Talk:List of Apollo missions

Hoax Allegation
Copied from my talk page to User:Salomee gum naan bin ohda:

Your source doesn't appear to go anywhere near saying what your edit claims it to, and thus is original research per WP:SYN. Nor does it appear to be reliable per WP:V. I also fail to see the relevance of such information to the page "List of Apollo missions". We do have a page dealing with such claims. Since this is controversial material, liable to be challenged, please try to get a proper consensus on the talk page before adding it again. I will be removing it once more. Pfainuk 23:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

What's a "shitearth" orbit??
"Launch Vehicles", Saturn IB I'm guessing this is an unnoticed bit of vandalism 91.125.48.96 (talk) 12:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Apollo Two
I took a look and I noticed that the mission isn't mentioned anywhere. So I added it. Someone reverted saying it wasn't a "Lunar mission" so I changed that to just Cancelled missions" Ericl (talk) 21:07, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Apollo 18
under cancelled missions under the listing for Apollo 18 it somewhat confusingly mentions Apollo 15 designation being re used and dosnt elaborate why, the Apollo 15 article itself mentions nothing and i have found no mention elsewhere of why this is as of yet

it feels like a random piece of obscure trivia rather than a informative piece, this should either be elaborated on more elsewhere or be trimmed to just the part pertaining to 18 itself .....at the moment it feels rather confusing as if it is indicating a connection between 15 and 18

Tony Spike (talk) 06:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit request
Request to edit The Apollo 11 mission was a manned mission. There were three astronauts during that mission, two of them who stepped onto the moon. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, who were the commander and the Lunar Module Pilot, stepped on the moon. While Michael Collins who was the Command Module Pilot did not get to step on the moon, he orbited the moon in the Command Module. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ellen.church (talk • contribs) 21:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌ The list article already gives that information. JustinTime55 (talk) 22:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Hoax
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi1U-3eorSo&feature=share In this video they say there are inconsistencies with the apollo 11's lunar modules landing gear hitting the dusty surface, not creating a crater where it landed, odd shadows. They also noted neither of the two astronauts mentioned seeing any stars on the atmosphere less surface, and even referenced the astronauts arm passing in front of the earth(the window from a distance) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.66.149 (talk) 13:19, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * YouTube is not a reliable source. Please see this page for more information. ~  Matthewrbowker  Say something &middot;  What I've done 17:07, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually, WP:Videos as references probably sheds the most light on this issue, specifically WP:YTREF. JustinTime55 (talk) 20:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I didn't know that page existed. Thank you for the information. ~  Matthewrbowker  Say something &middot;  What I've done 22:05, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a bit more involved to this issue than that; please see also our content guideline on how we handle fringe theories. We have an article, Moon landing conspiracy theories, which is intended to present notable "theories" (i.e., receiving significant public attention, as verified by reliable sources, which YouTube is not) without giving undue weight to ideas not broadly supported by scholarship. "Somebody on YouTube said ..." just doesn't cut it, in light of a $24 billion US government program employing about 400,000 people, the testimony of twelve men documented to have walked on the Moon, and lunar satellite pictures of the landing sites. JustinTime55 (talk) 19:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

List numbering
and anyone else interested.

Agree, we should discuss this on the talk page. There are a few options for how to handle the row scopes under the Manned Apollo Missions section. Here are some options:


 * Current Implementation

My concern with this is simple: Anytime someone uses a screen reader the screen reader will read the image as a part of the row heading, which can be very confusing.


 * Remove image

Simply get rid of the image. I'm personally against this, as I think the miniature of the mission patch adds value to the article.


 * Image in separate column

Not sure I like this either, adding the image feels forced here.
 * This is my preference. I would not label the field, however; just leave it blank. JustinTime55 (talk) 15:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Y'know, this honestly would have been my second choice, it's growing on me. Woo BRD in action!  If nobody objects, I'll implement this change in about 24 hours.  I'll also make sure the sort keys are properly set in that table.


 * I'm not sure we can go without a table heading (I'm not 100% sure how a screen reader would react to that), but how about an unsortable "patch" heading instead? I'll try to get my hands on a screen reader and try it for myself. ~  Matthewrbowker  Say something &middot;  What I've done 19:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Okay, the change has now been made. I did put the unsortable patch heading, we will need to explore if that affects a screen reader.  ~  Matthewrbowker  Say something &middot;  What I've done 20:43, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Numbering

This is what I used on List of Space Shuttle missions. Granted, it made more sense there as NASA can't count upwards coherently...

