![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The article totally omits any information on what frequencies are used for drone control. Could someone add this, at least for civilian UAVs? Military UAV control frequencies are likely secret, but I would think some information is available about what part of the radio spectrum is used. Thanks. -- Chetvorno TALK 21:44, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Regarding this revert by BilCat of changes here and there from "unmanned" to "uncrewed"... In general, Wikipedia prefers gender-neutral language ( MOS:S/HE), and I've been changing a lot of "unmanned" to "uncrewed" and "human" all over the encyclopedia. I know "unmanned aerial vehicle" is a common term in the defense industry, though "drone" is probably more common among members of the public. NASA's style guide now prefers gender-neutral terms like "human spaceflight" and "unpiloted" over "manned", except for proper nouns. I did a search online, and "uncrewed aerial vehicle" is certainly a term that is in general use. I wasn't quite ready to rename this article, but it seems like "uncrewed aerial vehicle" should be at least mentioned in the intro as an alternate term. I also didn't want to obliterate all references to unmanned anything from this article, but I assumed that Wikipedia when writing in its own voice should use "uncrewed" in this article as we do in other articles where we use "human", "uncrewed", "unstaffed", or "autonomous". What do you, BilCat, and other editors think about these two things? -- Beland ( talk) 20:20, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Okey, I've made the small changes mentioned above, and I don't plan on making any further changes, if everyone's happy with what's there now. -- Beland ( talk) 23:59, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The only gender-neutral definition for UAV that I have seen in reliable sources is the awkward Uninhabited aerial vehicle, which has been a WP redirect since 2005. 107.77.203.231 ( talk) 02:59, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Not sure why Delivery drone, Agricultural drone, Autonomous spaceport drone ship, Miniature UAV, Micro air vehicle are not incorporated in the article better as they have they own articles, and maybe in Template:Mobile robots.
There are also Biomimetic drones (Bionic bird deluxe is one example). 95.178.150.90 ( talk) 20:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
The paragraph on transport drones is totally outdated. If I see right (I see but I can't believe it) the most recent reference is from 2018. That's in regards to such a quickly developing industry an eternity. Just look for yourselves what Yahoo has to say on a company specialised in delivery drones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htcrlkn2Eq4 Don Aslan ( talk) 10:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Why reverting names? Few people say UACV daily. And many drones are not for any military use.
~~~~
as this will add your sig at the end so we know who you are.A long list of wing types has been added. When I reverted, it was restored. I see nothing specific to UAVs in the list, it is pretty much a comprehensive list for all aerodynes. It is not significant to UAVs just because some academic squeezed a paper on UAVs out of it. It need to be deleted. Does anybody have a problem with that? — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 16:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
~~~~
. This adds your sig to the end of your post and helps other users to follow who is talking about what. — Cheers,
Steelpillow (
Talk)
11:02, 22 May 2021 (UTC)I meant that those are the reasons that make me sure to add those classifications, I didn't mean that I want to continue this cycle. So I suggest you add those classifications to this discussion so that other interested editors can vote for them. Saviorof ( talk) 11:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
It would be great if you include all three classifications that I have suggested. Saviorof ( talk) 11:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Besides, if that list is just what you guys are disagreeing with, please re-include other editions I made. Saviorof ( talk) 11:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
The section on Regulation of unmanned aerial vehicles clutters up the contents and duplicates much of the dedicated article on the topic. Does anybody have any objections if I drastically cut it back to the main article link and a paragraph or two? — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 15:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
I've removed this text from Phantom (UAV) where it didn't belong, perhaps parts of it may be useful additions to this article:
Pieceofmetalwork ( talk) 11:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
References
The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. RM withdrawn. Noting that there is a strong opposition to the RM due to WP:NATDAB concerns, which the nominator acknowledged. ( closed by non-admin page mover) — CX Zoom[he/him] ( let's talk • { C• X}) 18:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Unmanned aerial vehicle → Drone (unmanned aerial vehicle) – 'Drone' is the WP:COMMONNAME for unmanned aerial vehicles, and is therefore what people will search for when looking for this page. Nevertheless it is not unambiguous, so (unmanned aerial vehicle) should be kept per WP:NATURAL A.D.Hope ( talk) 18:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Bnontn89 ( talk) 17:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
"to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB"(emphasis mine with the italicizing of the text). That Wikipedia link points to the section on self-published sources within Wikipedia's verifiability policy. In that section, it states that self-published material is
"largely not acceptable as sources"and due to the fact that
"[a]nyone can create a personal web page, self-publish a book, or claim to be an expert."However, this section also states that
"[s]elf-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications"(emphasis not mine; this was emphasized in the policy page text). This is what the conflict of interest guideline text that you quoted refers to.
References
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
"UAVs are real-time systems that require high-frequency to changing sensor data."
high-frequency what? I suspect it's intended to convey that the system must respond quickly to sensor data, but the writer's sense of drama has overtaken his need to convey actual information. or else it's a typo.
beyond this point, I found the article increasingly badly written, with a jargonistic use of nouns-as-verbs & so on.
