Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Apollo 21
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was No Consensus default to Keep. A bold editor is welcome to do the suggested merge/redirect. Essjay · Talk 01:38, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Apollo 21
There was never any such mission in the plans of NASA, or at least nothing official enough to get an "Apollo number". Evil Monkey∴Hello 21:43, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. There are enough references to this around to justify an article, although this one isn't very good. http://www.arclight.net/~pdb/nonfiction/making-history.html
http://www.friends-partners.org/partners/mwade/flights/apollo19.htm http://www.marsinstitute.info/rd/faculty/dportree/rtr/ap34-1.html http://kosmos-news.kosmo.cz/kosmos231.htm Monicasdude 22:11, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
Keep and mark for rewrite/expansion. Alf melmac 22:21, 9 September 2005 (UTC)ReservedI at first thought it was a typo for 12, but that really didn't make sense. If the links that are given above are tosh then I change to delete as I judged it on those. Someone should get the low down from horses mouth though, searching the NASA site picks up mentions of cancelled missions: if the plan ever existed and just never got off the drawing board it wasn't cancelled as such. If deleted, need to look at List of lunar astronauts which the original editor has also contributed to. Alf melmac 09:42, 10 September 2005 (UTC)- Delete, since NASA said it only went up to 20. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Comment. Although it is nice to have speculated what might have been, NASA only ever ordered 15 Saturn Vs. That only takes you through to Apollo 20. Evil Monkey∴Hello 22:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
Delete as fictional - no A21 planned or possible by 1969; the existence of this would have involved restarting huge swathes of closed production, and certainly wouldn't have been in an advanced enough stage of planning to name names. Even 20 was pretty much abandoned by this point. Shimgray 22:42, 9 September 2005 (UTC)- Come to think of it... probably worth setting up a single article for Apollos 18-20 (Cancelled Apollo missions? Would be able to work in the I-class and so on as well), and we could merge this in. As it stands there's not much that can usefully be said on any individual one of them. All of them had about a dozen possible landing sites, the crews for them all are equally debatable... Shimgray 22:52, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Good idea. The three of them are all pretty formulated at the moment - "Apollo x was a cancelled Apollo flight. It would have been flown by blah. The rocket and spacecraft it would have used were used by blah". Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:36, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Done. Apollo 18, 19, 20 which already existed are now redirected to Cancelled Apollo missions. If Apollo 21 is kept, we could just redirect it to this new article. Evil Monkey∴Hello 05:29, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- And there I was expecting to write it in a month or so! Thanks. I think I'll write in a chunk on "Apollo 21", since I now think I see how the mistake got spread, and we can just redirect this in - as it is, it's pretty meaningless. Shimgray 11:18, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- I've worked it out. Apollo 21 was really just an early name for AS-515, which we know as Apollo 20. Because, you see, in early 1968 they didn't expect Apollo 8 to be a Saturn V flight, so AS-503 would have been Apollo 9, not 8... and then adding twelve to that would take you to Apollo 21. Makes sense? Definitely redirect to Cancelled Apollo missions. Shimgray 11:59, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Done. Apollo 18, 19, 20 which already existed are now redirected to Cancelled Apollo missions. If Apollo 21 is kept, we could just redirect it to this new article. Evil Monkey∴Hello 05:29, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Good idea. The three of them are all pretty formulated at the moment - "Apollo x was a cancelled Apollo flight. It would have been flown by blah. The rocket and spacecraft it would have used were used by blah". Evil Monkey∴Hello 00:36, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Come to think of it... probably worth setting up a single article for Apollos 18-20 (Cancelled Apollo missions? Would be able to work in the I-class and so on as well), and we could merge this in. As it stands there's not much that can usefully be said on any individual one of them. All of them had about a dozen possible landing sites, the crews for them all are equally debatable... Shimgray 22:52, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as unverified beyond a couple of websites that could have made a simple error, plus the NASA statement saying only up to 20. I'm also skeptical that the mission would have been cancelled in 1969... I look forward to seeing an article on the other cancelled missions. 23skidoo 02:46, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Redirect per bright bunny Shimgray, with a carefully worded note added to that page. Alf melmac 12:17, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Redirect to Cancelled Apollo missions where the subject is covered fairly decently. — RJH 18:12, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Redirect to Cancelled Apollo missions as the above posters suggest. They're right, there is a nice Apollo 21 section, even though there was no Apollo 21 to cancel, from what I can tell. Definitely don't delete, though, as we need to give people any relevant knowledge on Apollo 21. I -Timvasquez 20:42, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
- Merge and redirect to Cancelled Apollo missions, since this never really existed. Alphax τεχ 01:21, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
