Talk:Robot combat

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Robot combat article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

Archives

Index

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Unverified Claims?

The 'unverified claims' tag added to the Robot Combat page says to look to the 'talk' section for guidance, but there is no guidance here. I would appreciate either guidance or the removal of the tag.Run Amok (talk) 23:24, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, nine new references are in place to support the alleged unverified claims. I'm removing the tags based on these new references. If teh support is inadequate, I would appreciate some guidance rather than just the return of the flags, please.Run Amok (talk) 16:56, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A sport?

Can robot combat be considered a sport?

--Fixuture (talk) 05:03, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it could be classified as either an e-sport or a motorsport, battlebots.com calls it a 'Robot Fighting Sport' JeffUK (talk) 21:19, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most people involved consider it a sport. I don't know how much weight that carries, though. ShadowLeopardBeetleweightGuy (talk) 16:31, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Link not broken but content no longer present at the destination

The link present for the following text leads to an orphaned article. Yes I could just remove it but I thought I'd raise it via here instead in case anyone had a better link or disagreed.

The sixth season of BattleBots in 2015 failed to explicitly exclude entanglement devices, which resulted in at least one controversial decision.

DNSLOC (talk) 07:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it. Discussing a single fight is too specific for the general page on the sport. This could be placed on the Battlebots page. LukeSurl^{t c} 11:47, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hyper Heavyweights and above

Including these weight classes kind of raises questions that aren't really addressed anywhere in the article. I know that Chinkilla is an Ultra Heavyweight which should at least be mentioned in that sub-article, but has there been an existence of robots or competitions that involve the Hyper Heavyweight / Tonweight and Super Tonweight classes? If not I strongly feel it should be noted. 2603:7000:6A00:23F7:74C6:380D:50B2:4FBE (talk) 18:08, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 November 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 05:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Robot combat → Robot combat competition – Robot combat should possibly be turned into a DAB page that also directs people to military robot. Right now, the name is too vague and does not make clear that this is a hobbyist activity. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:42, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. In a private window I googled "Robot combat" -wikipedia, and literally every single hit on the first 7 pages was related to the topic of this article (I stopped looking at that point). Books searches weren't so clear, but of those books where the phrase got more than just a passing mention and where I could determine the context from what I was able to see on the first pages of search, most but not the absolute majority were about the topic of this article. The second most common topic was theoretical or fictional combat between humanoid robots (either autonomous, AI or human-controlled). Actual military robots didn't get a look in. Taken together, it seems clear to me that this article is the primary topic and the hatnote suffices for people seeking other uses. Thryduulf (talk) 02:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep since article titles are supposed to be concise. We can add a "Not to be confused with" at the top of the article. Urchincrawler (talk) 07:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Titles are supposed to be concise until they become vague. I believe that without the "competition" it would be too vague and could refer to any combat performed by a robot, rather than combat between robots. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It could in theory refer to other things, but in practice there is an overwhelming primary topic for the term "robot combat" and the hatnote takes people looking for other topics to those articles. This is no different to thousands of other article titles that are more concise than required to remove all potential ambiguity or vagueness. Thryduulf (talk) 12:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the existing title is concise and is wildly considered a commonname for this topic. The argument that it is vague because it does not require more clarification that it is a hobby is not convincing enough for me. TiggerJay (talk) 02:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.