Talk:Joseph Francis Shea

Created this article

Created this article. Will be filling in more substance as time permits. Vincehk 06:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind me pitching in. I'm hoping to get the article to GA status, or beyond. MLilburne 17:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Good article nom

I'm passing this as a "good article". It is well written, and the narrative is above average—that is, it's an interesting biography! Under the peer review banner, my minor suggestions include integrating the shorter quotes into their preceding paragraphs; and not using the big-blue-quotation-mark template (but that's just preference!). I am confused by the linking of "dementia praecox" in one of the quotes--did the speaker mean plain old dementia? The section titled "Program manager" narrates for quite a stretch without providing date information. I also was not clear on how Shea managed to avoid the congressional testimony in the end. With the new job, he didn't have to? Again, nice article. –Outriggr § 06:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your comments! I've tried to deal with them all and hopefully the results will be to your satisfaction.

• I've integrated some of the shorter quotes into the text. There are a few, like the one quoting the Apollo 1 astronauts' inscription, that I wanted to keep out for reasons of emphasis.
• I'll look into another template for block quotes. I quite like the blue quote marks myself, but I'll have a look and see what else is available.
• I've tried to put in some more date information. I'm not sure if it's any better... a lot of that section is narrating continuing work rather than specific events. I may do a little more work later.
• I think I left it implicit that Shea's removal from his position would keep him from being called to testify, but I've made that explicit. (Why it was the case, I'm not so sure, but that's another question...)
• He definitely meant dementia praecox, and I linked it because it was a fairly unfamiliar term. I've now included an earlier mention of schizophrenia just to make the meaning clearer.

Let me know if you spot anything else that needs work. MLilburne 15:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for responding. I followed the implicit part of point four, but like you, I don't understand how changing jobs can help one escape testifying, so explicit is good. The point five change is also good: because the speaker was referring to his father, I figured senility was the intended meaning. –Outriggr § 23:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to remove date-autoformatting

Dear fellow contributors

MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether a date is autoformatted or not). MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.

There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:

Disadvantages of date-autoformatting

• (1) In-house only

• (a) It works only for the WP "elite".
• (b) To our readers out there, it displays all-too-common inconsistencies in raw formatting in bright-blue underlined text, yet conceals them from WPians who are logged in and have chosen preferences.
• (c) It causes visitors to query why dates are bright-blue and underlined.

• (2) Avoids what are merely trivial differences

• (a) It is trivial whether the order is day–month or month–day. It is more trivial than color/colour and realise/realize, yet our consistency-within-article policy on spelling (WP:ENGVAR) has worked very well. English-speakers readily recognise both date formats; all dates after our signatures are international, and no one objects.

• (3) Colour-clutter: the bright-blue underlining of all dates

• (a) It dilutes the impact of high-value links.
• (b) It makes the text slightly harder to read.
• (c) It doesn't improve the appearance of the page.

• (4) Typos and misunderstood coding

• (a) There's a disappointing error-rate in keying in the auto-function; not bracketing the year, and enclosing the whole date in one set of brackets, are examples.
• (b) Once autoformatting is removed, mixtures of US and international formats are revealed in display mode, where they are much easier for WPians to pick up than in edit mode; so is the use of the wrong format in country-related articles.
• (c) Many WPians don't understand date-autoformatting—in particular, how if differs from ordinary linking; often it's applied simply because it's part of the furniture.

• (5) Edit-mode clutter

• (a) It's more work to enter an autoformatted date, and it doesn't make the edit-mode text any easier to read for subsequent editors.

• (6) Limited application

• (a) It's incompatible with date ranges ("January 3–9, 1998", or "3–9 January 1998", and "February–April 2006") and slashed dates ("the night of May 21/22", or "... 21/22 May").
• (b) By policy, we avoid date autoformatting in such places as quotations; the removal of autoformatting avoids this inconsistency.

Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. Does anyone object if I remove it from the main text (using a script) in a few days’ time on a trial basis? The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 13:09, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

'radio' inertial guidance system?

In line 3 of the article....

Is there such a thing??? Can someone check the reference? I know of inertial guidance systems and one of their major attributes is they don't need an external input; ie: they rely on inertia to sense acceleration. Ariconte (talk) 08:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Please forget my question.... this is correct and used radio control in combination with an inertial system. Ariconte (talk) 08:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I have the same question. Thank you for asking and answering at the same time! Natasha2006 (talk) 12:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

New source of info on Shea

I found a new webpage about Shea. I think it's quite new -- I hadn't seen this page before, although I was aware of the austonautix main site. I don't think our Wiki page refers to this site, and there's some info in the site that isn't mentioned in the article. Check it out. http://astronautix.com/astros/shea.htm

What makes it a reliable source? I don't think it is... Calor (talk) 00:02, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Why would you think it's not reliable? Check out its 'About Us' page.

http://astronautix.com/articles/aboutica.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.106.101.11 (talk) 11:57, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

JFShea's comments

User:JFShea is a new user who put some comments on the article page rather than the talk page. I think he may be a source of much useful information, if we can engage with him constructively. So far his comments and edits include [1], [2], [3], and [4]. The first is the most substantive revision, some of which might be salvageable. Though the first three were reverted, the last currently stands, regarding the number of children Shea had when he died.

Note that the sources cited aren't readily available online - I don't know if they are inaccurate or if they were misread; this is an example where primary publication on Wikipedia from a named person would be desirable, if properly handled. But since that's impermissible, perhaps a Wikinews interview could serve the purpose? In general I think Wikinews might serve a useful role in addressing this sort of problem by giving principals a chance to get facts into the record. Wnt (talk) 08:34, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I should add that it looks like offline sources are going to be a big problem here. Incidentally, I just noticed that the sentence about barbiturates was sourced to Murray and Cox, "Apollo: Race to the Moon",[5] written by the same Charles Murray (author) infamous for writing The Bell Curve. What do you make of that? Wnt (talk) 09:04, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

While I'm at it, can someone familiar with the NYT archives confirm whether this article exists, (cited about a "straightjacket"!): "O'Toole and Schefter, "The Bumpy Road," The New York Times, July 15, 1979, p. E1." I tried [6] and got no result for it. I tried [7] and got no results. I want to make sure we haven't been had here. Wnt (talk) 09:17, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I can't get into the article either. I was able to find the article, but it was pay-per-view. A Google search discovered that this article was copied to the Pending Changes Testing Site. Should I delete it? --Alpha Quadrant ^talk 14:29, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Could you post the link? Even though it's pay per view, it still strengthens the reference; someone must have access who can check it.

I don't know why the Pending Changes test site currently exists in general. Wnt (talk) 19:27, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I've removed the unbalanced tag because it's been over a year without any movement. The disputed sections are cited, and a reasonable search for balancing material has been made. Approaches to the concerned editor (User talk:JFShea) have drawn a blank. DrKiernan (talk) 21:04, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The New York Times "Bumpy Road" article.

I easily obtained a copy of this through Interlibrary Loans. It is a valuable reference. The paragraph about straitjackets says:

"The Apollo fire claimed more than three causalities. One of Shea's deputies had a nervous breakdown. Shea spent the night with him, talking him into entering a rest home. The family minister arrived, suggesting the same thing. The next day the man was taken to a sanitarium in a straitjacket." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.184.203.183 (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for verifying that. For future reference for anyone else, the folks at WP:REX will provide paywalled news references. SmartSE (talk) 23:47, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

"How Soon the Moon?". Time Magazine. April 14, 1967. Retrieved 2006-11-27

I tried to find the article on the Time website, but I think they have put that issue behind a pay wall.--WPatrickW (talk) 23:53, 11 October 2017 (UTC)