Talk:Neil Armstrong

Editing request for August 2012

Editing request for August 2012:

The words "roommate" and "antiaircraft" are not hyphenated, hence please correct these.
"Anti" is never hyphenated onto anything except for proper nouns such as in "anti-Catholic", "anti-American", and "anti-Israeli". Otherwise, see antimatter, antiparticle, anticommunist, antilearning, antimilitary, antimissile, antinuclear, antipollution, antiscientific, antisuperstition, antisubmarine warfare, antitechnology, and antiwar.

The word "Australia-based" is incorrect, and we can give countless examples. The first word in this is always an adjective. See: American-based, Belgian-based, Canadian-based, Dutch-based, French-based, German-based, Greek-based, Italian-based, nuclear-based, Omani-based, Portuguese-based, Russian-based, Swedish-based, Swiss-based, Spanish-based, solar-based.

For example, "The American-based International Monetary Fund"; "The Belgian-based military headquarters of NATO", "The people on the Cape Verde Islands speak a Portuguese-based creole language."; "The Swiss-based United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
98.67.106.59 (talk) 00:23, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Death confirmed by Jay Barbree 3 pm MSNBC

The death is confirmed on the air by Jay Barbree just now on MSNBC - print citation coming shortly. Cause of death is complications from recent heart surgery. Tvoz/talk 19:10, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

If you don't have a citation yet, then don't add it. Wikipedia is not a real-time news service. We don't have to report current events fast. 200.127.89.241 (talk) 19:33, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the helpful advice. I'm well aware of what we are or are not. Tvoz/talk 19:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Similarly, I've removed any link between the surgery and Armstrong's death from the article. I've yet to see a news source that states the cause of death or links it directly to the surgery; anything else would be WP:SYN on our part. matt (talk) 19:40, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Look again, please. His family's statement made the connection, and many news outlets are so reporting it. Tvoz/talk 20:04, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

and here's just one of them. Tvoz/talk 20:05, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep, I saw that was added to the article with a ref. However, at the time of my posting, I had not seen one news source stating this (despite reading quite a few) and not one of the ones given in the article verified the claim at the time of my previous post. matt (talk) 21:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for snapping - that's fair enough. Tvoz/talk 21:25, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

No probs. matt (talk) 08:52, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree. "Complications"? I'm not sure that any coroner worth his salt would enter "complications" or "complications from x" in the "cause of death" field on a death certificate. I seriously doubt whether that would be legal. Cardiac failure, pulmonary failure, and also why. Probably thrombosis. I don't think you could get more vague than "complications". Also, you're right..."complications" necessitates a causal link arising from the previous bypass surgery. Something doesn't pass the sniff test here. Paul63243 (talk) 02:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request - missing comma

In Return to Earth section, "Armstrong and Aldrin discovered that in their bulky spacesuits, they had broken the ignition switch for the ascent engine;" needs a comma after "that": "Armstrong and Aldrin discovered that, in their bulky spacesuits, they had broken the ignition switch for the ascent engine;" Or else remove the one after "spacesuits". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.198.120.51 (talk) 19:23, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Done. ----AE Daily (speak!) 19:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST: cause of death.

A cause of death had been reported by AP News. http://apne.ws/Rb0Hi9

His family said in a statement that it was from complications from a cardiovascular procedure. Please can someone edit it in?

Aadmm (talk) 19:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done Tvoz/talk 21:02, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

EVA

Says "EVA" several times in the article without explaining what it stands for. Apparently it means Extra-vehicular activity. First mention should be an internal link to aforementioned article. (Obviously, the same goes for all other articles about astronauts/whoever where none of the "EVA"s is linked.) --82.170.113.123 (talk) 20:05, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Good point - I've Wikilinked the first 'EVA' in the article body. And you're right - this seems to be a widespread problem. I'll raise it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 August 2012

How come does this article have "USAF" under his picture when he was in the Navy? Yet another example of wikipedia's uncontested brilliance.

