Talk:Solo diving

Slow tweaking

Pbsouthwood, the section title made me think of this song, admittedly for no good reason, except perhaps that it's 3:00 pm here and getting closer to Happy Hour. My one step at a time approach to editing allows collaborators a chance to review what I've done so they can make corrections - such as my inadvertent use of American English where it shouldn't be, or if I inadvertently screwed something up to the point it inspires you to wanna catch a rabbit. If the latter happens, just click on the Slow Dancin' music and relax. It's all good - nothing is permanent on WP. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 20:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Sure, no problem, but the bit about catching a rabbit escapes me. I assume that is regional idiom. Oddly enough, Google didn't help, and just got links on actually catching rabbits. Cheers, · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 03:32, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

😂 It was just silliness that began as an inside joke. I was on-location in Missouri with my late husband (cowboy roper) having dinner at a Mexican restaurant with two USF&WS Special Agents, one of whom had been working undercover in a life-threatening sting operation that resulted in the capture of a ring of paddlefish poachers. We were planning the final stages of reenacting the night poaching scene and arrest, so our thoughts were quite focused on the topic when my beloved's face turned red, red after eating a chip dipped in salsa. He blurted out, Whooo-weee, that sauce will make you wanna catch a rabbit!! We broke out laughing. For me, it invoked an image similar to this, so it's nothing more than a silly hyperbole I use from time to time. ^{Atsme✍🏻📧} 16:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Solo diving/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: No Great Shaker (talk · contribs) 14:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

As this is the oldest on the GAN page, I'll take it on. I've no time just now but will start reading it probably tomorrow. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Better late than never. Have fun, and ping me for clarification any time. The article presumes a basic knowledge of scuba diving, but should be comprehensible to the lay person. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 14:58, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Peter. I use my own checklist for reviews and I'll complete this as I go along. I always do minor edits myself. I've checked things like the images and stability which are fine so I can tick those straight away.

By the way, it occurs to me that the diver in the photos must have a buddy to take the shots, ha! Don't worry, I'm not pedantic. :-) No Great Shaker (talk) 12:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Criteria

1. Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
2. Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
3. Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
4. Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
5. Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch (e.g., "awesome" and "stunning").
6. Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction – not applicable.
7. Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
8. Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations.
9. All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
10. All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
11. Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
12. No original research.
13. No copyright violations or plagiarism.
14. Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
15. Neutral.
16. Stable.
17. Illustrated, if possible.
18. Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

Have done an initial reading so far and will start an in-depth one soon. I will need to understand some of the terminology but can't see it presenting a problem. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:00, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

I've read it again with focus on the well written criteria and it's fine. I'm also happy with both the lead and the overall structure. I've ticked those boxes and will continue with the rest soon. It's looking good but I just need to be sure I'm understanding it. Apologies for getting inexplicably mixed up between AE and BE but fortunately someone spotted it. No Great Shaker (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

I've gone through the article with a fine toothcomb and made more changes of the copyedit variety and I'm now well-satisfied that this is a good article. I particularly like the emphasis on safety because, no doubt about it, diving is a very dangerous activity. I did think about changing "redundant" for the lay reader but decided that I shouldn't because it is a correct term in the context of engineering systems. It's a really good read and I think I've learned a lot. Well done. No Great Shaker (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

No Great Shaker, thanks for your review. I do tend to emphasise the safety aspects in diving articles, becase they are often neglected by the people who try to sell as much training as possible, sometimes to unsuitable people. I am particulary happy to hear that you found it interesting.

The diver in the photo had no buddy on that dive, the photo was taken by another diver from the same boat, who was diving with somebody else at the same site. It happens quite often. Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 15:29, 5 January 2020 (UTC)