Template talk:Divesitelisting

Proposed template
There are quite a large number of articles with dive site listings. Usually the format is reasonably consistent within any given article, but there is a wide range of formatting between articles, as the amount of information provided varies considerably. (Dive site travel topic articles tend to follow a consistent formatting which is harmonized with the destination article style guidelines, and which was reached by consensus some years ago. A substitution template is available for the layout of these articles. No change is needed for them.)

This listing template is proposed to allow easy standardization of formatting of dive sites in articles for those cases where there is not sufficient information available to justify a specific dive site article.
 * The Divesitelisting template would be used as the standard method to list dive sites in a regional dive guide (travel topic) article.
 * Dive site listings would go in the Destinations section of a major regional dive guide (see Scuba diving), or Dive sites section of a local regional dive guide (see Diving the Cape Peninsula and False Bay).
 * The template could be used in standard destination articles to list dive sites where there are too fer dive sites to justify a stand-alone article.
 * Dive site listings would go in the Do section of a destination article.
 * A criterion of 7+-2 dive sites per destination could be used for destination articles, beyond which a regional dive guide would normally be the appropriate route. Exceptions may occur.
 * There is a standard layout with headings based on consensus and long term precedent for a dive site article. This format, or a close derivative is suggested for the display of a dive site listing, but it should also not look out of place in a regular destination article.

Current (16:34hrs, 03 August 2013 UTC)
Current actual template display format (Example for full listing):
 * Smits Reef is

Suggested
Suggested template display format (example for full listing):
 * Smits Reef, (also known as Birthday Reef, Horseshoe Reef) is an offshore rocky reef dive site in Smitswinkel Bay on the east side of the Cape Peninsula in the Western Cape
 * Understand: The site is in the Table mountain National Park Marine Protected Area. Scuba divers are required to buy an annual or monthly permit to dive in this MPA. Some of the bryozoans are very fragile. Try not to bang around on the reef. This is a good area for macro photography.
 * Location: ("lat", "long") South side of Smitswinkel Bay, just north of Batsata Rock
 * Maximum depth at the site is 25m and minimum depth is 6m. Most dives will not exceed 18 to 21m. Visibility is likely to be 4 to 12m, and water temperature 12 to 17&deg;C
 * Topography: A large granite outcrop with many large and small boulders. The south end of the reef is very complex. Sand bottom surrounds the reef which is about 100m long north to south.
 * Get in: Day boat; Launch at Miller's Point slipway, travel south parallel to the coast and across Smitswinkel Bay.
 * See:
 * Marine life: Kelp forest and red bait colonies on top of the shallower areas, and the deeper areas are dominated by echinoderms, particularly sea cucumbers and brittlestars. A moderate variety of local reef fish can be seen.
 * Features: The Maze at the south end has several swim-throughs, and there is a large pinnacle to the west.
 * Stay safe:
 * Hazards: When the local fishing boats are working the area they tend to pass overhead at speed.
 * Equipment: A dive light is useful for looking into the many crevices and holes, and a reel with surface marker buoy will help passing boats avoid you when surfacing
 * Skills: Good buoyancy control is recommended

Suggested version 2
Suggested template display format (example for full listing, indented and with reduced italics):
 * Smits Reef, (also known as Birthday Reef, Horseshoe Reef) is an offshore rocky reef dive site in Smitswinkel Bay on the east side of the Cape Peninsula in the Western Cape
 * Understand: The site is in the Table mountain National Park Marine Protected Area. Scuba divers are required to buy an annual or monthly permit to dive in this MPA. Some of the bryozoans are very fragile. Try not to bang around on the reef. This is a good area for macro photography.
 * ("lat", "long") South side of Smitswinkel Bay, just north of Batsata Rock. Maximum depth at the site is 25m and minimum depth is 6m. Most dives will not exceed 18 to 21m. Visibility is likely to be 4 to 12m, and water temperature 12 to 17&deg;C. A large granite outcrop with many large and small boulders. The south end of the reef is very complex. Sand bottom surrounds the reef which is about 100m long north to south.
 * Get in: Day boat; Launch at Miller's Point slipway, travel south parallel to the coast and across Smitswinkel Bay.
 * See: Kelp forest and red bait colonies on top of the shallower areas, and the deeper areas are dominated by echinoderms, particularly sea cucumbers and brittlestars. A moderate variety of local reef fish can be seen. The Maze at the south end has several swim-throughs, and there is a large pinnacle to the west.
 * Stay safe: When the local fishing boats are working the area they tend to pass overhead at speed. A dive light is useful for looking into the many crevices and holes, and a reel with surface marker buoy will help passing boats avoid you when surfacing. Good buoyancy control is recommended.

