hitting some of the easy ones. Kees08 (Talk) 02:44, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are some clarification requests. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:19, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Hawkeye7: I made some recommendations, left the edits to you unless you want me to perform them. Let me know if you disagree with my suggestions. Kees08 (Talk) 00:04, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Hawkeye7 and Kees08, I'll try to explain myself. When I asked about emphasising splashdown by adding 'Earth', and suggested adding a bit more about re-entry, and my comment about 'priceless' etc, what I'm suggesting is a little more weight to be given to what was the stated original goal of the mission... to get a man there and safely back.
Kennedy said to Congress "First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth."... "one purpose which this nation will never overlook: the survival of the man who first makes this daring flight." He said at Rice, "...then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25 thousand miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun—almost as hot as it is here today—and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out—then we must be bold"
NASA says in summary top of this "The purpose of the Apollo 11 mission was to land men on the lunar surface and to return them safely to earth ." Somewhere else (I've temporarily lost which ref) says "This stride in the Space Race was at least as much to get a man there and home alive as it was to collect samples." Our Space Race article says "When the spacecraft splashed down, 2,982 days had passed since Kennedy's commitment to landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth before the end of the decade; the mission was completed with 161 days to spare.[139] With the safe completion of the Apollo 11 mission, the Americans won the race to the Moon"
(If the rocks/samples hadn't made it back but the 3 astronauts did (and were alive), there'd have been just as much rejoicing of success?)
The splashdown was the actual minute that the success was realised. "Safely to Earth". JFK emphasised it and I bet everyone at mission control held their breath at that moment more than at any time in the whole mission. Start from Earth --- finish on Earth.
PS and Hawkeye, if EEng adds that comment to Astonishment or to his wonderful museums (I've been terrified to check), I will have some trouble finding my forgiveness button for you pinging him. JennyOz (talk) 04:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The deed is done, I fear! [6] If you can forgive me nonetheless, let me suggest On July 23, the last night before their return to Earth... BTW, I can't agree that The splashdown was the actual minute that the success was realised: there's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip. EEng 05:19, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawkeye7 and JennyOz: Is there more to do here? I do have a couple of suggestions that I was going to have Hawkeye implement (like the list of apollo anniversaries), or otherwise tell me they are a bad idea. Not sure if there is anything else? Kees08 (Talk) 00:50, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kees08 and Hawkeye7: Thanks Kees08 for the reminder. Will look over. JennyOz (talk) 22:32, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Kees08 and Hawkeye7: for your patience! I have added my support. Pls though check this... back on Oct 18 an edit was made to Insignia "put an olive branch in its beak, and drew a lunar background", changing 'beak' to 'talons'. Was good faith but editor missed reading its following sentences? Should it be changed back? Regards, JennyOz (talk) 11:13, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
checkY Changed it back. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:51, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Hawkeye7: Tom Wilson, a simulator instructor, was actually who suggested the olive branch. Right now it implies Lovell came up with that too. Not sure if we should modify that to make it more clear. Kees08 (Talk) 21:17, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
checkY Fixed that. And corrected an error I found in the process. I moved the insignia section above the call signs one, which is more logical. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:49, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D

edit

Proper review this time. The article is excellent, and my comments are pretty minor:

Support My comments are now addressed - great work with this article. All the best for FAC, and it will be good to see it on the front page next year. Nick-D (talk) 02:58, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Kees08

edit

Going to make some comments here. Reviewing just the sources for now.

Okay the sports game I am watching is ramping up, I am taking a break. Will have more comments. Kees08 (Talk) 00:23, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I'm off to the Canberra Capitals game. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:35, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
77-65. Knew you would want to know that. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:04, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Very good! My team lost in triple overtime, which really sucked the wind out of my day. Kees08 (Talk) 07:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Side note, for whichever coordinator closes this, I am involved with astronaut biographies and a bit with this one, in case you want to factor that into my eventual vote. Kees08 (Talk) 07:53, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit
  • Why is the Apollo II mission in there twice? Suggest pulling it from the infobox unless that's a common theme among all the Apollo missions.

Support by Chetsford

edit

I'm about a month late to this party so there's not much I can say here since most possible criticism has been addressed. I wrote the articles on John Hirasaki and William Carpentier so I have an inkling of knowledge about Apollo 11 via them, but not to the level of others here; ergo, I restricted my review to technical matters primarily instead of content and in that respect could find nothing lacking. The only possible comment, if I really stretch, is that maybe in the Mementos section there would be room to mention the two Purdue University centennial flags that Armstrong took with him [7], [8]? That said, this section could quickly balloon up to be half the article if we start cramming stuff in there so I'm sure it would be fine to omit, as well; there's so many asterisks associated with Apollo 11 that a risk is run of turning this into a collection of trivia if some standards of brevity aren't applied. In any case, what a really fantastic job on this! Chetsford (talk) 18:39, 8 December 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Apollo_11&oldid=872760703"