Talk:Apollo 16

Call Signs

Perhaps it would be good to add why the call signs "Casper" and "Orion" were selected?

Best, Viranga13 (talk) 01:00, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

References

What's this for?

• Richard W. Orloff. "Apollo by the Numbers: A Statistical Reference (SP-4029)". NASA.

The title is wrong? And this one feels kind of useless here.--Jarodalien (talk) 14:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

It's been in there for over 15 years, initially added as a general reference for all the numbers cited in the mission; it's a little odd to see it now being used solely to cite the WP:CAPTAINOBVIOUS fact that this was a NASA mission. TJRC (talk) 02:18, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

I've removed it. Surely that does not need to be cited.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:22, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

No argument from me. I did add it as a refideas entry above, since it's a great source and if no longer in use in the article is worth noting for future editors. TJRC (talk) 03:00, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Lunar Portable Magnetometer

"There, Duke took pictures of Stone Mountain and South Ray Crater while Young deployed the LPM", before there's only full name "Lunar Portable Magnetometer".--Jarodalien (talk) 14:39, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Today featured article

Just a beautiful and comprehensive article. Well done User:Wehwalt, the featured article nominator. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. A good deal of the work was done by Tyrol5, although they were not an FAC nominator, they should have been--Wehwalt (talk) 15:22, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. This one certainly has been a long-term team effort. Embodies the spirit of the project quite well, I think. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk] 16:11, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

It is a pretty ambitious topic to work with. Kudos to both of you guys, Wehwalt and Tyrol5. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:12, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Should we add a flat-earth debunking section?

Just a thought. JonesyPHD (talk) 16:02, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

It would seem odd to me to lend such weight to a fringe theory with no apparent direct connection to Apollo 16 in particular that I'm aware of, apart from more generalized conspiracy theories and the like that are applicable to the space program and modern Earth science more broadly. For that, we have Moon landing conspiracy theories and Modern flat Earth beliefs. Tyrol5 ▸ [talk] 16:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree. It is not worth including. Presumably we have articles on such fringe theories, let the interested go there.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:19, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Locations of spacecraft and other equipment

https://www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2023/pdf/1025.pdf 73.222.134.53 (talk) 03:25, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Very interesting, thank you. If I've erred in summarizing it, please let me know. Wehwalt (talk) 12:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC)