Talk:Recreational dive sites
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from Scuba diving quarry was copied or moved into Recreational dive sites with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Purpose
editThis article was created to provide a way to tie together the scattered dive site articles in Wikipedia, which so far have been connected mainly by Category:Underwater diving sites. Exactly how this should best be done will no doubt develop with time, so if anyone has ideas, lets have them. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:31, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Idea for Dive sites of unique or exceptional interest section
editWhilst a lot of the text in this article is good, the lists under the section 'Dive sites of unique or exceptional interest' feel a) a bit to much like a list that do not help the reader understand what it is that makes them unique / exceptional; b) Include items that I would not have thought passed a unique/exceptional test (like the Stanegarth - whose only real claim to fame I am aware of is that I recall it being described as the largest boat sunk in inland waters in the UK ... though that isn't in the article), and others that have links to pages that don't (yet) exist even as stubs, which may or may not be noteworthy, but the reader is not left any the wiser; and c) does not include others that I would have expected to find - my example was SS Thistlegorm (now added) due to Coustou linkage, cargo condition and enduring appeal (on most top 10 wreck lists I have seen in pretty reputable books for example). Great blue hole in Belize might be another.
What I was wondering was whether we should refactor that section so that it has a table with the name/link, and 1-3 sentences on what makes that item unique or exceptional. Maybe also the region if that doesn't get too cluttered, since it would allow sorting by region. Not sure on citations if they simply repeat what is on the detail articles, but I would have thought that if they are required to support the basis for it being unique or exceptional then they should be included here. This article could then maybe be backed up by other articles that could handle longer lists if they are still judged useful - though could also be a link to other wikimedia vehicles that are better suited to guidebook type material. Can mock this up if thought it might have some mileage. Thoughts? Greg (talk) 11:27, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Easiest option is probably just to collect and sort links to all articles about recreational dive sites on Wikipedia, fairly broadly construed, until each section is worth splitting off, leaving a summary. Wikivoyage has some good dive guides and some not so good. Linking to them can be a problem. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 13:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
- I am going to try to reduce or eliminate the lists and tables of examples and instead link to the equivalent list section in Outline of recreational dive sites. This may take some time. Eventually this should leave the article only describing the types of dive sites in general terms, with links to the articles describing related skill sets, certification, and lists of the sites in each class. Pinging @GregoryPye: in case you have suggestions. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)