Talk:Apollo 14

message: Does anyone have any information about the decision process that ended up sending Apollo 14 to the moon even after the Apollo 13 disaster? -- Doopokko 22:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to say that it must be for the same reason that air travel continues even after the occasional air disaster; or for the same reason that people don't stop driving their cars even after being involved in serious traffic accidents.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.220.11 (talk) 02:36, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Decision to continue moon program after Apollo 13

message: This recently added section doesn't belong in the article:
For the following reasons:
* It's simply a coincidence that all three from the same mission are now dead; putting their deaths together improperly implies a connection to their deaths. (I can't seem to find a policy, guideline or essay to refer to on this, but I've had experience with consensus running against highlighting coincidental information.)
* No single real-world source is cited which highlights or connects all three deaths; therefore it fails WP:SYNTHESIS.
* We already track all the Apollo astronauts' deaths at List of Apollo astronauts. Eventually they all will be dead, and in the context of history, we can't assume it will be regarded as a significant fact that the Apollo 14 crew was the first to die. (WP:RECENTISM) JustinTime55 (talk) 16:39, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Crew fate": coincidence; synthesis 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Apollo 14. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/SP-4029.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060919032908/http://astrogeology.usgs.gov/Projects/LunarAtlas/maps/images/AP14_traverseL.jpg to http://www.astronautix.com/flights/apollo14.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090609154056/https://mira.hq.nasa.gov/history/ws/hdmshrc/all/main/DDD/17977.PDF to https://mira.hq.nasa.gov/history/ws/hdmshrc/all/main/DDD/17977.PDF
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:48, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It looks as if there is some kind of tiny sun-reflecting mirror on the lunar surface, some distance to the east of LM Antares. It's something quite unique, because nothing else on the surface shows so much brightness. Could it be a tiny part of the shiny film which was all around the LM's Descent Stage and legs? Anyway, take a look at these three photographs:
* https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a14/AS14-66-9281HR.jpg
* https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a14/AS14-66-9282HR.jpg
* https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a14/AS14-66-9283HR.jpg (the best one of the three).
* DannyJ.Caes (talk) 18:34, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you serious? That's obviously the Sun, which would have been located relatively low in the eastern sky behind all of the Apollo landing sites. This time of the lunar "day" was deliberately chosen for high-contrast, long shadows to make detecting surface features easier to facilitate landing. JustinTime55 (talk) 18:44, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: Oh, you mean the small horizontal bright dash? Could be. Maybe it's also some sort of reflection or scratch on the camera lens, but it looks like maybe it's in a constant location relative to the surface craters. So? JustinTime55 (talk) 19:32, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's the bright dot I mentioned above. I do know how the sun (read: its over-illuminated huge disc like appearance) looks like on Apollo photographs, and I also know how catadioptric effects (multiple solar reflections between the lenses of a Hasselblad camera) look like. DannyJ.Caes (talk) 19:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

text: It really is an object ON the lunar surface, because it is "anchored" at the surface's same location in all three photographs. DannyJ.Caes (talk) 19:47, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I didn't mean to insult your intelligence; I honestly didn't see the little spec at first, and I hadn't seen your posting on Talk:Apollo 15. I agree, a bit of Kapton is the most likely explanation, but the fact remains we can't just speculate about it; we'd need a reliable source. JustinTime55 (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it's possible to create a 3D-STEREO view from two of these three photographs (an anaglyph). DannyJ.Caes (talk) 19:58, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  The tiny bright dot a little below Apollo 14's eastern horizon 

message: In the lede, it mentions a "series of malfunctions" that had to be overcome.
In reading the article, I only came across two mentioned malfunctions, unless I missed something.
As far as I know, "two" does not constitute a series.
If the malfunctions were as 'important' as the lede implies, I think there should be a separate section that talks about/discusses them. 2600:8800:785:9400:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 09:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, deleted "series of". There were others, but I'm not sure it's worth cataloging them. If you are interested, they are in section 14 of the Mission Report,which is available online.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can you change this in the Main page's summary or should this be posted to WP:ERRORS separately? FozzieHey (talk) 22:05, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Dealt with.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malfunctions