Talk:Scuba diving quarry

Notability?
Is this subject worth an article? Should it not be a section in a more broad based article on types of dive site? There may be some case for a list of quarries which are poular scuba diving sites, but even that would make more sense as a subsection of a list of dive sites. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * In my humble opinion, it is clearly not worth a stand-alone article. There really is no claim to notability and the information in the useful sources would be best presented within a section of another article - Diver training, perhaps? I disagree with any suggestion that we should have a list of quarries that are dive sites - Wikipedia is not a directory and it would be an invitation for a link farm. There are six examples given: the external link is 404 and the other five are stubby and mostly unsourced articles - not the best starting point for making a list article! --RexxS (talk) 23:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree on the pointlessness of a list. That leaves three immediately obvious options.
 * Leave it as it is, not very useful, and unlikely to become anything much better.
 * Delete it altogether.
 * Merge it into a more general article on types of dive sites. In this case a new title would be necessary to indicate the scope of the article.
 * I think the 3rd option is best of these three. This brings up the questions:
 * what all it should include, and
 * what to call it
 * Any suggestions? Peter (Southwood) (talk): 17:56, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Suggest merge to Recreational dive sites and redirect. See discussion above. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 09:26, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. --RexxS (talk) 12:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I will give it a week or so in case anyone wants to comment, mainly as a formality, as I dont expect any other comments. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:09, 12 June 2012 (UTC)