Talk:Erroneous newspaper report garners publicity for Moon landing tapes

August 2006

I've mailed the author of the PDF to see if we can get permission to use pictures from the report. I think this can take a little time to be developed, so feel free to expand once you've read the PDF, but hang off on publish just now. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

interview

any chance of an interview? Doldrums 16:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

tone

article appears in a pretty informal tone, is this intentional? Doldrums 16:18, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Please have a go at it, I read the PDF late yesterday and am going from that and Bill's various comments around the wiki. My mail bounced with a "service not available" - probably my provider getting blacklisted again. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Bill Woods is a a military person who works for NASA. He might be just being doing damage control by trying to distort the news. I wouldn't rely on his inputs.--Tequendamia 01:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What was the error?

The title is either misleading, or the article is unclear. Near as I can gather from the article, the original slow scan tapes are, in fact, still missing. In what way was the original article in error?

I hadn't intended for this to be published so quickly, I have tried to clarify the tapes issue and the Goddard/DEL issue. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 08:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

There isn't any error in the first article. Just a semantic dispute. The tapes are missing but are not missing. They haven't found the originals, but because they are still looking for them we cannot certainly say they are lost. They are looking for them but there is little hope they will be found. However they are not missing, not because they haven't been found but because no official statement has been made about it. The official statement might never come because it would be the same as calling government employees negligent. The historic tapes are very important but treating them as dispensable is not negligence, it is just burocracy. On the other hand, those who belive the tapes are missing and don't belive they are still looking for them are nuts who believe in conspiracy theories.--Tequendamia 22:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

13,000 tapes missing

According to Forbes the number of original tapes missing is 13,000. They haven't found at least one of them.--Tequendamia 23:39, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

and now...

this. Doldrums 08:52, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

These guys are on a real publicity drive, who are they trying to embarass into spending the money to find this stuff? --Brian McNeil / ^talk 16:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Brian, it is simple - they are trying to distract us from the war and the election. ;-) --SVTCobra 23:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

on the web

As this link show, only Wikinews reports a piece of news that contradicts more than 200 articles from international serious news agencies and online newspapers around the world. Only Wikinews got a report base on unfounded, biased and doubtdul information. Google search for news on the topic.--Tequendamia 01:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Spanish language interwiki

Can some administrator put the Spanish-language interwiki link in the article? Thanks in advance. --Julián Ortega - My talk 21:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Done! Thanks for highlighting the link. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 21:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Categories

{{edit protected}} Please add this article to Category:The Sydney Morning Herald. Thank you. Green Giant (talk) 10:12, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Done --Pi zero (talk) 10:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)