Template talk:Underwater diving

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Template:Underwater diving/new was copied or moved into Template:Underwater diving with this edit on 1 November 2019. 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.

Additions

I am starting to get the sense that this is going to be one big template before too long... --Legis (talk - contribs) 16:35, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Catergory?

I don't think that Hyperbaric medicine is a diving hazard. Maybe a new category in the template should be created with a subject of 'Related' or something like that. UteFan16 (talk) 23:21, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After not receiving and any feedback I went ahead and added the categoy. UteFan16 (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another new category?

A category for diving procedures would be useful. This could include Decompression (diving), Diver rescue, Underwater searches, Underwater navigation, Underwater search and recovery, Underwater archaeology, Diver communications, Underwater surveys, inspection and testing etc. At a stretch these could go under "Related", but there are enough procedural aspects that a separate category is justifiable, Related should stay, as there will be the odd tenuous connection like Hyperbaric medicine that would fit there best. Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 11:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No comment after a month. I will assume no opposition and go ahead. Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 10:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reorganisation of underwater diving navboxes

I want to try to rationalise the main and sub-navboxes to reduce redundancy and make finding an article a bit easier. If anyone has ideas of how to do this efficiently, please let me know. Otherwise I plan to progress by trying things out and see what works. Please point out any obvious errors or inconsistencies. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 15:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List moved to Template:Underwater diving/new · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 14:59, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The new template is roughly up to date - more so than the old one, anyway - and as far as I can tell it is working correctly and ready to deploy. I propose to copy it over the old one if no-one can come up with a reason not to do it. There may be errors and omissions or details that can be improved. Those should be fixable. Please let me know if you spot them. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 14:16, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done, running, and tweaked a fair amount. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 10:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links produced by the template

wbm1058, you recently created a redirect from Solution (underwater diving) to Solution, and replaced the link in this template with the redirect, with an edit summary this template is link-spamming "What links here". I am not sure whether I understand the problem you were addressing, and it is not clear to me whether this is a solution (pun unfortunately unavoidable). What I do see is that if this is a real problem it will probably occur again and become more frequent as the encyclopedia grows, so it is worth looking into how effective your solution might be, and possibly into alternatives, so could you please explain the problem, and how this measure is a solution, taking into account any side effects it may have. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 17:11, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Wbm1058#Solution, Wikipedia talk:On Wikipedia, solutions are mixtures and nothing else#It's fine to use the meaning of solution to a problem and Talk:Solution#Rename this article to Solution (chemistry) as well as my recent edit history. The template was generating a lot of false-positive links and I did that, for the short term, to clear up the link fog to make my search for the "solution selling" links go quicker. – Best, wbm1058 (talk) 17: 50, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

wbm1058, I think I see your point. It is not the problem I was expecting, but a real problem nonetheless. I basically agree with the effort to clean up the mislinking of "business solutions" to chemical solutions, and as far as I know, all links to solution from diving related articles are related to chemical solutions, mostly of gases in body tissues, in case you were wondering, as that is central to decompression theory. I deal with an IT supplier called Complete Office Solutions, and the name always makes me think of ink... Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:13, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. On Wikipedia I tend to expect "link spam" to refer to external links, and "overlinking" when referring to unnecessary links on words that shouldn't need clarification in context, but maybe your experience differs. Anyway this is not really either. I wish you well on your link correction project, and will keep a lookout for examples, and fix any I notice. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 06:32, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Split out dive sites?

I am considering splitting out the list of recreational dive sites in the same way as underwater divers, and just keeping the generic articles as a summary, for a similar reason. Recreational dive sites are not about diving as an activity, they are instances of places where the activity occurs, in a similar way to how divers are instances of people who dive, not about the activity of diving, and both categories are very open ended, and will constantly grow, whereas articles about diving per se are relatively closely circumscribed. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 05:36, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss:

Recreational dive sites now all in separate navbox, {{Recreational dive sites}}, along with a whole lot more that were not previously listed, so I will now remove the site and specific region listings from the main navbox. Some overlap will remain. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 15:42, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]