Talk:RoboBee: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:56, 5 May 2013

Robotics Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A news item involving RoboBee was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 5 May 2013.

Wikipedia

Reads like an advertisement?

Just starting a thread to discuss the "reads like an advertisement" tag that another editor added recently. My take: Maybe there's a "slightly promotional tone" (per the ES), but I don't think it's an NPOV problem. The prose conveys the excitement of the achievement but doesn't promote anything else. Maybe a tweak needed but that's it. Great article and fascinating topic. --Middle 8 (talk) 03:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I marked two sections with {{news release}} template because they are really news-like. --PICAWN (talk) 09:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the tagger - the excessive use of a personal tone, and the lack of simple factual information, such as when did the research start? who else does this kind of research? What other discoveries led to the device? What is the maximum flight duration? Are there limitations due to fatigue for cycling of the mtaerial that makes up the wing? Can they, in theory, fly outdoors? 46.115.43.77 (talk) 09:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other sources

Even 5-6 years ago in some high tech studying documentaries were briefly telling that Pentagon related labs were working on bee sized nano flying robots. But this news with Harvard was surprising thing to see. Orgio89 (talk) 07:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 I marked two sections with {{tl|news release}} template because they are really news-like. --[[User:PICAWN|PICAWN]] ([[User talk:PICAWN|talk]]) 09:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
-: I agree with the tagger - the excessive use of a personal tone, and the lack of simple factual information, such as when did the research start? who else does this kind of research? What other discoveries led to the device? What is the maximum flight duration? Are there limitations due to fatigue for cycling of the mtaerial that makes up the wing? Can they, in theory, fly outdoors?
+: I agree with the tagger - the excessive use of a personal tone, and the lack of simple factual information, such as when did the research start? who else does this kind of research? What other discoveries led to the device? What is the maximum flight duration? Are there limitations due to fatigue for cycling of the mtaerial that makes up the wing? Can they, in theory, fly outdoors? [[Special:Contributions/46.115.43.77|46.115.43.77]] ([[User talk:46.115.43.77|talk]]) 09:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 ==Other sources==