Jump to content

Talk:Diving safety

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Supervisor

[edit]

Needs explanation of the role of the supervisor in professional diving safety · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:50, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changed importance rating

[edit]

Changed to high importance for WikiProject Underwater diving. If anyone disagrees, ping me to discuss. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 15:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

B-class review

[edit]

B
  1. The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations.
    It has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged is cited. Any format of inline citation is acceptable: the use of <ref> tags and citation templates such as {{cite web}} is optional.
    Needs a few more refs.There are still a few minor unreferenced statements remaining, but good enough for B-class. checkY
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
    It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.
    As far as I can tell, yes.checkY
  3. The article has a defined structure.
    Content should be organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind.
    Structure looks good. checkY
  4. The article is reasonably well-written.
    The prose contains no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly, but it does not need to be "brilliant". The Manual of Style does not need to be followed rigorously.,br/>Looks good to me. checkY
  5. The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.
    Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams, an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.
    Reasonable number of images. More would be nice if they can be found, but good enough. checkY
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way.
    It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.,br/>Looks OK. There is technical language as it is a technical topi. If anyone feels that mor clarification is neede, let me know where. checkY

Not quite yet. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:57, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting to B-classs. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article size

[edit]

Article is quite big, and is mostly a set of summary sections based on main and related articles, so there is not much that could be split off, and there are still aspects insufficiently discussed. It may be possible to pare down a few of the larger sections without losing too much information which should be in the article. Please discuss here and ping me before removing significant content. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]