Talk:Robop

Categorisation
This is definitely an odd article. I don't know if it's worthy of being on Wikipedia or whether I categorized it the best way. Please help if you'd like. Egpetersen 20:30, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's indeed quite odd. But the product seems to have generated a lot of press coverage, so there are certainly enough sources to expand the article. (Not sure whether someone will actually expand the article, but it does fulfill the notability criteria.) --B. Wolterding 18:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Robop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070505022828/http://apnews.excite.com:80/article/20070420/D8OKG3DG1.html to http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070420/D8OKG3DG1.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050216005227/http://www.swan.ac.uk:80/estates/news.htm to http://www.swan.ac.uk/estates/news.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070513201833/http://today.reuters.com:80/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews to http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2007-04-20T131358Z_01_L20408605_RTRUKOC_0_US-BRITAIN-ROBOFALCON-PIGEONS.xml&pageNumber=0&imageid=&cap=&sz=13&WTModLoc=NewsArt-C1-ArticlePage2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:35, 22 February 2016 (UTC)