Talk:Index of robotics articles/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Robotics (Rated List-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon Index of robotics articles/Archive1 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.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.


Hey Guys I found this link (talk) 14:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC) The article looks like a good faith edit, however it contains no information yet that could not be found in other articles. I am waiting for more to come, however I may have to put it up for AfD if no information is added in the next few days. -- Casmith 789 08:30, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

The whole point is to provide information that is in other articles - it's a "basic" reference aid, or more accurately, it's part of one... The collection presented on Lists of basic topics is a general reference tool intended to provide an outline of knowledge to make Wikipedia easier to use: its intended function is to cover all subject areas which are important enough or broad enough that lists of their basic topics are worthwhile. Holes in the coverage of the collection hamper its reliability as a general reference aid to help users find what they are looking for or familiarize them with the subject areas of interest to them. When visiting the (main page of the) collection they should confidently expect to be able to find at least something on every major subject area. Therefore, scant lists ("stubs") generally remain in the basic topics collection to provide 1) a starting point which presents at least the barest essential links on a subject to help point users in the right direction as an alternative to providing no assistance at all, 2) to establish a conventient place in a standard format for users to contribute links (saving them the trouble of starting such pages from scratch, which is more tedious than donating a link or two here or there), and 3) clearly show where expansion to the list collection is desired and expected. Keep in mind that the entire basic topic lists collection is a work in progress, and that any progress made is a good thing to be left in place as a foundation for others to build upon. For the above stated reasons, the addition of list stubs to Lists of basic topics is entirely acceptable and should be be encouraged. AfDs (nominations to "Articles for Deletion") of new basic topics lists are generally subject to "speedy keep", and such nominations are a blatant waste of time and effort on the part of the nominators. Building a brick wall is all the more difficult if someone removes bricks as you are adding them. A better approach would be to add a link or two every time you visited a less than complete list of basic topics. If everyone did that, the lists would get completed much more quickly, and in the meantime would be improved for the next user who came along after you. Think about that user. Sincerely, --The Transhumanist 23:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Rename proposal for this page and all the pages of the set this page belongs to[edit]

See the proposal at the Village pump

The Transhumanist 09:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Links moved from "See also" section of Robot[edit]

These links have been vetted several times at Robot, but the current WP:GAR review and upcoming peer review are going to require a lot fewer links. Rather than doing something rash, I think it makes sense just to transfer discussion to the proper venue, which is probably this page. Which of these links seems good for this list? - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 15:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


Research areas[edit]

Additional topics[edit]

- Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 15:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge with Glossary_of_robotics?[edit]

I found a Glossary_of_robotics page, and I started adding some terms, but I think it would be better if it managed to get merged into this page on the outline. - Phil (talk) 18:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Guidelines for outlines[edit]

Guidelines for the development of outlines are being drafted at Wikipedia:Outlines.

Your input and feedback is welcomed and encouraged.

The Transhumanist 00:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

The "History of" section needs links![edit]

Please add some relevant links to the history section.

Links can be found in the "History of" article for this subject, in the "History of" category for this subject, or in the corresponding navigation templates. Or you could search for topics on Google - most topics turn blue when added to Wikipedia as internal links.

The Transhumanist 00:31, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Rename of "Outline of robotics" to "List of robotics topics"[edit]

This article has been named Outline of robotics since March 2009. And before that it was Topic outline of robotics from October 2008. It was created Sept 26, 2006 as "List of basic robotics topics". Renaming it out of the blue to "List of robotics topics" after it has been called an outline and part of Wikipedia's Outline of Knowledge for over a year, is disruptive. And the rename was done without any consensus. The Transhumanist 22:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Oppose rename, and keep "Outline of robotics" as its name - per reasons posted above, and because the article is an outline rather than merely a list. The Transhumanist 22:31, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose rename : keep as List of - The OOK is little more than a personal project of The Transhumanist, who had agreed to not rename anymore articles until his project had established consensus globally for outlines. WP:OUTLINE has never had any consensus, and has recently been tagged as a failed/disputed policy. This article was originally a list, and lists are supported by policy and guidelines, and community consensus. In this case it is also a better name which describes the topic and allows more flexible organisation, not tied down to the WP:OUTINES style guide (which contradicts WP:MOS in several paces and encourages GFDL violations). The "staus quo" until the outline problem is solved is "list of". Verbal chat 07:07, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Voting should not be used to support such actions. Please work on gaining consensus. This is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia. No argument has been presented on why this should be an outline rather than a list. The argument that is has been an outline since a given date is weak. Please give a more reasoned argument that editors can understand.Bhtpbank (talk) 09:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Voting - evil No reason has been presented. As such, this is just a vote to win, as opposed to a discussion about moving. Thus, I oppose any move. Hipocrite (talk) 10:57, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree that voting is unhelpful here. It is past time to have a proper RfC to get the community's view of how "List of [topic]" or "Outline of [topic]" articles should be treated and where in the project they belong. WJBscribe (talk) 13:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)