67.238.224.194 (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, the article says that Armstrong was"...A participant in the U.S. Air Force's Man In Space Soonest and X-20 Dyna-Soar human spaceflight programs...", which might justify calling him a 'USAF astronaut'. You may have a point though. We'll need to think about this. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

He was in USAF and he made training with Chuck Yeager, that surely wasn't in the Navy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.51.225.207 (talk) 08:36, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

To the IP: But we could live without the sarcasm - we actually do try to get it right, and helpful comments are welcome. Tvoz/talk 20:33, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm removing "USAF" from the above mentioned comments. Armstrong was in the US Navy and then worked for NASA. He may have participated in a program that the Air Force led, but he was never a member of the USAF, thus this is misleading. His NASA Bio should clear up any questions. http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/about/bios/neilabio.html --Revmqo (talk) 21:31, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

 Already done - removing template to clean up backlog in category. — Deon^talk 06:38, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

First wife

You have Neil Armstrong's first wife listed as having died in 1962 and then you mention she divorced him in 1992 after 38 years of marriage. Cannot be both. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.4.63.232 (talk) 20:14, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

The article says that their daughter Karen died in 1962. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

25. August is correct?

His death was reported on 25th, but seems the site http://neilarmstronginfo.com had been created on 24th. --Kucharek (talk) 20:27, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

It was definitely reported today (the 25th), but as it's already 4:30 in the afternoon on the east coast, I can't say what that means for the actual date of death.  — AnnaKucsma  Speak! 20:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

It was reliably reported on the 25th at around 3pm EDT that he died on Saturday the 25th, so that's what we're going with. Don't know who did that website or when. Tvoz/talk 20:41, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I've seen dates of death be reported incorrectly by the media before, based on when the story breaks. See Richard Winters. His death wasn't reported for over ten days, and we got it wrong at first. There's no hurry, as long as the date is corrected in the end.--JOJ ^Hutton 21:19, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I doubt it's that big of a gap. If it does turn out to be something other than today, it will in all probability have been yesterday.  — AnnaKucsma  Speak! 02:17, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Moon landing

It should be mentioned that "Hoax theories, saying Apollo astronauts had never walked on the Moon" see Moon landing conspiracy theories. Moreover add that "Polls taken in various locations have shown that between 6% and 20% of Americans surveyed believe that the manned landings were faked".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.151.195 (talk • contribs)

No. This article is about Neil Armstrong, the Apollo astronaut. It isn't about conspiracy theories - see WP:FRINGE. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:51, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

It is essential part of the whole Moon landing and hence his legacy and history.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.151.195 (talk • contribs)

Absolutely not - Andy is right. Tvoz/talk 21:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree that it should mention the hoax theories. This article has a large segment about a "moon landing". However, the vast majority of the world don't believe in this landing, as it was more than likely faked. Therefore it should definitely be made clear in the article about Neil Armstrong that his status as being the first man on the moon is only a theory. Especially now that he has died, the viewcount will rise quickly, so we need the facts out there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.67.69.8 (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Already Covered in the article Moon landing, where it belongs. It has no place in this article about Neil Armstrong. Please learn about Hoax and the Scientific method. All Wikipedia articles must reference reliable sources for inclusion of facts. Intrepid (talk) 23:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

The article states "He was notable for being the first human to set foot upon the Moon.". It should state "According to NASA, he was notable for being the first human to set foot upon the Moon." Wiki guidelines state "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." "According to NASA" makes it verifiable. "He was notable" is against Wiki guidelines. You might as well say that Neil Armstrong's moon landing is already covered in the Moon Landing article, so no need to have it on his personal page. Sorry, but Wikipedia doesn't work like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.67.69.8 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 25 August 2012‎

Ridiculous. Please read Wikipedia policy on fringe theories. Despite your claim to the contrary, reliable sources are universally agreed that Armstrong was the first man to set foot on the moon. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 23:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protected

Well since the page is protected now, here's a fix for a dead link I was going to make; http://www.wapakoneta.net/history for Reference 3. Ebrockway (talk) 20:57, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