duncanrmi ( talk) 18:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 9 December 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Makuraren (
article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Makuraren ( talk) 13:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Does it really make sense to combine $50 quadcopters with $1B military drones in the same article like they're equivalent? They're massively different things and much of what applies to one is irrelevant for the other. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 20:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Suggest using Uncrewed instead of Unmanned. 23.162.40.96 ( talk) 00:47, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
[a]rticle titles are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject.You will need to demonstrate that "uncrewed aerial vehicle" has replaced "unmanned aerial vehicle" in common usage for the topic to have much hope in changing the name of this article. Donald Albury 01:33, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
The article totally omits any information on what frequencies are used for drone control. Could someone add this, at least for civilian UAVs? Military UAV control frequencies are likely secret, but I would think some information is available about what part of the radio spectrum is used. Thanks. -- Chetvorno TALK 21:44, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Regarding this revert by BilCat of changes here and there from "unmanned" to "uncrewed"... In general, Wikipedia prefers gender-neutral language ( MOS:S/HE), and I've been changing a lot of "unmanned" to "uncrewed" and "human" all over the encyclopedia. I know "unmanned aerial vehicle" is a common term in the defense industry, though "drone" is probably more common among members of the public. NASA's style guide now prefers gender-neutral terms like "human spaceflight" and "unpiloted" over "manned", except for proper nouns. I did a search online, and "uncrewed aerial vehicle" is certainly a term that is in general use. I wasn't quite ready to rename this article, but it seems like "uncrewed aerial vehicle" should be at least mentioned in the intro as an alternate term. I also didn't want to obliterate all references to unmanned anything from this article, but I assumed that Wikipedia when writing in its own voice should use "uncrewed" in this article as we do in other articles where we use "human", "uncrewed", "unstaffed", or "autonomous". What do you, BilCat, and other editors think about these two things? -- Beland ( talk) 20:20, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Okey, I've made the small changes mentioned above, and I don't plan on making any further changes, if everyone's happy with what's there now. -- Beland ( talk) 23:59, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
The only gender-neutral definition for UAV that I have seen in reliable sources is the awkward Uninhabited aerial vehicle, which has been a WP redirect since 2005. 107.77.203.231 ( talk) 02:59, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Not sure why Delivery drone, Agricultural drone, Autonomous spaceport drone ship, Miniature UAV, Micro air vehicle are not incorporated in the article better as they have they own articles, and maybe in Template:Mobile robots.
There are also Biomimetic drones (Bionic bird deluxe is one example). 95.178.150.90 ( talk) 20:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
The paragraph on transport drones is totally outdated. If I see right (I see but I can't believe it) the most recent reference is from 2018. That's in regards to such a quickly developing industry an eternity. Just look for yourselves what Yahoo has to say on a company specialised in delivery drones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htcrlkn2Eq4 Don Aslan ( talk) 10:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Why reverting names? Few people say UACV daily. And many drones are not for any military use.
~~~~
as this will add your sig at the end so we know who you are.A long list of wing types has been added. When I reverted, it was restored. I see nothing specific to UAVs in the list, it is pretty much a comprehensive list for all aerodynes. It is not significant to UAVs just because some academic squeezed a paper on UAVs out of it. It need to be deleted. Does anybody have a problem with that? — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 16:56, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
~~~~
. This adds your sig to the end of your post and helps other users to follow who is talking about what. — Cheers,
Steelpillow (
Talk)
11:02, 22 May 2021 (UTC)I meant that those are the reasons that make me sure to add those classifications, I didn't mean that I want to continue this cycle. So I suggest you add those classifications to this discussion so that other interested editors can vote for them. Saviorof ( talk) 11:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
It would be great if you include all three classifications that I have suggested. Saviorof ( talk) 11:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Besides, if that list is just what you guys are disagreeing with, please re-include other editions I made. Saviorof ( talk) 11:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
The section on Regulation of unmanned aerial vehicles clutters up the contents and duplicates much of the dedicated article on the topic. Does anybody have any objections if I drastically cut it back to the main article link and a paragraph or two? — Cheers, Steelpillow ( Talk) 15:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
I've removed this text from Phantom (UAV) where it didn't belong, perhaps parts of it may be useful additions to this article:
Pieceofmetalwork ( talk) 11:22, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
References
The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. RM withdrawn. Noting that there is a strong opposition to the RM due to WP:NATDAB concerns, which the nominator acknowledged. ( closed by non-admin page mover) — CX Zoom[he/him] ( let's talk • { C• X}) 18:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Unmanned aerial vehicle → Drone (unmanned aerial vehicle) – 'Drone' is the WP:COMMONNAME for unmanned aerial vehicles, and is therefore what people will search for when looking for this page. Nevertheless it is not unambiguous, so (unmanned aerial vehicle) should be kept per WP:NATURAL A.D.Hope ( talk) 18:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
Bnontn89 ( talk) 17:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
"to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB"(emphasis mine with the italicizing of the text). That Wikipedia link points to the section on self-published sources within Wikipedia's verifiability policy. In that section, it states that self-published material is
"largely not acceptable as sources"and due to the fact that
"[a]nyone can create a personal web page, self-publish a book, or claim to be an expert."However, this section also states that
"[s]elf-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications"(emphasis not mine; this was emphasized in the policy page text). This is what the conflict of interest guideline text that you quoted refers to.
References
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
"UAVs are real-time systems that require high-frequency to changing sensor data."
high-frequency what? I suspect it's intended to convey that the system must respond quickly to sensor data, but the writer's sense of drama has overtaken his need to convey actual information. or else it's a typo.
beyond this point, I found the article increasingly badly written, with a jargonistic use of nouns-as-verbs & so on.
duncanrmi ( talk) 18:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 9 December 2023. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Makuraren (
article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Makuraren ( talk) 13:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
Does it really make sense to combine $50 quadcopters with $1B military drones in the same article like they're equivalent? They're massively different things and much of what applies to one is irrelevant for the other. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 20:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
Suggest using Uncrewed instead of Unmanned. 23.162.40.96 ( talk) 00:47, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
[a]rticle titles are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject.You will need to demonstrate that "uncrewed aerial vehicle" has replaced "unmanned aerial vehicle" in common usage for the topic to have much hope in changing the name of this article. Donald Albury 01:33, 24 November 2023 (UTC)