Talk:Dive computer

message: I'm a diver with 10+years of experience and a good knowledge of the diving market. I feel that the market share % are not real or, at least, can't be applied to a worldwide situation.
Suunto and Oceanic are global brands, but the 6,6% attributed to Uwatec is way too low. For example in Europe the market share of Uwatec is probably around 40% and globally the number should be about 30%. 
I'm unable to cite sources as I'm not aware of any real global market survey, so I refrain from editing the main page, but I'd like to see the data updated or, lacking some verifiable data, removed.
CarloA (talk) 15:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This sort of information is unlikely to remain up to date for long, and probably is not a worthwhile addition to an encyclopedia article. No sources for the section have been brought forward since the template was added over a year ago. I'd agree with its removal. --RexxS (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Market share

message: Should we try and add a list of Dive Computers here on this page? I think the manufacturer pages should probably include models that they make as well, though I did not see any of the models listed on Suunto's page. Many of the makers also do not have pages.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zevon7 (talk • contribs) 01:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What would the purpose of such a list be? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

text: I landed on this page as I was doing research on the different brands and features available. I was hoping to find a table with a list of models, and then columns that listed the capabilities etc. something like -> Manufacturer | Model | form factor: watch/console | gas support: air/nitrox/trimix | air integrated y/n | Built in compass | USB data transfer | Logbook capacity | Algorithm used | Max depth ... It is possible to go through all sorts of sites to find the info, or maybe there are magazine articles that would compare the models we can pull data from, but having this as a reference would be useful.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zevon7 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Indeed. But somebody would have to do the research and create such a list, and then somebody would have to keep it up to date for it to be useful. Nobody has volunteered to do that so far, which is why the list isn't in the article. --RexxS (talk) 00:02, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Computer list 

message: 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  is optional.Needs some more refs. 
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for , although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. Seems OK. 
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.Has structure, but can be improved. Order not very logical. Better now. 
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.Looks OK to me 
The article contains supporting materials where appropriate. Illustrations are encouraged, though not required. Diagrams and an infobox etc. should be included where they are relevant and useful to the content.Adequately illustrated. 
Not yet. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:21, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-Class review 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dive computer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304050651/http://hs-eng.com/ to http://hs-eng.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:11, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The section Dive computer#Manufacturers is turning into a adspam link-farm for every brand of dive computer on the market. I suggest that entries on the list are either notable enough to merit an article on Wikipedia (blue-linked), or have a reliable source showing that the company actually manufactures dive computers (as opposed to rebadging another manufacturer's product). If that's agreed, then I'll remove all of the unsourced or unlinked names. --RexxS (talk) 18:39, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manufacturers 

message: Article is now quite large and is likely to continue growing as more sources and details are found for the history section. I suggest that once it has expanded to be the largest section, and has adequate sourcing, that it be summarised for this article, and split out as a stand-alone History of dive computers. 
Any good sources for expansion are welcome and may be listed here, or used to directly improve the article. 
Relevant comments and discussion are invited. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 03:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article size, growth, and potential split  

message: 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  is optional. Mostly well referenced, with a few unreferenced paragraphs of uncontroversial content.
The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. 
:It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for , although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing. Quite comprehensive coverage except for a few minor items where sources have not yet been found. Should be adequate. 
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 well defined and appropriate.
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.Looks fine to me. 
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.Plenty of photos and a few relevant diagrams, complies. 
Promoting to B-class · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-class review