Talk:RoboMower

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

[edit] Point of view

This article reads like a sales brochure.

I'm all for avoiding the burning of fossil fuels while cutting down the grass, but I don't see how the Robomower saves gasoline any more than the corded and uncorded electric mowers I have been using for well over 20 years. My research shows the Robomower was only introduced in the U.S. in 2000. Please rewrite this article in an encyclopedic tone.

  • The United Nations and the EPA do not prefer the Robomower over Black & Decker or Sunbeam or Neuton or any other electric, so statements about them seem inappropriate in this article.
  • What team of psychologists determined that Tiedeman is a genius?
  • Remove "fundamentally changing". When more than half of the population is using a robotic electric (or any electric) mower, I'll drink to that, and you can put that phrase back in, along with "massive tipping point".
  • It runs on batteries, right? Why doesn't the article use that word? I understand that a sales pitch might want to use "power pack" so the customer might buy the mower before realizing that it has to be charged, but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia article. How much does the mower weigh? How long to charge? How large an area can be mowed on one charge? How many of these are being sold compared to other electrics and gasoline mowers?
  • Even a fair sales pitch should mention the need to install wires in the yard.
  • "it is hoped the world will reduce ..." — Who hopes? Tiedeman? Then please say so. You hope? That is not suitable for an encyclopedia.

Lastly, consider merging this into Lawn_mower#Robotic_mowers or Autonomous robot. Chris the speller 18:37, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

The facts on the Robomower look good to me.
Power pack is the proper wording. Battery is too 20th century. We have moved beyond the word. Chris, is this better. Take a look at it.
This listing looks non bias. It has been cleaned up. The Robomower is a new invention just as the automobile was in 1886.
I have indented the above (unsigned) comments by Onenex1000. I just looked at the article on Roomba, and it discusses most of the points I asked for in this article, such as charging times and how to limit its area. It describes the batteries — yes, "batteries", as this encyclopedia calls them (there is a "Power pack" article, but it's science fiction). You might use that Roomba article as a model, although it is not a perfect example. I think in time you will agree that a good encyclopedia gives people the information they want, not the information you want them to have. The better you write an article, the less chance another editor will mess with it trying to improve it. To me, this article still looks more like it trying to sway people than to provide objective information. Chris the speller 03:41, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I completely agree with Chris the speller -- the article as written is a sales brochure, almost every sentence is trying to hawk the product. I'll take a shot at rewriting it if it's not cleaned up a bit more soon. It really is not an encyclopedia article. Bikeable 04:04, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
    • I've fixed it up. After removing the NPOV stuff, there's not much else in the article. I'll see if I can find some more referenes... -- Mikeblas 18:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The mower is called Robomow, not Robomower. I updated the page but I don't know how to update the title.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/o/b/Talk%7ERoboMower_93f0.html"