Talk:Automated species identification
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Automated species identification article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Section on applications ?
editPerhaps a section on applications is useful; ie include robotic weeding, see ie http://www.visionweeding.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.130.166.67 (talk) 11:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Automated species identification. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070302185826/http://www.informatik.uni-bonn.de:80/projects/ABIS/ to http://www.informatik.uni-bonn.de/projects/ABIS
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:06, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
89.103.133.252 could you explain your edit? You used no WP:EDITSUMMARY. It appears you are saying the two FlowerChecker apps are the same. That may be true. I don't know. DoebLoggs didn't understand due to the lack of edit summary. Invasive Spices (talk) 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @Invasive Spices: for pinging. The rationale of my rollback is that I've seen an unexplained removal of a piece of content that seemed to me fully appropriate and an addition that sounded a bit redundant (I may have been wrong on that, however). Nonetheless, I'm not an expert of the matter and, indeed, a few words in the edit summary would have been very helpful. --DoebLoggs (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, the intended purpose of the edit was to update the information about FlowerChecker that is now incorrect on the page. The FlowerChecker is a company that offers two services - The Flowerchecker app, which uses real botanists for plant identification and thus shouldn't be listed on the page, in my opinion. The second product is Plant.id which is API for automated plant recognition. Previously there was a FlowerChecker bot, but this service is no longer functional. For this reason, I wanted to remove the information about the FlowerChecker bot, but I wanted to keep the information that Plant.id is developed by Flowerchecker company and uses pictures from the FlowerChecker app. 89.103.134.172 (talk) 07:58, 9 July 2022 (UTC)