Discussion requested

 * 1) Is the use of a template for this purpose a satisfactory solution?
 * 2) If so, is the proposed usage acceptable? If not, what alternatives are suggested?
 * 3) Is the existing layout and formatting, or the alternative suggestion preferable, and are there any suggestions for improvement?
 * 4) Would we want clear to be automatically included via the template, or added manually where necessary?

Discussion
An optional template is a practical solution and your proposal seems to be a reasonable layout. Since I assume we're going to be substituting rather than simply transcluding this template, as to your question (4) above, I would suggest including clear so that it is automatically included via the template - it can always be manually removed if and where necessary. --W. Franke-mailtalk 14:08, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The intention is to transclude the template like all the other listings templates, this makes it possible to adjust the formatting sitewide by adjusting the template. This makes it impracticable to delete the clear after the fact except by changing the template. The point here is whether the forced presence of whitespace is preferable to offset images in all cases, or whether the choice and work should be left to the editor. Ideally the template would be used in all cases where there is a divesite listing in an article but no divesite article. In the cases where there is a divesite article the listing would be truncated and a link to the article added. This would be an ordinary internal link, so no controversy there. Just like a link from a destinations listing in a region article to the city articles.
 * The other question is which display to use, the one which currently exists, or the suggested alternative. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, penny has dropped (I hope). I prefer your proposal, Peter. A clearer and more logical layout. --W. Franke-mailtalk 16:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually the original and the proposed option are both mine. The first was getting it going, but now I am trying to fine tune it a bit. I take it you prefer the second option? &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I do prefer the second option. Now that you have explained things to me, you'd better edit the mess I have made of the quaternary headings above, to make clearer that there is a proposal number (1) and a proposal number (2 ) to discuss. Sorry! --W. Franke-mailtalk 20:43, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, I will be back later today. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 04:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I wonder if it is really necessary to break it down into so many fields. Looks to me you could just have Understand, Get in, See, and Stay safe, dropping the sub-fields and combining their contents. It would be more succinct and easier to read, and as this is a listing and not an article or subsection of its own, the four sections I just named would presumably never be so long that they really need a further breakdown anyway. Texugo (talk) 17:06, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I do like using bold instead of italics for the subsections, since italics conventionally has other meanings on WV. Also, the subsections should probably be indented another notch. Texugo (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I would be quite happy to lose more of the italic subsections headers if it is likely that it will not cause confusion or make it more difficult to fill in the parameters. That is more or less what the second option for layout is aiming for. We can try it and if it is a problem change back. Your suggestion on indentation also seems like a good idea. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Were you thinking of indenting the bolded and italic parts another notch, or just the italic parts, or one for the bold and two for the italic? &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:17, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, considering that I was talking about getting rid of the italic headers, I meant indent the bold sections so they don't appear to be the same level as the listing title... Texugo (talk) 12:24, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That is what I thought at first, but then when I was trying it out it struck me that i may have misunderstood, so I asked. Better to check when there is any doubt. Thanks, I will be back to add another example to demo this a bit later. &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 15:52, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Template is broken...
It's leaking a SPAN tag somewhere... Can someone please re-write this template so it doesn't leak or minest tags please?ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, all the spans are closed &bull; &bull; &bull; Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)