Talk:San Alfonso del Mar

Source

In interesting, but not always reliable, source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=509718&in_page_id=1770 violet/riga (t) 18:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

POV Check

This article mainly addresses the dispute over the resort's development into surrounding wetlands, and contains almost no information about the resort itself or from the resort's POV. ERTBen (talk) 16:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Facts:

http://www.gizmag.com/worlds-biggest-and-deepest-swimming-pools/8891/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Root Beers (talk • contribs) 05:37, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

{{bots|deny=D6}}

Please leave this in the article. Thank you. -- User:Docu

Depth

Pool is definitely not 115ft deep based on the volume and surface area figures which make it approximately 11ft deep. This gives the shadows on the bottom of the pool seen in many pictures. There has been no proof shown that the pool is 115ft deep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.169.242.66 (talk) 08:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

250,000,000 litres divided by 80,000m^2 gives an average depth of 3.1m, this pool is definitely not 35m deep. --131.111.250.35 (talk) 17:20, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Obviously someone forgot to place the decimal for the depth. 3.5 meter = 11.5 feet and not 115 feet. This error has been spread for too long. Also all areal shot of the pool show a uniform light blue color. A 115 foot deep section would be a far darker hue of blue then the rest of the pool — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.47.15.97 (talk) 02:27, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The pool is surely not 35 meters deep, really a crazy number for a swimming pool, notwithstanding the surface area. In the Spanish article the depth is given with 3 meters, which is plausible. And, like another user above correctly mentioned, if there was a significantly deeper section (35 meters is the height of a 10-storey building), one would see it on the aerial photo by a darker color. --Aarp65 (talk) 15:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

No one claims the average depth is 115 deep; rather, that is stated to be the maximum depth. No one has cited any source that this maximum depth (which is supported by citations) is incorrect. As for the argument that deeper water is a darker color, while that may be true in the ocean (though no one here has actually cited a source), it doesn't follow that this is true of a swimming pool where the bottom could be painted.

So - citations, please. Otherwise the article should stay as is. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Mathematically speaking if the pool has a surface area of 80,000m^2 (8ha) and a maximum length of 1,013m the average width would be 78.9733m. Lets assume the majority of the pool is a Trangular Rectangle with measurements 1,013m (length), 78.9733m (width), 3.5m (depth) the total cubic meters of the majority of the pool would total 139,994. Given the 250,000m^3 of the total pool volume and the max depth of 35m that would allow for a rectangular prism of 31.5m x 442.19m x 78.97m with a volume of 110,006m^3.

It is quite possible for this pool to exist in the stated dimensions. Thea H. 21:05, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Upon further searching a Patent was found for the technology in the pool. It states the maximum depth as 3.5 meters. Patent is US8790518 Publication date Jul 29, 2014. Thea H. 11:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't click on the slashgear article

The slashgear site article tried to download a virus on my computer when I accessed it just now. Songflower (talk) 08:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

No issue coming up for me and my antivirus software is up to date.MartinezMD (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)