Jump to content

Talk:Underwater habitat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

HYDROLAB image

[edit]

The Hydrolab.jpg image is reversed. The person entering the habitat should be on the right, so that the instrument panels would be on the right side of someone walking towards the large window on the opposite end.

The cut-away section (left side) contained three bunk beds. Although the maximum number of aquanauts was four, one person was required to be up and awake at all times. The person ending their night watch would simply trade spots with the person who was on duty next. Space was at a premium since the living chamber of the habitat was roughly eight feet tall and fifteen feet long (dimensions from memory and not verified by documentation).

The source for the image information is the original drawing, which is in my possession.

Anza 07:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the notice. Wikimedia Commons has a photo of the interior of HYDROLAB (File:Hydrolab interior.jpg), that on close examination showed a publication and a food container on which the lettering was discernible, confirming what you say. The lettering was reversed. Accordingly, I flipped both File:Hydrolab interior.jpg and File:Hyrdolab.jpg to correct the error, albeit 12 years late. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)T @ 05:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scott Carpenter Space Analog Station

[edit]

This subentry wrongly suggests that the SCSAS is, or was once, a viable underwater habitat and uses the name of noted Sealab aquanaut (and Mercury astronaut) Scott Carpenter. Although so named with Carpenter's permission, Carpenter was unaware that the SCSAS had not met (nor had it submitted to) NASA's safety and hazards inspections. It was later determined by NASA experts (and others) to be uninhabitable and unsuitable for the purposes for which it was purportedly designed.

Now it works only as a subentry on the Wiki, on equal footing with actual, viable underwater habitats, for example, Aquarius, MarineLab, and La Chalupa Research Laboratory.

Wholesale deletion suggested. paxrkec 03:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC) 00:28, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it just needs to be moved up to the former section... sadly, along with MarineLab. Chadnibal (talk) 21:18, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hydro-lab Journal

[edit]

The Hydro-lab Journal can be found at 17 libraries listed in WorldCat. The OCLC number is 3289185. The journal spans three volumes published from 1972 to 1975. This was the major method of distribution for the project information, why was the journal removed from the article? --Gene Hobbs (talk) 17:29, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. I saw an irrelevant and bungled chronicle link and couldn't find the journal instantly by Google, and didn't check to see that you were doing quality work in other edits. My error; thanks for catching me. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In all fairness, I did say I was "looking for the Hydrolab J" so I probably created the confusion... I was scared to just revert it as I did not want an edit war on something this hard to find. I am still trying to get my hands on them so we can expand this some. Thanks! --Gene Hobbs (talk) 18:17, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

[edit]

This article easily meets C-class criteria, but requires a little more work to reach B-class:

  1. B-Class-1: It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. PASS
  2. B-Class-2: It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
  3. B-Class-3: It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
  4. B-Class-4: It is free from major grammatical errors. PASS
  5. B-Class-5: It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. PASS
  6. B-Class-6: It presents content in an accessible way.
  • The smaller sections would benefit from expansion, particularly where the {{main}} article that they summarise is large enough to facilitate that.
  • There are habitats not covered. The lead section states that "at least one underwater habitat has been provided for recreation and tourism", but the article omits any further mention of e.g. Jules' Undersea Lodge, apart from an external link.
  • The lead section should be a summary of the rest of the article. Issues such as supply of resources and usage of habitats deserve their own sections, leaving a brief summary in the lead.
  • The images would benefit from WP:alt text to aid accessibility.

--RexxS (talk) 06:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dcsfvbbbegbfg 49.189.227.127 (talk) 07:24, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SUNYLAB

[edit]

I'm not sure how to post anything myself yet, but thought folks might also be interested in SUNYLAB, constructed by the State University of New York at Stony Brook and used with private and interagency support (State University of New York; NOAA; U.S. Coast Guard; U.S. Navy Office of Naval Research; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; Town of Smithtown, NY and others) in Smithtown Bay, Long Island Sound from 1977 to 1982. The lab remained unused on site in Long Island Sound from 1982 to June 1988, when it was raised and refurbished for display as the centerpiece of an Undersea Frontiers exhibit on board the Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum in New York City for more than a dozen years. It was subsequently returned to the heavy engineering laboratory at the State University of New York at Stony Brook where it remains on public display today, with hopes that it might be reused to train marine scientists in scientific diving. If folks want photos or video I can provide that as soon as I learn how to use the Wiki functions.

