Talk:Android

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Android is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, an attempt to standardise coverage of Robotics. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article. Feel free to add your name to the participants list and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Ambiguity & Androids in FIction sections need cleanup

These sections contain several duplicative entries. Jon 18:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I will try to clean up the Ambiguity section in the next few weeks. Can we agree to limit the lists of fictional androids to 4 or 5 per section? There is a seperate article for that after all, the list of fictional robots. Robotman1974 19:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with Bio-Androids

I vote no. -- Macmelvino 02:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I also vote no, in fact I feel more android sections should exist for the variations on the main theme such as nanobot (liquid metal) androids and other vartiations.

  • I vote yes. Seeing as how all these android variations are purely fictional, and can only have fictional references, they hardly merit seperate articles. The future existence of Bio-Androids and Nanobots is also far from certain, whereas work is being done already to produce electromechanical androids. I think it will suffice that the other types be mentioned as variations of fictional androids within a single article. Robotman1974 06:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Also vote yes. Even if they exist, bio android are only a variation of androids. And about anonymous comment, nanorobots also would merge, but that doesn't change my opinnion.

—Nethac DIU, would never stop to talk here—
20:19, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

  • I also would have to vote yes. Radagast83 15:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
I have merged Bio Android into this article. After more than 5 weeks, the votes were 3 merge and 2 don't merge. No convincing arguements were given against the merge. Also, I have removed some entries from the "Androids in fiction" section of this article as they were duplicated in what is now the "Bio androids" section. Robotman1974 19:30, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Someone must make a note somewhere that "Robot" in Polish means SLAVE. In the years since RUR was written, the word ROBOT has lost the meaning SLAVE, and now refers to a machine created to do work, and not an artificial man.

I vote no because I think bioandroids(or any kind of biorobot) are cyborgs. I say that becase I actually work with cybernics.

[edit] Metropolis

Just curious, but why doesn't Metropolis (film) get a nod in the fiction section? As far as I know, it is the first mention of android (rather, gynoid) in film; it's pretty much where the idea came from.

192.153.24.130 19:32, 21 September 2006 (UTC)-

[edit] Usage of the term/notion of "Android"

I have the Online Etymological Dictionary referencing but not actually citing a usage of "Android" from 1727. It also translates (I think) that usuage as meaning "automaton resembling a human being." This could be significant to understanding from where this usage much earlier than the one offered in the wiki-article comes. Does anyone know where this usage is citable, and whether it occurs any other time(s) between then and the 1880s? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PhilosophyMonkey (talk • contribs) 18:17, 25 November 2006.


Yes - I just found an 1883 US patent for "Androides or Automation Shoe Factory" where the "Androides" are mechanical factory workers with human appearance. This predates Villiers' 1886 novel L'Ève future. See [1] Cbaer 17:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lists

The fiction lists in this article need to be cut down or removed entirely IMHO. There are already separate articles for collecting such info, such as List of fictional robots and androids. Robotman1974 17:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll agree with this, provisionally: let's leave here any androids that can be considered in some way seminal or pivotal, such as Maria, Otho, Data, and the humanoid Cylons.BobGreenwade 18:07, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Androïd was a current word in French in the 18th century. There is for instance an article in Diderot and d'Alembert's Encyclopedia with the heading Androïd, signed by Diderot himself, that discusses Vaucanson's automatons. Knutel 10:46, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Picture

Hey just a thought, would anyone have an objection if the picture of Jude Law was changed to one of Data from Star Trek the Next Generation? The trivia section allready lists him as probably the most famous android in fiction and to be fair Jude Law's character is hardly as well known or recognisable as an android. --150.101.103.208 06:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with that. ConnertheCat 22:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] When is an android not an android?

Is it when it's a Humanoid robot? Merge anyone? Or am I missing something? Tree Kittens 07:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

An android is a completely artificial autonomous robot that resembles a human/humanoid. Ran4 (talk) 21:36, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] He/She vs It

Eh...

I have issue with use of the term "he" or "she" when describing androids. The paragraphs concerning the EveR series make use of "her" a number of times, and, for me, really give of a strong POV vibe. I'd rather not make the change to make it a lot less NPOV in case some consensus had been reached previously of which I am not aware, but I thought I'd bring it up anyways. Magaroja 17:35, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree, as of yet there is no consensus regarding gender use in robotics. "it" should be used instead.Ran4 (talk) 21:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Change of direction for this article

Given the rapid progress in making real androids, should this article now focus on them, and move fictional androids to their own separate article? There is certainly enough information about current projects to make a full article on its own. Damburger 06:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


I'd vote hell no —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.173.89.190 (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Androids are not necessarily robots

The article states flatly that an android is a sort of robot. This isn't correct. Androids can be robots, but they don't have to be.

A robot, as the term is usually used, implies the ability to sense and respond to its environment. Early android makers created elaborate clockwork dolls that imitated human beings wonderfully but were (being clockwork) completely oblivious to their environment. 4.246.245.97 (talk) 04:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)