Talk:Xenobot

The Name
Fine as its pedigree may be, "xenobot" suggests, at least to a science fiction fan, a robot of alien origin. And its etymology (here from Xenopus) --
 * The word Xenopus means "strange foot" and laevis means "smooth".

-- is mistaken, or at least misled and misleading. "Xenos" (Greek: ξένος) does not primarily mean "strange" in the sense of "odd, peculiar", but rather "foreign, alien". From Wiktionary:
 * Xenos (Greek: ξένος, xénos, plural xenoi) is a word used in the Greek language from Homer onwards.

The most standard definition is "stranger". However, the word, itself, can be interpreted to mean different things based upon context, author and period of writing/speaking, signifying such divergent concepts as "enemy" or "stranger", a particular hostile interpretation, all the way to "guest friend"' one of the most hallowed concepts in the cultural rules of Greek hospitality.

--Thnidu (talk) 04:19, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Potential risks!?
Nothing is said about potential risks!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.98.202.34 (talk) 09:36, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion
This page is marketing for one specific recent publication to promote a coined term. All the sources are pop news articles about the one publication, as well as a perspective about the publication. Significant issues of scientific merit aside, there is no broad notability to the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB60:1F01:12:0:0:0:101C (talk) 05:09, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/scientists-xenobots-worlds-first-living-000809015.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/29/americas/xenobots-self-replicating-robots-scn/index.html Draconiator (talk) 06:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The above are yet more pop science articles derived from a press release from the Wyss Institute regarding the same authors. There is no evidence of a notable field arising out of this work. Keeping this article risks furthering the use of wikipedia as a tool for career advancement rather than as an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB60:1F01:12:0:0:0:101C (talk) 17:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Reviewing Notability, this article is certainty notable for its scientific value. There has been extended coverage of the topic, as evidenced by the fact that although the most recent publication came out on 29 November 2021, this article was created almost two years ago (15 January 2020). --Leviavery (talk) 03:22, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

May reproduce
The xenobots may be able to reproduce according to this Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/nov/29/amazing-science-researchers-find-xenobots-can-give-rise-to-offspring --93.42.69.104 (talk) 13:45, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

NOT Named after a Frog
Please read the citations in the first paragraph BEFORE changing the page. The term 'xenobot' is a contraction -- just exactly as the citation informs -- and NO WHERE on those citations does it say "named after a specific frog." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.55.50 (talk) 22:48, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That's from wired, for example: "researchers describe how they’ve engineered so-called xenobots (from the species of frog, Xenopus laevis, whence their cells came) ". They called it so because they were working with frogs, not because they decided that it is "alien robots". Artem.G (talk) 07:03, 8 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The other ref is The Guardian article, which is only 3 paragraphs and appears to be written in ignorance of the facts. I will go further: I think it should be removed. Invasive Spices (talk) 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm going to go ahead and remove the Guardian article from references. It is clearly incorrect as far as the origin of the name "xenobot" is concerned. In addition to the Wired article, here is an article by the New York Times and here is an article by Tufts Now, the news organization for the university that published the paper; both confirm that the name originated from the frog in question Idontknowwhatshappening (talk) 05:32, 11 February 2022 (UTC)