  No problem doing it for you, but fyi the page is only semi-protected (no IPs or brand new accts can edit) - so you should be able to do subsequent edits directly yourself. Tvoz/talk 21:37, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sorry, I did try and got a message that I couldn't as it was protected. Maybe I didn't read far enough. Thanks. Ebrockway (talk) 06:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Moved section (from "Editing request for August 2012")

The description of Neil Armstrong as the first person to set foot on the moon is incorrect. Buzz Aldrin Was the First of the crew to set foot on the moon, Neil Armstrong is given credit for the famous quote, But the right as first to set foot on the Moon is Buzz Aldrin's
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.172.27 (talk) 22:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Nonsense ...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.135.171 (talk) 23:23, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

* I moved the above 'comment' and reply from the top of the page under "Editing request for August 2012" to its correct chronological position. 220 of ^Borg

 Not done. If it is an edit request, as not supported by any source (ie. crap, my POV! See Neil Armstrong#First Moon walk) - 220 of ^Borg 04:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Quotation in 'Lead Section'

Second time quotation has been deleted. The Edit Summary I gave was:- (historic quotation. therefore, reverted deletion. per MOS:LEAD/WP:LEAD --> section 'Relative emphasis'). Please read that section and also the section 'Citation' on that style/policy page which clearly mentions the usage of quotations in lead sections.Yaara dildaara (talk) 22:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Articles always begin with the lead sentence. No article, ever, begins with a quotation. This is just completely against our commonly accepted article structure. There are many people who have some famous quote associated with them, but this is Wikipedia, not Wikiquote. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. And this man was not notable for his quote. He was for something else. -DePiep (talk) 22:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Its one of th emost famous quotes in the century (akin to I have a DREAM), it ould be mentioned/referenced in the lead. Its part of what made him notable (ie- as a result of the primary feature)Lihaas (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm not against some sort of mention of the quote in the lead, but I absolutely oppose having any sort of quote box or other set-aside quote in the lead. As for what WP:LEAD tells us about situations like this, the most relevant sections are "Elements of the lead" and "First sentence", neither of which provide any sort of provision for the use of a quotation to introduce the article. Yaara dildaara specifically cites the "Citation" section, which deals with when to use inline citations in the lead. Yes, quotations are mentioned, but not because we should introduce articles with quotations. If you read it that way, you're taking the section out of context. Quotations, maybe even including this one, can certainly appear in the body of the lead when appropriate. Putting a quotation, however famous, before the body of the lead, is not done on Wikipedia. The Hamlet article does not begin with "To be or not to be...", the Martin Luther King, Jr. article does not begin with "I have a dream...", and this article should not begin with "That's one small step for man...". szyslak (t) 00:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

OSE is not a reason to keep it out, albeit i agree with you on the quotebox mentioning the words alongside the landing would suffice i thinkLihaas (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

My mention of the Hamlet and King examples was not intended as an OSE argument. More importantly, I absolutely support the mention of "One small step..." in some form in this article, even in the lead. I just don't support a set-aside quote before the body of the lead. Is that clear to you? szyslak (t) 04:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 August 2012

Under legacy section please add:

The Civil Air Patrol cadet program has also honored Neil Armstrong by naming the 8th cadet achievement after him. It requires the cadet to accomplish several tasks including but not limited to:

1.write a 300-500 word essay and present a 5 to 7 minute speech to the unit on one of the topics below:

   A. Explain why America’s aerospace power is vital to commerce, science or national security.
   B. Describe leadership mistakes you have made and explain what you learned from them.
   C. Explain the difference between followership and leadership

2. Pass a leadership exam.

3. Pass a physical fitness exam.

Leadership, physical fitness and the ability to speak and write were vital to his roles in space, the military and in his teaching life.

