Talk:Aeropolis 2001

Poor quality article
"It will also have green floors, where children and office workers can eat their lunch-break. If suddenly there is a fire, it will be put out by robots."

Doesn't this sound a bit weird? I mean, seriously, 'it will be put out by robots'. WTF —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)


 * Not any weirder than: "...as soon as they get the money for the project, they will start building it. It will be fully built by robots." So as soon as the get the almost $4 billion, they'll start construction (i.e. never). And by that time we'll surely have the technology for fully automated robotic construction, but I'm not holding my breath. Nathanm mn 23:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)


 * And only children and office workers can eat their lunches on the green floors, no one else... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BjornBednarek (talk • contribs).


 * It looks like it's been written by a 12 year old Japanese school kid. "If suddenly there is a fire, it will be put out by robots" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)


 * What would really impress me: "The funding required will be provided by robots." That would be awesome! Gmuir 14:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Also, you can't really eat a "lunch-break". "Lunch" is the thing that you eat, whereas "Lunch-break" is the time during which you eat the lunch. S. Morrow 16:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article be deleted? No citations, ludicrous claims, I think the guy above me nailed it. The whole page is useless. It could be mentioned as a proposed building in another article, but that's all it needs. Unless someone could find some worthwhile information to warrant an article, I think it should be toast. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)


 * No kidding, the source is headway, an english languague book i used in grade 4, lol 85.140.154.17 20:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I cleaned it up somewhat, though verifiable sources of the information are lacking. "Green floors" refers to sustainability.  The lunch-eating part was removed as it is irrelevant.  I removed the info regarding fire-fighting robots as this is a bit too "crystal ball"-ish to have without any references.  --Bossi ( talk ;; contribs ) 06:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Aeropolis2001.jpg
I found Image:Aeropolis2001.jpg and noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. Someone will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If it was obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self-no-disclaimers tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Fair use, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If there are other files on this page, consider checking that they have specified their source and are tagged properly, too. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Aeropolis2001.jpg
Image:Aeropolis2001.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)