Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Robotics/Archive 2

WikiProject X is live!


Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

cleaning up the Roboy page
The Roboy page says it needs to be "cleaned up" especially for neutrality. How do I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:1B40:9C:B50F:82C6:42E2:1539 (talk) 17:01, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Tesla Model S manufacturing process
Hi All

I wrote an article for the Tesla Model S manufacturing process, the manufacturing plant has a high level of automation and uses a lot of robots, I'd appreciate someone who knows about robotics looking at it.

Thanks

Mrjohncummings (talk) 11:06, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

RfC: Nikola Tesla
An RFC: Should all discussions and proposals about Nikola Tesla's nationality, ethnicity and country of birth (broadly construed) be limited to the sub-page: Talk:Nikola Tesla/Nationality and ethnicity? has been posted here. Interested editors are invited to comment.- MrX 20:56, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Writing an article on open source software
Just like to ask for some aid the revision for the draft Gazebo_simulator.

My goal is to keep the article short and factual similar in style to existing example open source articles:


 * Bullet_(software)
 * Player_Project
 * Robot_Operating_System

If you have detailed specifics on this matter, or know of an editor knowledgeable in the subject, please do not hesitate to inform.

Thanks Ruffsl (talk) 22:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Clean-up of an entry
Dear all, I'm currently working on an entry on a manufacturer of robotic therapy devices called tyromotion. It has been suggested that I should contact you to enrol your help. My submission has been reviewed and rejected; the feedback I received was that the topic as such merits an entry. However, the section on the company's devices needs to be edited.

I work for tyromotion and would like to avoid any sort of bias.

This is the page in its current shape: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tyromotion_GmbH

Does anyone of you have any suggestions on how to improve the products section? I would also welcome it, if anyone else would like to participate in the creation of the article.

Many thanks in advance! TyromotionKarin (talk) 09:07, 30 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, unfortunately, as I suspect the rejecting editor did, I cannot find enough secondary source material (or tertiary) to satisfy notability.
 * It may be that more sources publish secondary material over time, or that there may be ones in German.
 * Currently, however, I fear that there is just not quite enough to argue notability has been fulfilled.
 * Sorry Chaosdruid (talk) 17:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Question on source information - first robotic surgery
Page Robot-assisted_surgery states that Vancouver robot was the first surgery robot (assisted). The source newspaper is published in 1985 and no mentions of 1983 or stating it was used before 1985. Digging a little in google, states that the 1985 was the first robot surgery. Can someone verify? Thanks, 68.102.181.125 (talk) 00:13, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi. The source states that this was after their 60th procedure, and they state in that article; "We started using our robot about a month before the well-publicized team in California [...]"
 * So we know there were more before Nov 1985. Whether they were as far back as 1983 is unclear so far. The ref used supports that being claimed by the Canadian team, but not that it is a fact.
 * At this point, one could argue that the article be changed to say something like "The Canadian team claimed this was the first ..."
 * More investigation would be necessary, realistically, if there was another claim to the throne ... so off I go doing research on Google.


 * Within a minute, on the first page of searches:


 * (a Wikipedia clone? - and a bad one at that)
 * Seems to have copyvio type sentence issues as well ...
 * and this gem from the US National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health - National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine which states that "The world's first surgical robot was the “Arthrobot”, which was developed and used for the first time in Vancouver, BC, Canada in 1983"


 * Chaosdruid (talk) 17:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, is the project still alive?
Topic, spam, foo bar baz qux — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxorazon (talk • contribs) 22:58, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Deep editing Uav tomorrow! best regards, Maxorazon (talk) 23:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, sort of, yes. Thanks for keeping up the good work ... although I should maybe wait until I read it before I congratulate you? Chaosdruid (talk) 17:25, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * One mate soul! Well did add my part with systems a few weeks ago, my to-do edits are on the related talk page. BR Maxorazon (talk) 17:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Armature Controlled DC Motor
Hey, all, This article was deleted and then recreated and I was hoping some WikiProject Robotics members could look it over, evaluate it and categorize it appropriately. I first went to WikiProject Engineering but their talk page seems inactive but it looks like some editors are checking in here so I thought I'd ask for your help. Thanks for any assistance you can offer. Liz Read! Talk! 17:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi Liz, I have added some cats. This topic is more of an electrical engineering thing, but is certainly relevant to robotics, too. It is a specialized article dealing with the mathematical modeling of the more general component Armature (electrical engineering). The refs look OK; here is the PDF for the second ref. The two articles might be usefully merged. --Mark viking (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