Reference :

http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cadet_programs/stripes_to_diamonds/neil_armstrong_achievement.cfm

Rpgennrichiii (talk) 23:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)Robert P. Gennrich, III

The article is about Neil Armstrong. It isn't about The Civil Air Patrol cadet program - and if it were to mention this at all (which seems unlikely), it certainly wouldn't go into that sort of detail. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

That the award was named after him can be added to the legacy section, though i agree the details are not relevant.Lihaas (talk) 23:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. I don't see it as noteworthy enough for inclusion but would have no major objection if a short summary, per Lihaas's suggestion, were added. Rivertorch (talk) 09:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Off-topic material

Immediately following Armstrong's death there have been repeated attempts to lard up the article with quotes from the Narcissist-in-Chief, Barack Obama, overloaded with the pronoun "I". Who cares? Several years before his death, Neil Armstrong penned a letter, along with along with ex-Apollo commanders Jim Lovell and Eugene Cernan, highly critical of Obama's diminished plans for future United States space exploration. Anyway, the article is about Neil Armstrong, not Barack Obama. — Quicksilver^{T @} 01:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

On the contrary, when a noted individual dies, it's relevant when important people, especially the president of the country of his citizenship, make comments expressing their grief. You know what's off topic, though? Linking to an article that's two years old, and bringing petty name-calling politics into a Wikipedia talk page. Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 02:17, 26 August 2012 (UTC) Tvoz likes this.

Given the language Quicksilver is using I suspect he's out to POV push. In full disclosure, I'm a Republican. Dick Inyo CA (talk) 22:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Sang'gre Habagat, if you're thinking that Wikipedia is free of politics, you're deluding yourself. There are some articles that I don't even bother editing, because they have become de facto soap boxes for various political pressure groups. — Quicksilver^{T @} 23:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Can I suggest you "don't bother editing" more, if your only contribution is going to be political soapboxing of your own? AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Place of death

Reliable sources seem to differ on his place of death. Some sources say he died at a hospital in Columbus and some sources say he died in Cincinnati, presumably at his home there. Anyone know which is accurate? Rreagan007 (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

missing "a"

The article contains the following text:

         The broadcast did not have the "a" before "man", rendering the phrase a contradiction (as man in such use is synonymous with mankind).

The phrase is obviously not a "contradiction". In context the word "man" (ie an individual male person) is obviously being contrasted with the concept "mankind" (ie all humaninity). In the words "Man goes into a bar, orders a drink" no one would think that the speaker was making a reference to humanity generally. The sentence in fact sounds more poetic and effective without the "a", even though in ordinary speech one would more usually say "a man", because the contrast "man" with "mankind" is much stronger to the ear than "a man" and "mankind" would be. But what do I care 90.221.84.165 (talk) 07:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

I listened to this again on the TV last night and I'm convinced Armstrong never said [a] at all. There is just no interval between the words "for" and "man" that would enable "a" to be fitted in, and the "for man" fragment sounds normal, with no static or anything and flows naturally. 86.29.127.15 (talk) 08:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

It's mankind!

Quote "NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said that Armstrong will be "remembered for taking humankind's first small step on a world beyond our own". If this guy can't even use Armstrong's own words then his quote doesn't deserve to appear in this article. What an idiot! Can the quote be removed? 86.29.127.15 (talk) 08:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Not all quotes about a person have to use words from that person's catchphrase. Most don't. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:46, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Dryden 'Bio'

This bio (http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/Biographies/Pilots/bd-dfrc-p001.html) from the Dryden Flight Research Center may help expand on Armstrong's career as a test pilot. - 220 of ^Borg 08:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

The famous quote?

Shouldn't the quote that heads Armstrong's page be 'That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind' rather than just 'man'? It's clearly just static covering up the 'a'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.97.38 (talk) 12:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

"Neil, when you land you are to say 'That's a small step for one man, a giant leap for mankind.' Got it? These words will go down forever in human history. Say them very slowly and clearly."

"Sure. 'That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.'"

Lestrade (talk) 14:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)Lestrade

The Age of His First Flight

If his first flight was on July 20, 1936 he could not have been 6 years old because his birthdate was on August 5, 1930, therefore he was 5 years old.

Obama

Obama is a well respected figure but it is not encyclopedic to add President Obama's comments to every death. President Obama was not involved in the space program at all. In fact, some of Armstrong's family and friends may take it as an insult because Armstrong went to the President to protest cutting of space programs.

