Talk:Actroid

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Robotics (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Actroid is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page (Talk), where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.
WikiProject Japan (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 02:47, August 21, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Picture[edit]

Can anyone get a picture to use here? I don't think I can lift one from the source article I used. Hiberniantears July 5, 2005 19:43 (UTC)


I think she's called Repliee Q1Expo. I'm moving it to there, if anybody objects I'll move it back if they can prove which one is the correct name. Revolución 16:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

I think this article should be moved to Actroid, as Repliee Q1Expo was just one specific model. If no one objects I will request a non-controversial page move. Robotman1974 21:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

reaction to children[edit]

I do believe I had heard about some study with children reacting to the child model riplee. Can anyone find the citation? Lotusduck 18:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Buffybot?[edit]

I wonder how much it would cost to make one of these that's a clone of Sarah Michelle Gellar...

Oh come on, if you've watched season 5 of Buffy you know you've had the thought, too!65.87.20.98 (talk) 21:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay. Ew. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 16:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Sensativity?[edit]

I am taking a guess the Actroid doesn't use cameras, but does it have a sensativity blanket of any kind? Like pressure sensativity? A lovely machine, but still needs work, IMHO. ~Hx 18:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

BSG[edit]

Someone keeps adding in that the Actroid was in the BattleStar Galactica series closer, "Daybreak". That needs to be cited, since the robot seen there could have been any one of a number of different life-like things, like the RealDoll. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:32, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

And no, citing it to a personal observation of the episode is not good enough. We as editors are not citable. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 15:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Except we're not citing ourselves, we're citing the episode. Stop playing your WP:POINT games, and stop reverting cited and sourced information. Thanks... MikeWazowski (talk) 04:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
As you may have missed, you have absolutely no way that this is in fact an Actroid being depicted. If so, please provide the citations that names the robot by name. It could be a RealDoll, or a CandyGirl. The point is, you are pointing to the episode and claiming 'I saw it there! I did, I did, I really did!' This is akin to people saying the same thing about sasquatch, the Loch Ness Monster and UFO's - its all your interpretation. As such, it doesn't get included. Ask an admin if you are unsure of this. While you are at it (and since you mentioned WP:POINT), make sure you point out to that admin that you are fully aware that this is actually a point currently being mediated (not arbitration, as you misunderstood); they might advise you how to become a part of that mediation. They might also advise you about attempting to end-run the mediation; we pretty much call that disruptive here in Wikipedia.
In point of fact, it is not the video that states that one of the robots depicted is in fact an Actroid. Indeed, you haven't a single, RS reference that calls it such. When you take your personal knowledge and join two pieces of information together in an evaluation, we call that synthesis. Synthesis - which I am sure you are already aware - is verboten in Wiki-en.
Now, if you want to keep discussing this, you are welcome to. Understand that until you bring a citation that points at something other than your own, personal observations, we cannot connect the Actroid to BSG. I am reverting your edit back out; I am going to urge you to seek out the advice of an administrator before reverting for a fifth time. I am sorry that I have apparently failed in clarifying as to why your personal interpretations are not allowable in Wikipedia. Maybe an admin can explain it to you. If you continue to edit-war instead of discuss, you aren't going to leave me a lot of choices with how to proceed. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 05:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I love how you bring up "end run around the situation", since that's exactly what you are doing here yourself. As to your interpretation of the source, we shall agree to disagree. Also, please cease leaving personal insults on my personal talk page. It doesn't help your argument. MikeWazowski (talk) 14:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Since you are tempting fate here, I am going to say this one more time - you are really going to want to pay attention this time. The very next time you add uncited information, you get reported. You have been skirting the bleeding edge of 3RR, and you labor under a false impression if you think you cannot be blocked for edit-warring, especially when you are simply wrong. You cannot add synthesis to articles. Please do not add it again; if you do, you will have only yourself to blame for the end results. Ask an admin. Ask two. You are are wrong - and this isn't one of those interpretions. You cannot cite it as an Actroid, and you personal opinion is not citable. Was that clear enough? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 22:56, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Definitely have to agree with Arcayne here, this isn't even close. Using personal and contentious analysis of a video does not provide encyclopedic content. If this is in fact relevant and true, then it shouldn't be too hard to find an actual source which supports your claim. MikeWazowski, you do not have consensus to add this material, please stop. --Leivick (talk) 23:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
You both (Arcayne and MikeWazowski) need to cool down a little and walk away from this for a while. I am also inclined to agree with Arcayne on the content issue. --John (talk) 23:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The real issue here is WP:TRIVIA, it really doesn't need to be mentioned as it is just a little montage of stock footage regarding robots, it bears no relation to the actual Actroid. --Leivick (talk) 23:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

His reasons[edit]

"In July 2006, another appearance was given to the robot. This model was built to look like its male co-creator, roboticist Hiroshi Ishiguro, and named Geminoid HI-1. Controlled by a motion-capture interface, Geminoid HI-1 can imitate Ishiguro's body and facial movements, and it can reproduce his voice in sync with his motion and posture. Ishiguro hopes to develop the robot's human-like presence to such a degree that he could use it to teach classes remotely, lecturing from home while the Geminoid interacts with his classes at Osaka University."

Why would he want to teach remotely? it doesn't make sense to me if hes too busy why be a teacher?. Pyrolord777 (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2010 (UTC)