"Real robot"
The usage of is under discussion, see talk:Real Robot -- 70.51.45.100 (talk) 04:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Viterbi algorithm
A lot of content removals starting here, can someone knowlegable please check it out. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 19:49, 22 August 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Missing topics list
My list of missing topics about robotics is updated - Skysmith (talk) 19:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

WikiJournal of Science promotion
T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 10:29, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

WikiObjects project collaboration
Hi, I have started a wikiproject about Open Product Data, "codenamed" WikiObject.

I have started adding info related with Open Source Hardware world like:


 * Components of a 3D Printer (Prusa I3 Hephestos) https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?&q=27000417
 * List of arduino official boards https://query.wikidata.org/#%23Items%20where%20manufacturer%20is....
 * Open Source FPGA "IceZUM Alhambra" datasheet https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q25026145

It could be good to contribute togheter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qupro (talk • contribs) 12:08, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

NEWS~
Hello. I just updated a page, MAHRU & AHRA. Feel free to check it out! --RainPearl233 (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

I found this show fascinating and wonder how, when, if this brain/computer linkage can be useful for Wikipedia and whether WMF might want to be involved. Nocturnalnow (talk) 03:51, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject
Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Robotics

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.&mdash; Rod talk 18:25, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Machine learning bar
As the WikiProject with the most specialised interest in machine learning articles, does anyone here have a view on the possible conversion of Template:Machine learning bar to a footer template? This sidebar has annoyed me for some time but the last comment on the template talk page (also expressing the same opinion) is two years old. Since this affects quite a lot of articles I'm hoping for at least some clue that this change wouldn't go against a contrary consensus before going ahead... Bigbluefish (talk) 10:27, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Update
Hello all. I just updated the page, Epson Robots. Feel free to check it out. Any tips on how to improve are more than welcomed and much appreciated! (Smcarter37 (talk) 03:48, 26 April 2018 (UTC))

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject
The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template Transclude lead excerpt.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background
On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you. &mdash; The Transhumanist  07:52, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Articulated soft robotics
Will someone please assess this draft as to its suitability to be moved into article space? Robert McClenon (talk) 22:32, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Requested move in progress to change Lunar Roving Vehicle to lunar roving vehicle
A requested move to lower-case the name of the astronaut driven vehicle used for Moon exploration is at the link above. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:36, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Request for attention from an expert (specific questions)
I've just copyedited this article and there are a few specific outstanding issues (links and wording) that need expert attention. If anyone could have a look that would be brilliant. Thanks in advance.--Philologia (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Banner image
Hi

I have reverted the image placed on the banner.

I cannot see any consensus for the change, and the image used was very sub-standard.

So, I guess we need to have some discussion about the image used, and whether or not it should be changed, and of so, what to?

I was OK with it as it was, though it may well be time for change.

Having said that, let's go!

Should we have some new pics on the banners?
eg * ABSTAIN/YES/NO/MAYBE (sig)


 * MAYBE Chaosdruid (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

If so, what?
eg * robotic hand.jpg


 * Something a little less rover based - perhaps a montage to show the range of robotic assistance Chaosdruid (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Banner robot image
The new 2018 image for the WikiProject seems to imply this wikiproject is fictional, or pertains to anthropomorphic robotics (androids), implying a limited scope. It would be better to have something less humanoid and less comicbook. Perhaps an industrial robot arm?

