Talk:Automated guided vehicle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

edits at Automated Guided Vehicle[edit]

(copied at the Jaymarsound's talk page) Hi Jaymarsound, we need all the new editors we can get on robotics articles, but we generally discuss things on the talk page when any significant changes are made, because many people are watching robotics articles, and it will save us all some time if we know what's going on. Are you the same guy as 70.239.154.166? The end result of the edits is that many of the video links are gone. Is that a good thing, and why? - Dan Dank55 (talk) 17:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I reverted those changes because they included deletion of references to sources. -- SEWilco (talk) 17:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I didn't notice that, thanks SEWilco. But that left a rejected image, so I reverted the 3 anon edits also, which restores the video links...despite the fact that I'm generally in favor of deleting video links on robotics articles unless they really illustrate something that can't be seen without the video. It's not a strong opinion, it would just be really nice not to have to patrol things that take a long time to watch, and allowing non-essential video is an open invitation to commercial spammers...as if we don't have enough already. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 18:08, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I simply haven't taken the time to look at the videos to see if they are relevant. They might show something encyclopedic, although I doubt they all do. -- SEWilco (talk) 18:22, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm on it, back soon. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, I've looked at all the videos. One is produced by HK, the last is Snox, all the rest are Egemin. All but one are AGVs on YouTube, and although I have no direct experience with AGVs, it seems to me that there is nothing particularly special about that selection of videos. I have asked an admin for links to Wikipedia video policy...I can't find it anywhere...but I believe admins would have problems with the very promotional nature of all the videos. Does any one have an objection to replacing all the videos with a link to an AGV search on YouTube? It's AGVs on YouTube . - Dan Dank55 (talk) 22:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Just delete the entire YouTube videos section, as anyone who wants to search for images on a site will go to that site and do the search. -- SEWilco (talk) 06:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Done, and added link to YouTube. There were 3 videos that were not links to YouTube, but those videos could always be added on YouTube. Does anyone think that we should use a video for something that could be just as well demonstrated with 1-3 images? Images are a lot easier to patrol, are less likely to be used to advertise, are a lot more "encyclopedic", and lower bandwidth at both ends. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 23:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)



(im new to wikipedia and would like to make a suggestion) I think that the section about steering could be improved with the mention of "ackerman steering principle" instead of "steered wheel control AGV" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.98.6.164 (talk) 13:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Theme Parks[edit]

Trying to remove section about Walt Disney World. This is an advertisement and the vehicles are people movers and do not pertain to industrial settings like the rest of the article does. This section does not belong. Every time I remove it, my changes are reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.235.131.34 (talk) 14:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

As the one who put it on there, I am biased. However, it is needed because it is a use of the technology and AGV's in total that is becoming more and more prevalent. If you want to help rewrite it so that it includes more, that's fine. But in my opinion, it is a very necessarily part of the article, because of how much it is being used, the fact that it's growing in use, and gives many uninformed readers a way to connect to something they do know. Elisfkc (talk) 02:47, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

-By that logic, then smart cars should be included here. Still don't think passenger vehicles pertain whatsoever to this. Why not move it to sections of wikipedia that discuss automated passenger vehicles? Then it is represented and doesn't dilute the purpose of the AGVs page and make it a free for all for every driverless automobile or robot manufacturer to write about what their company is doing in a non-industrial setting. Also note that other companies have had their mentioned names removed permanently and had them noted as spam, so not sure why you think it is not advertising to list company name and ride names. Total advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.235.131.34 (talk) 19:37, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Elisfkc, since you've stopped responding, I went ahead and removed your advertisements. No one else has their jobs listed in this page, so why should you? Everyone else's photo credits are even removed when they add them. It is not right to use your company name when no other company can and everyone else's gets instantly removed as advertising. Please at least respect this change, since it is on par with how every other company is forced to write entries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.235.131.34 (talk) 11:16, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I've been super busy with school. First off, thank you for the current version, where it still includes AGV's in theme parks. I understand you don't think they need to be there, but the vehicles used in theme parks are defined by the companies that build them, and almost everyone else as AGVs. So, I believe that they are AGV's.

Second, I do not currently work for The Walt Disney Company, nor have I ever worked for The Walt Disney Company. I am honored that you think that I do work there, as my dream job is to work for them as an Engineer in the theme parks, and I am also a huge fan of the company, which may be why it came off as an ad. I thought that including SeaWorld would help make it be less of an ad, but I understand why it may have still seemed like one. The only thing I feel needs to go back in the article is the reference from Modern Marvels. I have put it back in there, with a couple other edits (such as putting back in the Universe of Energy and Tower of Terror), because I feel it doesn't hurt to have an extra reference and the other edits were spots where it seemed clearly need the original link to the other article. Elisfkc (talk) 20:02, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Automated guided vehicle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:03, 22 October 2016 (UTC)