User talk:Markusvr

Since we can't see what kind of gas they use we dont know for sure if they are saturation diving. However, in the first picture the diver has a gas retrieve system. This is what saturation divers use. In the second picture it is the normal kirby morgan superflow 350. This is what air divers use. We cant know for sure if it a saturation diver and since there is a chance of wrong info this picture should not be part of this article.

The breathing gas does not determine whether it is saturation diving or not. The earliest saturation dives were done on air. The USN uses heliox for its work at depth. Commercial saturation divers may use trimix. The COMEX experiments used hydreliox. Plenty of dives on air, heliox or trimix are made that are not saturation dives, so knowing the gas breathed decides nothing.
Even though a diver may be using a Kirby Morgan, if they are a US Navy diver working at 70 metres (230 ft), then they are breathing heliox. Period. They are not breathing air.
If the first image is of a USN diver working on the USS Monitor and they are stated to be saturation diving, then what are the chances that the diver in the second picture, who is also a USN diver working on the USS Monitor is not saturation diving? Slim to none, I believe.

If you haven't realised yet, the place to discuss this is Talk:Saturation diving where I've already started a discussion for you to join at Talk:Saturation diving #Lead images. Please try to contribute there and we can seek other opinions. If you decline to discuss and simply keep removing the image, you run the risk of losing your editing privileges here. --RexxS (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

Your recent editing history at Saturation diving shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. RexxS (talk) 19:50, 26 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]