User talk:Dsather

Deep diving
Please don't edit war to force your view into an article. We have a convention called WP:BRD, whereby an edit is made (boldly) and if it is reverted, then discussion starts on the talk page. Otherwise we could going backwards and forwards all day reverting each other, and that is unacceptable.

The only proof required for any claim in Wikipedia is that can be verified by a reliable source. In Deep diving, I see that not one of the example list has a reference to a reliable source and I intend to remove the list as it simply becomes a magnet for anybody to claim that they have dived to 200 metres on a CCR.

I fully accept that you are making your claim in good faith, but you have to realise that anybody could place any name in such a list, unless we insisted on verifiability. Otherwise, what's to stop an anonymous editor adding Mickey Mouse to the list? How are we to decide which claims are true? --RexxS (talk) 02:41, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I am not sure how this works but hopefully this reaches you. I did one of my first deep 200M dive in 2004 on fluid filled Hammerhead electronics with the help of Kevin Juergensen  - the same that Dave Shaw used to set his record.  This dive can be verified by people that were there along with the pictures that I have on Facebook.  http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=12323835396&set=a.12323805396.57652.837425396&type=3&theater.
 * If you have a look at your watchlist (there's a link at the top right of the window), you'll see the pages on your list that have changed recently. I've kept your page on my watchlist, so I can reply to you when I see you have posted here.
 * I can appreciate the achievement of diving to 200 metres+ but I'm really dubious about its encyclopedic value. I do not intend to slight the accomplishment, but I do ask if it's really notable? Was it reported in the press? or written up in a magazine article? If it attracted significant third-party interest, then it's likely to be the sort of thing we should include in Wikipedia; if not, then it's an indication that we probably shouldn't. Please understand that it's not me that you have to convince personally. Have a read of our policies on verifiability and identifying reliable sources and think about whether your dive could be verified by anyone who had access to an appropriate reliable source. I'm afraid that Facebook really doesn't count as reliable in that sense. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

So pictures, dive logs, and testimonials from people that witnessed the dive dont count? I am only trying to add value to the content included here. If you are unable or unwilling to listen then I give up and frankly dont care. If you are as avid as a diver as you say you are you may want to put some effort into this as opposed to the stone wall approach you have. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.73.177.77 (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That's very rude and totally uncalled for. Are you seriously suggesting that I should start searching the press and dive mags from 2004 to find sources for you?
 * I've tried to explain as clearly as I can that it doesn't matter that I believe you, because Wikipedia has its own way of working which insists on all of its content being verifiable from reliable sources. I've provided the links to the pages where you can read for yourself. Here they are again: WP:Verifiability and WP:Identifying reliable sources. Click the links and read the pages, rather than wasting my time and your own. --RexxS (talk) 00:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)