I'm open to suggestions here, do you have any?
 * Other options?

Thank you. ~ Matthewrbowker  Say something ·  What I've done 20:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

"Apollo 1A", "Apollo 2", and "Apollo 3"
I note that this list of flights includes the designation "Apollo 1A" for AS-201, "Apollo 2" for AS-202, and "Apollo 3" for AS-203.

This is the first time I've ever heard of "Apollo 1A", and it was my understanding (based on "Apollo: The Race to the Moon" by Murray and Bly-Cox) that there were proposals to call AS-202 and AS-203 Apollo 2 and 3, but that in the end, this was never done, and NASA never referred to these missions in this manner.

Is anyone aware of any official use of these designations for these missions? If not, then these should be removed from the list.Voodude (talk) 15:53, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Executed merge (late 2019): Apollo Mission TYPES
Pursuant to a brief exchange at Talk:List of Apollo mission types, I judged that the proposed merge of that article into this one (as a section) was uncontroversial, and started doing it per WP:MERGE. However, my edits concerning the merge have not been simple copy-paste jobs as suggested in the information page, but have also included significant re-working of the previously existing article while maintaining the spirit of the information conveyed. Still, I didn't preserve all information (part of editing), a concern raised by Randy Kryn. I encourage any user having concern over edits relating to the merge to discuss them here or in related talk pages, otherwise you can simply check my recent editing history since I've committed to proceeding with the details of the merge.MinnesotanUser (talk) 01:49, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Split list
What are the thoughts on splitting this into List of crewed Apollo missions and List of uncrewed Apollo missions?  Kees08  (Talk)   15:12, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If I can play too, the table/list of crewed missions could be moved higher on the page (I'd move it to the first table after the Alphabetical mission list) as that's what the bulk of readers will be looking for. Outside of that suggestion, which would feature manned missions more prominently, the page seems fine. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:47, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The more I think of it the better your idea sounds. You probably have a vision of what the pages will look like, so I'm on board. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:41, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Something like this for the uncrewed and this for the crewed? Not sure what to do with the mission designators that were merged into the article. The leads would need rewritten and I would make a summary of the uncrewed missions be a background section for the crewed missions. For the background on the uncrewed missions I would write about Gemini/Mercury. Is something like that reasonable? It seems like a decent split.  Kees08  (Talk)   23:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks very good, nice work. You know what you're doing. When it's finished let us here know and other editors can look in for nudging around edits. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:04, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:23, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ASTPpatch.svg

Needs a bit of rewrite
There are several things not so good about the list article as it stands now:
 * Scope: Not very well defined; the definition of "mission" is not clearly understood and sometimes misused by some overzealous ESL Wikipedians: according to Merriam-Webster, 1.b.1: a definite military, naval, or aerospace task; and 1.b.2: a flight operation of an aircraft or spacecraft in the performance of a mission. It is the second sense we want to go with here, and the thermal vacuum tests are out of scope as they were not flights at all, but rather ground tests simulating flights. They deserve some sort of mention, and should be incorporated maybe in a separate article (probably not notable enough for each to have its own article?)
 * Order: Should not begin with "Alphabetical mission types", as these did not appear until relatively late in the program, just before the crewed flights started. I suggest this order:
 * Saturn I flights;
 * Boilerplate Apollo CM flights
 * Block I spacecraft flights
 * Launch escape system tests
 * Alphabetical mission types
 * Uncrewed Saturn V and Lunar Module tests
 * Crewed flights
 * Cancelled flights

JustinTime55 (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Here's another clue List of Space Shuttle missions is a featured list; perhaps it would make a good model for improving this list. JustinTime55 (talk) 15:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I've moved the thermal-vacuum tests section section here to the talk page until we figure out the best way to handle it. JustinTime55 (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Apollo 15 in last table on page
The last table on the page, which lists original planned missions and the missions as finally executed, seems to double up information about Apollo 15 in its right hand columns. Is this deliberate, or a flub? Grutness... wha?   10:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Citation
The source cited does not say anything about 'waning public interest' which sounds very unlikely so soon after Apollo 11. 2600:1700:B270:75C0:59C9:2B11:ED29:AC8A (talk) 04:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)