Steve Resler —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scidiver (talk • contribs) 14:47, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion, Steve. Editing Wikipedia is quite easy in principle – just click on the the [edit] link for the section you want to edit and make your changes. However, there is an important policy of verification that you should look at. We want all of the information in wikipedia to have a reliable source to support it, so you will need to find the published sources that you used for the information above and make a note of them as references. Have a look at how the references work in this article. If you have any questions about editing in general, ask them on your talk page and I'll do my best to answer them. --RexxS (talk) 15:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a link to a copy of a news broadcast about SUNYLAb's "resurrection". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.183.30.234 (talk) 02:52, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PORTALAB & Atlantica Expedition

[edit]

Similar to SUNYLAB, the Univ. of Rhode Island PORTALAB ought to be covered. I am starting to wonder if inclusion of the Atlantica Expedition is appropriate, at this stage it seems more of an advert for vaporware (despite the distinguished cast) that a legitimate entry in an encyclopedia. I'd recommend deletion, at least until something actually happens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki4Thal (talk • contribs) 04:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Some serious rigorous cleanup needs to happen in this section. A lot of shows, games, books etc. feature "people living underwater", but that really is not enough to warrant inclusion here. I'd say to just ditch the whole thing, but then the Bioshock people would get super pissed : ) Hornpipe2 (talk) 23:11, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What criteria do you suggest for inclusion? • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:58, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Show, movie, game, book etc. takes place in a distinctive environment (or features as a Big Major plot point) which was constructed for the purpose of underwater survival... people in the habitat should have to contend with realities of undersea survival rather than just being there for the aesthetic. Sealab 2021 allowed, Legend of Zelda ("it has a water temple") not allowed. No flooded ruins, no games where "one level takes place underwater", etc. Seaquest DSV not listed because while it may have an underwater habitat in one or two episodes, it's really about a bigass submarine.
Maybe what I'm really asking for is a distinction between "scientific" plausible underwater habitats, and "magical" underwater habitats like Atlantis or whatever. Hornpipe2 (talk) 15:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'd recommend splitting the whole lot off into List of underwater habitats in popular culture and make it somebody else's problem. None of the entries here contribute anything to the encyclopedic understanding of an underwater habitat. --RexxS (talk) 17:18, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

B-Class review

[edit]

B
  1. 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 {{cite web}} is optional.

    2. Some sections still completely unreferenced. ☒N
  2. The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. It contains a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing.

    3. Reasonable coverage, but still empty sections. checkY
  3. 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.

    4. Looks OK.checkY
  4. 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.

    5. Looks OK. checkY
  5. 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.

    6. Sufficiently illustrated. checkY
  6. The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way. It is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible. Although Wikipedia is more than just a general encyclopedia, the article should not assume unnecessary technical background and technical terms should be explained or avoided where possible.

    7. Looks OK. checkY

Not yet. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References on the German Wikipedia article

[edit]

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unterwasserstation

I was working for a time now on improving the German article on underwater habitats (Unterwasserstation) with lots of corresponding references. My English is not enough to rewrite the article here, but maybe someone would like to use the references. You can always contact me for questions on the subject. Happy editing! --Martin Henke (talk) 19:39, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Henke, Thanks, I will take a look. Cheers • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like quite a lot of useful content. Nice work. It will take some time to fully integrate it. Please feel welcome to check whether I have translated correctly. My German is worse than your English, but I can usually tell if the machine translation is plausible, and can usually fix it. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:48, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Underwater habitat. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Progetto Abissi gameshow

[edit]

There is only one source cited for the Progetto Abissi habitat, and as far as I can see there is no mention of a gameshow on that site.

The gameshow is mentioned in a couple of other articles about the habitat, but only in passing, which suggests the writers of those articles were going by the Wikipedia page. Does anyone have any extra information on this? Telepork (talk) 11:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MarineLab

[edit]

Sad news, I really wanted to go to Jules Undersea Lodge and do my Aquanaut cert at MarineLab, but that ended a couple years ago, all that is out of date. MarineLab needs to be moved to the Former section and Jules needs to be updated, they raised MarineLab and made it a museum in 2018, not even associated with Jules anymore. Pretty heavy edits needed. [1]

Note: the part saying you can still do aquanaut training is on another wiki page for Jules, linked from here which needs to be fixed as a part of these edits.[2] Chadnibal (talk) 21:24, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.mrdf.org/undersea-lab-museum
  2. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules%27_Undersea_Lodge
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Underwater_habitat&oldid=1216439633"