-- 67.70.34.69 (talk) 23:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * No idea why it was changed, but I have initiated a discussion and sort of vote section below so we can decide what, if anything, needs changing, and what, if anything, we feel needs updating.
 * I have also reverted to the original imaage - this is NOT Google Android lol Chaosdruid (talk) 14:30, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Human Interaction Proof
Was wondering if someone from this WikiProject would mind taking a look at this new article and assssing it. It looks like a first attempt at writing an article by a new user. Subject matter seems quite technical, and it reads more like an academic paper than a Wikipedia article. I tried to do some basic formatting cleanup, but perhaps someone here is familiair with the subject matter and can help with the phrasing, etc. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:16, 10 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Sorted I believe - Diaana has remnamed from caps, and it is now a redirect to CAPTCHA Chaosdruid (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
 * – Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Brainiac
Who in their right mind added a Robotics project line to Brainiac (character)? He's a fictional robot. Not an actual one. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 02:58, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Seriously? Did you not think that "he" is not even a "he"?
 * It's a robot, this is the robotics project - any robot, fictional or not, is within our scope. Chaosdruid (talk) 17:05, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Portal:Robotics is up for deletion
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Robotics. Is anyone from the project interested in updating this? Espresso Addict (talk) 06:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Shame it has gone, but the maintenance was too much for the one or two passing editors and I could not do everything on my own :( Chaosdruid (talk) 17:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Dispute on what a cam is
A redlink user wants to see in a crossbow trigger mechanism a cam (brief vid on mechanism). I disagree. Qualified opinions are welcome. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 08:51, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Vecchia approximation
Could someone take a look at the above article to make sure the formulas are correct? Thanks.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:14, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I had a quick look, but as I do not have a clue what they mean, my input was futile (that's two robotics jokes in there btw) ... might be worthwhile canvassing some of the more mathematical sections for someone to help with checking it as this project is surprisingly resting like a parrot. I say suprisingly, because most people see robotics as part of other things, for example, space robotics, industrial robotics, and so we have very few active authors currently. Chaosdruid (talk) 18:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Robot built by a teenager in Bangladesh
Over at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation we are talking about Draft:Robot Robin, a robot built by a teenager in Bangladesh, and whether it is a notable subject. Your views would be appreciated. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Assistance with Draft:SuperDroid_Robots_Inc.
I'm trying to find some folks who can help review this draft and help clean it up for submission to AfC. I'm trying to use the feedback provided to improve and restructure the page. ( Ben AbioticSine (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2021 (UTC) )

Article for review at AfC: Plus (autonomous trucking)
I believe that AI falls under the remit of this WikiProject, so I am here to ask if an editor member could help review an article I've submitted at Articles for Creation for Plus, an autonomous trucking technology company based in Silicon Valley. The submission can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Plus_(company)

I am an employee of Plus and have a conflict of interest and I understand that the page needs to be carefully reviewed by editors. If editors here have any questions, I am more than happy to help. With gratitude, PlusJoc (talk) 22:39, 29 September 2021 (UTC)


 * User:Onel5969, User:Chaosdruid and User:Curb Safe Charmer: Hi! I'm looking for editors to help review my draft at AfC and saw your names in the discussions above, and it looks like you're currently active on Wikipedia. Would any of you have some time to look? With gratitude, PlusJoc (talk) 07:51, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * There's a queue for having drafts reviewed, currently with a seven week wait. Please wait your turn. We are volunteers here, whereas you get paid to work in marketing and communications. We are not here to help you promote your company. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:49, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Science Competition 2021
Hi! I am here to remind you all that Wiki Science Competition 2021 has started in many territories last week. It will last until November 30th or December 15th, depending on the areas.

WSC is organized every two years, and people from all countries can upload files (the goal are the international prizes) but specific national pages are also set up, for example for USA or Ireland or New Zealand. Such national competitions (when they exist) act as an additional incentive to participate.

