Talk:Striped bass

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
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Striped bass is within the scope of WikiProject Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of fishing. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can register your interest for the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-Importance on the assessment scale.
Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page.

Contents

[edit] Comment

Typical sizes/weights of these fish would be interesting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.49.115.183 (talk) 03:01, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how useful the bottom text is. Any comments? It is dated, nobody uses silk line to fish anymore. Plus there are other unique facts about striped bass that could be included.

They are interesting as historical insight about fishing technique, although arguably that's going too far afield (so to speak :-) ). At the very least the source work for these sections needs to be identified, preferably with a link; perhaps at some point we'll want to do a mass move to WikiSource or some such - as historical material they are more interesting intact, than "edited mercilessly" as we would do for modern text. Stan 23:55, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)


Stan - looks like a long time with no reply. I am working on some items for this page which I will add and hopefully put together a community based wiki discussion to update the striped bass Wikipedia page. I hope to soon have a Wiki on Striped-Bass.com to tune the striped bass page by the community and update the Wikipedia site. Yes, the silk line has past it's prime :)... Thanks, John Redmond


Hey fellas,

Am cleaning up the page a little if you don't mind, though the added info is great. Personally I divide the year between two great spots for bass fishing: NYC (I saw a guy who caught one nearly a meter long last year off one of the old piers and no, he never gets sick from his catch) and Duxbury Bay in Massachusetts (best kept secret-quieter than Martha's Vineyard.) Can't wait to get a new pole come spring! User:shadowcat60

[edit] Article cleanup

Striped bass is a delicious fish that deserves a good article. I'll work on it when my schoolwork calms down Onsmelly 05:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)


I think someone removed a link I had placed under external links to striped-bass.com and in my opinion mistakenly labled it as spam. Striped-Bass.com is a PUBLIC COMMUNITY site based on, you guessed it ;), Striped Bass and we have been a public community on the internet for over seven years. We promote fishing clubs, best skills and practices, conservation, and a great community. I persoanally have contributed to at least half of this article and I am looking to add substantial more GOOD HONEST information that will benefit the WP community at large, at least where relevant to striped bass ;) . So please, consider that this is not SPAM but in fact an honest effort at placing relevant information to WP regarding striped bass - Regards, John Johnredmond 19:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Your website looks fine. If I removed it then it was an accident. The link I removed was a charter boat advertisment. I'm going to start working on this article. Onsmelly 07:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Your webstite has a prominant link to your charter service. You cannot use Wikipedia for advertising. Wikipedia admins may not have a problem with the rest of your web site content, if you did not have ads. Since it's your personal site and Wikipedia policy discourages adding your own site, it would be better (after removing ads) to ask an admin to review the site and add it if it seemed worthy. Pollinator 04:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Novice perspective

I am on vacation and will be arriving at Cape Cod later today. I have done precious little saltwater fishing so far, but I am really looking forward to trying my hand at Stripers this week. I say that to explain that I found and reviewed the Striped Bass page with little previous knowledge. So I offer some comments from a 'novice perspective'.

There was a phrase used on the page which I have never seen before. It spoke of "full neap tide". I know what a tide is, but I have no idea what a 'neap tide' is. I did not see any other reference to tides in the article and I did not see any links that would take me to an explaination of tides or how they affect a fisherman. If time allows, I may try to look the topic up on Wikipedia. But I expect those of you who know this topic and can provide the best suggestion for which of what may be several tide links should be reviewed.

One other suggestion would be to possibly add information or a link for those interested in fly fishing for stripers. I talked to a friend back home in Chicagoland and he has loaned me a fly rod/reel that are more appropriate for salt water than my own gear. He had a few suggestions, but I am searching the internet this morning for some more.

Depending on how I do this week, I may be able to offer a basic outline for a section on fly fishing for stripers. Thanks for the information that is presented.

(I'm truely a Wikipedia novice and I'm not sure how to sign this comment. Sneezy2 13:39, 10 June 2006 (UTC))

  • Well, you signed the comment just fine, and congratulations! On your query about information, have you checked the Fly fishing article? On editing: there's a couple of things you might keep in mind before making a large edit. First, Wikipedia is generally not a place for how-to guides. While a well written section or article on fly fishing for Stripers could have merit, it's not always easy to write about angling subjects in a way that meets guidelines. Also, while there are lots of things that aren't reliably sourced in and around Wikipedia, any edit made stands a far greater chance of success if it's based on independent information that already exists in published form. Third, you might want to look below at the "Focus" section, as some of us are considering splitting away the fishing material into a separate article (and a section on Fly Fishing sounds to me like it would be great in the other article, if and when it happens.) But finally, understand that one principle governing Wikipedia is to be bold - none of the above should prevent you from making edits. I just want to see any edits you might will not be reverted unnecessarily. Feel free to ask on my talk page if you have any questions about the above. Cheers and tight lines! LaughingVulcan 04:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment otherwise unheaded

Fisherpersons,

Does anyone know anything about "farm Raised Rockfish". Someone told me this is happening and I am wondering where ans how this affects the quality of the fish. Nadine– 64.105.207.37 21:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC) (The preceding was incorrectly signed at the top of the page. Corrected by LV w/o template.)

