Talk:Carp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fish Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
News This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. The citation is in:
News This article has been cited as a source or otherwise recommended by the mainstream press. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a press source for details.


Contents

[edit] Human introudction of Carp

Hello, while living in Utah, USA I came upon a lake at a bird sanctuary. This lake was swarming with carp. It turns out the early Mormon settlers brought carp with them to use as a food source. It turns out the settlers found the carp to not very pallable. Something like this may be noteworth....

Help requested. I am writing about a fish locally known as "Aspen", translated to "rapacious carp". Anyone knows what thiseferences, otherwise it seems more like speculation than actual fact.

An expansion of the Carp's place in Chinese mythology and legend would be nice. -Toptomcat 22:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article is not meant to be a carp apologist's piece of propaganda!

I am fairly irritated to see that this article had again been turned into a a carp apologist's piece of propaganda!

Please, whoever you are, do not do this.

You may like carp very much, and that's fine, but we must recognise that carp are an invasive species, and they DO, without dispute, cause serious ecological damage in many of the waters they are introduced into. There is strong anecdotal and mounting scientific evidence of the damage they have caused in the Australia's Murray-Darling system in particular.

You like carp, that's fine, you want to talk about eating them and their role in European and Asian culture, that's fine too, but don't bend or whitewash the hard facts about their negative impacts.

Codman 04:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Carp apologist? Please, calm down. It is only a fish. If you have concrete changes to propose for the improvement of the article, then make them. -Toptomcat 18:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Possible POV issue

"The movement and introduction of carp for frivolous reasons such as sport fishing should not be tolerated."

My emphasis added. Does this constitute a breach of NPOV? Sounds like the imperative is a bias, but I'm not exactly sure. --Agharo 03:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds POV to me. If anything like that pops up again, probably better to speedily delete it. Words like 'should' or 'must' don't belong in an encyclopedia. --lk (talk) 03:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carp Longevity?

In Robert A. Heinlein's book Methuselah's Children, carp are said to have unusually long lifespans, usually dying of unnatural causes and not succumbing to 'old age'. The book deals with human longevity and one researcher onboard a generation ship remarks "...carp don't seem to die. They get killed, or eaten, or starve to death, or succumb to infection, but so far as we know they don't die." Does anyone know whether there is any foundation for this statement, or if it's just fiction? It would be interesting to read about. Phasmatisnox 16:40, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, the common carp article says that the oldest recorded carp was at least 65 years old. If that's true (I don't know which source in that article to check), it's no wonder that researcher never saw one die of old age. Jefepato (talk) 03:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge to Common Carp article

There's a similar article Common carp that doesn't link to this article. And this article doesn't link to Common carp. What's the relationship between the two? Should they be merged? Or should Common Carp be considered a daughter article to this one? --lk (talk) 03:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The two articles should definitely be merged. Rlboyce (talk) 20:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Oppose. "Carp" refer to numerous larger species of the family Cyprinidae, while Common Carp is a single species (among many many carps). (Melanochromis)
Perhaps I need to elaborate in order to make my stance properly understood. It makes sense to argue that the terms "carp" and "common carp" are entirely different, and that "carp" should never be synonymous with "common carp". While common carp may be, more often than not, referred to as carp, Wikipedia should encourage the use of the correct name. As for the two articles, they refer to the same species, thus it is logical that they should be merged in the page "Common Carp" so that there are not two separate pages for the same fish. As for the "Carp" page, perhaps it should be a redirect to the Cyprinidae family. I wouldn't mind being the one to make all the changes, but I would have to have your approval before doing so.Rlboyce (talk) 01:03, 24 May 2008 (UTC)