We expect a sitenotice to show up for all readers here on enWikipedia as well, but probably during the second half of the month when all countries with national competitions are open for submission at the same time. In the meantime, if you are planing to upload some nice descriptive photo, infographics or video to Wikimedia Commons, please consider to submit them using the WSC interface, you might win a prize.--Alexmar983 (talk) 21:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Aurora Odysseus article - what is "and visited by the" meant to mean ?
In the Aurora Odysseus article - what is "and visited by the" meant to mean ? My best guess is that the text should be replaced by "and has been considered by" but I'm really not sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Southof40 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Help assessing notoriety
Hello, full disclosure I am an employee of Agility Robotics, as such I don't think I can be an unbiased/objective editor. I'm hoping the folks working on this project can help me with evaluating whether Agility has enough notability to warrant a page. I think so, but again I am biased and would benefit from others assessment. Below is some of the coverage produced by 3rd party journalists. Thank you for any insight or thoughts you are willing to provide.


 * https://techcrunch.com/2022/07/21/agilitys-next-digit-robot-will-have-a-face-and-hands/
 * https://www.geekwire.com/2022/agility-robotics-raises-150m-from-amazon-and-others-to-build-robots-used-in-the-workplace/
 * https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/amazon-invests-in-robots-that-work-alongside-humans/
 * https://www.therobotreport.com/fords-package-delivery-tests-combine-autonomous-vehicles-bipedal-robots/
 * https://www.bizjournals.com/pittsburgh/inno/stories/profiles/2022/04/25/agility-robotics-factory.html
 * https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/01/agility-robotics-building-two-legged-cassie-robot-and-delivery-robots.html
 * https://www.forbes.com/sites/amyfeldman/2022/04/22/meet-the-startups-that-amazons-new-1-billion-industrial-innovation-fund-is-backing/?sh=6cd00ae025a4

If this community thinks the notoriety bar has been reached then I can work on a draft article, if that's even possible with my conflict of interest? Keganator (talk) 21:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi @Keganator. Welcome to Wikipedia. You're right to declare your conflict of interest, and are "strongly discouraged" from writing articles about employers and other close relationships. Note that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a soapbox or means of promotion.
 * That being said, here's my estimation of the references you provided. I was only able to give each one a quick skim.
 * The TechCrunch article is a bit of puff piece. The consensus on Wikipedia is that TechCrunch can be a bit iffy.
 * Likewise for the GeekWire article. I wouldn't rate GeekWire as a particularly reliable source.
 * The ZDNet article seemed a bit better. ZDNet are generally considered to be a reliable source here.
 * The Robot Report article had more meat, although I'm not sure how much extrapolation they did from the video there. I normally rate Robot Report as "meh".
 * The Pittsburg Inno article seemed good. I saw no reason to doubt the quality of the journalism.
 * The Make It article seemed ok. I saw no reason to doubt the quality of the journalism.
 * The Forbes article didn't have much to offer. Forbes articles are generally considered to be reliable.
 * I would argue that, based on those references, your company is notable, and that a small article might be appropriate. There's not much in your references that a roboticist might get excited about.
 * Hope that doesn't sound too negative. There are many, many articles on Wikipedia with far worse references than those! -- Doktor Züm (talk) 21:03, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for taking the time to review and respond. Not negative at all, just objective review. I value your assessment (and the communities general regard) of those media sources. As a lay person I greatly appreciate the fact that Wikipedia isn't a soapbox for promotion. Thanks! Keganator (talk) 21:14, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, you can ask about references on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. (Just don't mention Fox News.) -- Doktor Züm (talk) 11:13, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Merge military robot to lethal autonomous weapon
A merger proposal for military robot to lethal autonomous weapon has been started at Talk:Lethal autonomous weapon, input is appreciated. —DIYeditor (talk) 10:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a class parameter to WikiProject banner shell, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to WikiProject banner shell, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass WPBannerMeta a new custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Neural Radiance Fields
I saw there is a draft for Neural Radiance Fields. It may be of interest to members of this project. Thriley (talk) 16:25, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Content assessment
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. &#x0020;This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 06:58, 2 July 2023 (UTC)