Talk:Freshwater angelfish
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all Fish taxa and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the Portal, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life |  |
Contents |
[edit] P. altum
Added a link to blackwater river in the P. altum section as I teach myself how to use and edit Wikipedia articles and move toward actually contributing new material. In doing so, I might have exposed a contradiction where the P. altum section of this article states:
- "In the wild they come from water that is so stained with tanins from detrius such as decaying peatmoss and driftwood that it is a dark brown and visibility is only a few inches"
However, the article on blackwater rivers states:
- "Blackwater rivers are also characterized by striking water clarity; so clear that visibility regularly exceeds 30 feet (9 meters). However, after rainstorms blackwater rivers can lose their typical clarity and color while sediment runs off from the surrounding forest. Within a few hours to a few days, the normal conditions return."
Everything I've been able to come across on the web indicates that the blackwater rivers are tea-colored and appear dark when the water is deep, but extraordinarily clear. But I don't know for sure. It would be great if someone more knowledgeable on this subject could edit or clarify the article containing the incorrect information. Neil916 05:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't receive any comments here, so I removed the statement. Neil916 15:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Breeding fish
Probably there should be a seperate page on the breeding and breeds of angelfish, along with some of the other bred for characteristics tropical fish like bettas, gouramis, discuses, guppies etc. Whole books have been written about the subjects so I imagine there's a whole huge section that could be written. Williamb 22:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- It seems that the current flow of the articles seem to support adding info on breeding fish to the specific fish that the info applies. However, if you want to add an article on fish breeding be bold and go for it! Blue Leopard 04:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Personal attacks in a fish article?
Edited out a personal attack in the section on P. scalare by 64.231.67.213. Although the information was wrong it doesn't give the right to make personal attacks on another wikipedian. Although I've seen worse, please leave constructive critcisms on the talk page, NOT the article. Blue Leopard 04:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Merge article?
I propose we merge Freshwater Angelfish into Pterophyllum.
The genus only has 2-3 species and I think is best dealt with in a genus page.
Thoughts? MidgleyDJ 23:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- This is the genus page, listed under its common name, with taxobox and everything. All of the information you entered on the Pterophyllum page should be integrated into this article. There was previously a redirect on the Pterophyllum to this page. See the guidelines on the WikiProject Fishes page regarding how these articles should be named. Eventually I could forsee gathering enough information on P. altum and P. leopoldi to warrant separating the species information into their own pages, but since it's such a small genus they're all jumbled into one right now. Neil916 01:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Neil - if this is the genus page, perhaps it should have the genus name (rather than freshwater angelfish). Most other cichlid genera have genus names as the page name. Does moving the material currently under Pterophyllum into this page - then renaming this page to Pterophyllum (and redirecting Freshwater angelfish to it) sound sensible to you? I know the convention is to use the common name eg: cow, bear etc. In this case though the common name is ambiguous (which is why we currently have "Freshwater Angelfish" as a title. MidgleyDJ 03:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
- That's probably the best bet. It seems like it would be a lot less work than creating a new Pterophyllum article then trying to merge the content from here into it. I've never had much of a liking to the "freshwater angelfish" article name, since it's not really the common name, so it would be better to go with the scientific name. I've given thought to splitting the individual species out into separate articles since a majority of the content that is in this article (especially the parts I've added) have to do specifically with P. scalare and I'm sure there's plenty out there that could be added to the very small sections of P. altum and P. leopoldi and easier to add content specific to those species...but haven't gotten to it yet. So my vote is go for it. Neil916 05:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