The neutral thing would be to remove Obama's perfunctory comments. This is not to say President Obama is bad. It's just not the best for WP. Auchansa (talk) 02:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

There are plenty of public comments...John Glenn, Buzz Aldrin, Mitt Romney, Barack Obama, NASA's Charles Bolden (Besides being one of America's greatest explorers, Neil carried himself with a grace and humility that was an example to us all. When President Kennedy challenged the nation to send a human to the moon, Neil Armstrong accepted without reservation.

"As we enter this next era of space exploration, we do so standing on the shoulders of Neil Armstrong. We mourn the passing of a friend, fellow astronaut and true American hero.", the Armstrong family: "Neil was our loving husband, father, grandfather, brother and friend. "Neil Armstrong was also a reluctant American hero who always believed he was just doing his job. He served his Nation proudly, as a navy fighter pilot, test pilot, and astronaut. He also found success back home in his native Ohio in business and academia, and became a community leader in Cincinnati. "He remained an advocate of aviation and exploration throughout his life and never lost his boyhood wonder of these pursuits. "As much as Neil cherished his privacy, he always appreciated the expressions of good will from people around the world and from all walks of life. "While we mourn the loss of a very good man, we also celebrate his remarkable life and hope that it serves as an example to young people around the world to work hard to make their dreams come true, to be willing to explore and push the limits, and to selflessly serve a cause greater than themselves. "For those who may ask what they can do to honor Neil, we have a simple request. Honor his example of service, accomplishment and modesty, and the next time you walk outside on a clear night and see the moon smiling down at you, think of Neil Armstrong and give him a wink.", etc.... Auchansa (talk) 02:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

The reaction of the current President is relevant, although it may need to be limited here to a few words. Armstrong's family and friends may be insulted because Obama described him as "among the greatest of American heroes"??? Oh please; give me a break! Cresix (talk) 02:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Not relevant. No need to add these things, no matter who it is.--JOJ ^Hutton 02:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Auchansa, we don't base article content on suppositions about 'family and friends' being insulted by the fact that the head of state has commented on the death of a man widely seen as a hero. As for 'perfunctory', are you aware of what the word means? Your usage of it seems to suggest otherwise. And given your ridiculous attempts to replace Obama's comments by entirely irrelevant ones that Richard Nixon fortunately never had to make, [1], I can see no other way to read your latest edit summary except as complete bullshit. [2] Frankly, as a foreigner, I am disappointed that yet again, an article where US politics is clearly irrelevant should be come yet another arena for petty sniping. Do you not have any sense of decency at all? AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Whoever the President is, it is common and easy (and perfunctory) for comments like "he was a great man" to be said. It's not really encyclopedic. That's the bottom line. Auchansa (talk) 04:50, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

So what was all the bullshit about Nixon for then? As for 'perfunctory', I suggest you stop using words you don't understand. You have tried to use the death of a great man as a platform for petty political pointscoring. Troll elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:56, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Couple of comments

Neil just passed away. He was one of my greatest heroes. I had to read this article. After going through it, I have to admit that it's well written. I made some minor changes to the text and improved the layout. I want to add a few more comments:

1. "the 1202 and 1201 alarms were caused by an executive overflow in the lunar module computer."

The 1201 is not introduced before this sentence (it probably should).

2. "Armstrong thought they had a strong engineering division, plus they were in financial difficulty.

The sentence doesn't sound good. Should it be "but they were" instead? It sounds more appropriate.

3. "The Justice of the Peace read from an unrepealed 400-year-old law that required him to hang any Armstrong found in the town."

I don't understand the meaning of this sentence.

4. "This prompted many responses, including the Twitter hashtag "#WinkAtTheMoon""

In my opinion, this sentence is nothing but garbage.

May Neil be remembered not for just being a hero but also for the person he was and for the model of inspiration he was for millions of people around the world.

ICE77 (talk) 05:24, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree about #4. What relevance does a Twitter hashtag have? 94.168.37.235 (talk) 08:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Korean war ejection

Hansen's biography at p94 says 6ft was sliced of Armstrong's Panther's wing, not 3 as it states in this article (presumably referencing the earlier inaccurate reports also cited in the bio). Can someone fix this (admittedly very minor detail)?