Talk:From the Earth to the Moon

message: In the Disneyland Paris, it is stated "The attraction's exterior was designed using a Verne era retro-futuristic influence".
Is this not Steampunk?
Athomsfere (talk) 14:42, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What is the picture supposed to be of? Even looking at the larger size, I can't see anything resembling the columbiad (or much of anything at all, for that matter). I think we should find a better pic, but short of that I have to say I think having no picture at all would still be better than this. Kafziel 18:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced it with two pics from the same edition, one of the projectile and one of the columbiad going off. Kafziel 21:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: If I remember from the footnotes a long time ago, E to M contains a fallacy about the Earth rising over the 'horizon' of the moon.  To whit: from the surface of the moon the earth doesn't rise, it stays where it is and changes phase. If you are on the back of the moon , you never see Earth. If you're in the middle of the 'front', Earth sits overhead.--Eddie | Talk 09:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A fallacy in From E to M? 

message: Should this article really link to the american civil war? The book, as humor is used, describes the war simply as a way to test their cannons. I don't think a link here is appropriate.
:Also, the name of the cannon as The Columbiad refers to this Columbiad. 
:The cannon was never referred by a name, to tell the truth. It was called a Columbiad as a way of labeling the genre it came from of cannons.
:THis article states that the gun club was interested in weapons of all sorts, especially cannons. I would suggest that weapons be changed to firearms. Thanks, Independent147 (talk) 21:39, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linking 

message: The original title of Chapter VI is "Ce qu'il n'est pas possible d'ignorer et ce qu'il n'est plus permis de croire dans les États-Unis". Most copies of the book I have found use the proper translation - something along the lines of "What is Impossible Not to Know and What It Is No Longer Permissible to Believe in the United States". However, I have found one version, a translation by Edward Roth, who translates the title to "Which Lady Readers Are Requested To Skip." Does anyone know why? Thanks in advance.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kodachrome22 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapter VI 

message: What about The Unparalleled Adventure of One Hans Pfaall by Edgar Allan Poe? Why isn´t it mentioned? --85.220.108.196 (talk) 11:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Unparalleled Adventure of One Hans Pfaall 

message: Per the main [[Jules Verne] Wiki, most of the early English translations of Verne's works were poorly translated and turned into childrens books.  Is that the case with "From the Earth to the Moon"?  If so, which are the faithful translations? Luckyshot (talk) 16:05, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  English Translations 

message: The External Links section contains a comment about one of the translations: “The translation is more complete than the Mercier version, but still has flaws, referring to the space capsule as a "bullet".”
Is that a flaw? Wikipedia itself describes a bullet as “a kinetic projectile, a component of firearm ammunition that is shot from a gun barrel”, which seems to be if not exactly the same, close enough by analogy to be acceptable as a decription of Verne’s spaceship. Jock123 (talk) 15:34, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What’s wrong with this…?