Talk:Rebreather diving

Intentions?

 * To User:Pbsouthwood: Currently much matter about the design of rebreathers is in page Rebreather and also in page Rebreather diving, causing WP:content forking. What are your intentions here? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 11:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Design specific to diving rebreathers could go on either page. I am uncertain at this stage, though I lean slightly towards this page, but am open to persuasion. Do you have an opinion? Both pages are pretty large already, so it might even be appropriate to split again to a page Diving rebreather. I don't think this is an urgent split. Cheers, • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 11:53, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have moved back to page Rebreather all the matter about the design of rebreathers, rather than using them. Else we end up with a lot of WP:content forking. To page Rebreather I have added a section ===Industrial rebreathers===. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 15:35, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks good. That should work. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 19:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

B-class review
Not yet. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 12:33, 26 December 2016 (UTC) Still needs more refs for some sections, otherwise still good. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 17:19, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Split out and merge Diving rebreather from this article and Rebreather?
Both Rebreather and Rebreather diving are very long articles. Quite a lot of the content in both articles is on the topic of diving rebreathers. I propose splitting out the content on diving rebreathers from Rebreather to Diving rebreather, and possibly splitting and merging some content from Rebreather diving to Diving rebreather. Courtesy pinging

Discuss at Talk:Rebreather
 * There were no objections, the split has been done and merging of selected content is ongoing. &middot; &middot; &middot; Peter Southwood (talk): 06:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)