Talk:Swimfin

message: * The small bit under the trivia section should be referenced and moved to the history section, or removed: see WP:TRIV. -Superbeecat 10:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History and Trivia merge 

message: (Section copied from User talk:RexxS#ForceFins
* People come to wikipedia for information, perhaps more information should be added to give that to readers in the other sections, instead of deleting verifiable, accurate, descriptive, and cited information within the Force Fin section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by WatermanFF3 (talk • contribs) 17:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Force fins 

message: Franklin was a great guy, but since he also loved straightforwardness, in all due respects, it should be mentioned that his "fins" were worn on the hands, not the feet.189.38.128.134 (talk) 12:18, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Franklin 

message: Did anybody try to consider this guy? The article is in polish, but they claim that he invented the swimming fins in 1914, while being at the Adriatic. 
"Edmund Łasiński był wynalazcą płetw. W 1914 roku będąc w Porto Re nad Adriatykiem razem z prof. Fischerem wypróbował swój wynalazek."
http://www.borzecin.pl/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3071&Itemid=436
He is also mentioned as the inventor in the book 'I haj vivat Poznańczanie' by Marcin J. Januszkiewicz p.187  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.169.105.162 (talk) 22:49, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It is difficult for those of us who do not read Polish to use the reference, or to assess whether it is a reliable source. If you can understand and translate the content, and can explain why the source should be considered reliable, you can edit the article to include information from the source. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:10, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edmund Łasiński 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Swimfin. 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/20090709140530/http://www.ishof.org:80/honorees/68/68bfranklin.html to http://www.ishof.org/honorees/68/68bfranklin.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100526123506/http://www.apollosportsusa.com:80/Products/Fins/Principles.htm to http://www.apollosportsusa.com/Products/Fins/Principles.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100206052137/http://www.forcefin.com:80/index.html to http://www.forcefin.com/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

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.Some sections uncited, but not much is likely to be controversial. At least some of them should be improved. 
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. Looks OK to me. 
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.Looks OK to me. 
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.Some parts not clear. Partly insufficient information, partly poorly written. Lead and sections on Training and Power need expansion and clarification. 
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.Sufficiently illustrated. 
Not ready yet.  • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 04:36, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  B-Class review