Nadine

[edit] External links

Please note that Wikipedia is not a collection of links (see WP:EL). I've replaced the random assortment of links in this article with the standard link to the the DMOZ open directory project. You are free to submit as many links to that place as you want, and in due course they'll be added to the directory. This keeps things clean and fair, and everyone's site can be checked and listed impartially. If you want to add references to the article, go ahead and do them as inline references.

Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 14:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Focus?

I intend to trim the stuff about angling way back. It's totally out of proportion for an article about the biology of a fish. Take a look at Atlantic salmon or Common carp and you'll see a much more realistic balance between general biology and angling. If people prefer, we could always divest the angling stuff to its own article (say, Striped bass fishing). But as it stands now, there's a huge amount of unreferenced, chatty stuff about angling. Naming brands of lures and suggesting warm footwear really isn't relevant to the article at all. Much more valuable would be referenced quotes on the value (in dollars) of the striped bass fishery, the environmental impact of introducing striped bass on native fish faunas, use of striped bass by native peoples (if any), and so on. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 09:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Neale I am going to agree with you on this one and actively follow-up on your suggestion:

If people prefer, we could always divest the angling stuff to its own article (say, Striped bass fishing).

The biology of a fish is the biology of a fish, whereas the cultural, recreational and economic aspects of a fish, especially one such as the Striped Bass are so exceptionally diverse, evolving and complex that trying to include them in an article purportedly devoted only to the biology of the fish is very difficult. Your comment:

Take a look at Atlantic salmon or Common carp and you'll see a much more realistic balance between general biology and angling.

Illustrates my point to in the best possible way. The history of Atlantic Salmon angling is storied and is a basis for much of our angling traditions today. There are even today, evolving recreational fishing opportunities and techniques for Atlantic Salmon, especially the Landlocked strains. On the Carp side, here is a fish that today is becoming one of the hottest tickets in fly fishing--the Golden Bonefish--It is a challenging and difficult fish to catch on a fly. In both cases, the articles are clearly imbalanced toward the biology of the fish--a biology that is pretty much fixed, known, yada, yada. Whereas, the economic, cultural and recreational aspects of this fish word for word, makes their biology a minor bit of information.
So Neale, I would encourage your support and the support of others involved in the "Fishes" project to concur with and support the creation of Fish Fishing articles and removing the angling aspects from the Fish Biology articles. --Mike Cline 13:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm assuming, Neale, that you're suggesting that some (most?) of the Fishing section be summary-style forked into an article on fishing for Stripers, and a summary and link be left in this article? I think I'd like to see what's being proposed, rather than just signing off on the idea (i.e. dropping two separate sandboxes for what this article would look like post-fork, and what the new article would look like post-fork. I'd be happy to set that up in my userspace.) That said, I can see what you mean about this article being very fishing-heavy by volume, and it is not impossible that the section could use some trimming (if you'd provide an idea of what you'd trim.) Have you, as an alternative, considered adding content to the article to balance it? Except for the fishing parts the rest of the article reads like a stub to me. LaughingVulcan 15:49, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I think creating Fishing for XXX articles is an excellent idea, particularly where fishing for a certain species is practically a free-standing hobby/sport in its own right. The parallel situation I've been involved with is with aquarium fish. Often, the major contributors on articles about things like guppies are aquarists. That's fine, but when you get an article that describes 90% of the biology of a fish from how it behaves in an aquarium, there's bias. Now, I *do* think that discussing angling is important when the prime commercial significance of a species is its value for that purpose. But I think it can be scaled a bit more elegantly, with the main article describing he history of its value as sport fishing, national records, environmental impact of introductions outside its range, and so on. The "nuts and bolts" if you will, like what lures to use and what kind of rod you need, are perhaps better in the Fishing for XXX articles. I have a book on the sport fishing of Nebraska sitting right here, and flipping through it I've found lots of interesting historical stuff about stocking these fish in that state. But I hasten to add that I'm not an angler; I'm a professional writer on aquarium fish, so my background isn't really of much use to this article. I'm happy to help, but I don't think I'm the person to lead for fear of offending more experienced angling writers. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 16:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't sound like a bad idea. While I think some 'nuts and bolts' are a good idea, it can be hard to make edits in Angling articles (or main articles with an angling component) that don't amount to a how-to. (Which is why I thought paring back *might* work.) For the moment, though, I've set up one sandbox directory, and two separate user articles, to investigate how this might work. They are at: User:LaughingVulcan/sandbox/Striped Bass Split/Striped bass and User:LaughingVulcan/sandbox/Striped Bass Split/Striped bass (fishing). I've only just set them up, and there is much editing to be done just to get it off the ground -- the "Fishing" section in the main article would need a summary paragraph, and the Fishing article would need an introduction, just for starters. Any who are interested may make test edits to these sandboxes, to see if the concept will fly. If it won't, then we'll just delete them without having to change the main article, and try something else perhaps. LaughingVulcan 17:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moved angling to its own article

As per the discussion above, I've moved the angling section to striped bass fishing, which should satisfy the scientists, who don't want fathoms of angling here, and the anglers, who like to write long articles and how to catch a certain species. Quite possibly both articles will need a slight polish to accommodate this division, as User:LaughingVulcan suggests. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 19:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Great Move Neale. Thanks--Mike Cline 13:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)