Talk:Gulf saratoga
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Common Name
This redirect is inappropriate. The term "australian arrowana" can refer to both S. jardini and S. leichardti. Furthermore the 'specific common names' applied to these species (northern and spotted barramundi) can also refer to other fishes. I suggest that the articles for the respective Scleropages species remain at their respective scientific names, with a disambig page at this one. 80.255 09:05, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Agreed, as the Australian Scleropages both have so many common names. Also, I'm renaming the page from S. jardini to S. jardinii because this name is prefered by Fishbase. Ginkgo100 21:18, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- This species is usually known as the Gulf Saratoga, the other common names are now not well known or used within Australia, which is where this fish mainly occurs. I will move the article if no one objects in accordance with the Wiki policy of using common names for fish. Nick Thorne 13:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- OK, I'll leave it for a few days incase anyone else has something to say and then I'll move it. Case comment noted, I only capitalised it in my comment for clarity. Nick Thorne 14:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image
Sorry for the low quality of the image. You can even see the reflection of my camera! I will try to get a better-lit picture, but for now this gives the reader an idea. Ginkgo100 03:53, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Taxobox image
Not sure about this photo, check out the Native Fish Australia web site's Gulf saratoge article for a better idea of the usual colouration for this species.Nick Thorne 07:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- The taxobox image is a Sclerpages jardinii that is part of the collection at Denver's Downtown Aquarium. I used to be the aquarist who cared for this tank and can vouch for the species. The bronze color might be a result of the flash or of being kept in captivity. It is also an older fish than the one pictured in the article. However, it is not great in terms of photographic quality, so I wouldn't mind seeing it replaced if a better one is available. --Ginkgo100 talk · e@ 19:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)