This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Robotics This article is within the scope of WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Robotics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RoboticsWikipedia:WikiProject RoboticsTemplate:WikiProject RoboticsRobotics ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

What actual features does the HitchBot have. It seems to have a lighty face that does things like hearts. But how does it work?76.198.56.253 (talk) 02:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC) http://www.hitchbot.me/hilfe/help/ Hitchbot has GPS and a 3G wireless http://hitchbotimg.blob.core.windows.net/img/PressRelease_07162014.pdf 76.198.56.253 (talk) 02:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC) http://hitchbotimg.blob.core.windows.net/img/hB%20Fact%20sheet_July2014.pdf 76.198.56.253 (talk) 02:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And I would like to know how hitchBOT managed to recharge its battery. Did it ask passersby to plug it in somewhere? Kelisi (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. That's been answered now. Kelisi (talk) 21:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Loved that line from one of the U.S. news articles. Gandydancer (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The "murder" of the Canadian robot in Philly has all the markings of an elaborate prank that has not yet fully played out. The location of the robot's remains are unknown. The only sources in the story are the creators of a popular YouTube prank series, and an unknown photographer who sent 1 picture of the robot's remains to a journalist. The same pranksters were the last people seen with the robot. It appears the media has been too quick to accept the story as it was handed to them. I think Wikipedia should be more cautious in accepting this narrative until there are some tangible evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.210.22 (talk) 04:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Some people here and on reddit have expressed concerns that the video is not real. (Some reddit comments: [1][2][3]). However, it shouldn't be removed yet (per Wikipedia's policies on original research). If someone can find a further source, that would be helpful. --Pokechu22 (talk) 05:40, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gizmodo updated the article and now questions whether the whole video is a prank, and whether it could actually be surveillance video.

Gizmodo says the video shows somebody kicking hitchbot, but it in fact it does not show what the person in the video is kicking, if anything. Removing a reference because it makes unverified claims is not original research, it's just critical reading.

If you are going to cite the video through an article, you have to find a better article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.210.22 (talk) 05:51, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the Gizmodo reference to accurately reflect the fact that the article now suggests the video might be a hoax. Also added a second source that questions the authenticity of the video. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.210.22 (talk) 06:19, August 4, 2015

Alright, thanks! Looks good. (On an unrelated note, please remember to sign your posts on a talk page with ~~~~. Thanks!) --Pokechu22 (talk) 06:25, 4 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence gives the date of the images as August 8 (which hasn't arrived yet), but says they were posted on August 5, which is a contradiction. Also, suggesting the images are evidence of the robot still being "alive" is misleading, as the robot's head is missing, and Gizmodo seems to indicate that the guys who found the robot were simply showing it to Kevin Smith before sending it back to its builders. Bms4880 (talk) 14:28, 6 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed the paragraph needs to be fixed or removed. First of all the word "alive" should not be in quotes because the word does not appear anywhere in the referenced article. Also the robot is not operational, much less "alive". Its head, tablet, and electronics are all gone. 24.130.210.22 (talk) 08:53, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also changing the section title to "Rumored Destruction" was not justified. 24.130.210.22 (talk) 09:18, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to fix the Kevin Smith edits. But really the whole Destruction section needs to be simplified and updated with the latest information.24.130.210.22 (talk) 09:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]