Talk:Atlantic herring

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Former good articleAtlantic herring was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 10, 2006Good article nomineeListed
May 9, 2009Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Animated Gifs edit

I love the animated gifs. It breathes life into the article. Well done Skeeter08865 14:41, 30 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Edits edit

Just started a cursory edit of the article will go through it more thoroughly in time. Their is a wealth of info about Atlantic herring on internet i have put one of the better sites in the external links. I think that info combined with what you have put in already Uwe should make for a well informed and interesting article. Do you think we could get Lupo and Salleman involved with helping edit and adding references? it would be cool if we could. probably could use some help with taxonomy box for Taxonomy reference goto *[1]. Yakuzai 28 June 2005 20:43 (UTC)

good idea, maybe it is better when you ask them - tax: we do it this way http://www.fishbase.org/Summary/SpeciesSummary.cfm?ID=24&genusname=Clupea&speciesname=harengus%20harengus fishbase is made by a student of our Kiel group, now visited by 11 million a month, 1000 cooperators - amazing what the web can produce - there is also a lot of refs Uwe Kils   June 28, 2005 20:51 (UTC)

Most Annoying Page EvER!! Can we please put the animated gifs on a diffrent page and link to them from here? This page takes forever to load and puts a huge strain on the server--Ewok Slayer --(User | Talk | Contribs) 02:33, 3 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Most abundant? edit

The article says:

Atlantic herring is the most abundant species of fish on the planet

but doesn't give a reference. I've changed this to "one of the most abundant species of fish on the planet" as I can't find any evidence for the more definitive claim.

I did find some interesting surveys of abundance of fish larvae: Franco-Gordo et al. surveyed the Pacific coast of Mexico and found Bregmaceros bathymaster (Bregmacerotidae) to be by far the most abundant; Aceves-Medina et al. surveyed the Gulf of California and found Benthosema panamense, Triphoturus mexicanus (both Myctophidae) and Vinciguerria lucetia (Phosichthyidae) to be most abundant. Note that these are all very small mesopelagic fishes.

  • C. Franco-Gordo, E. Godínez-Domínguez and E. Suárez-Morales (2002). "Larval fish assemblages in waters off the central Pacific coast of Mexico" (PDF). Journal of Plankton Research. 24 (8): 775–784.
  • G. Aceves-Medina, S. P. A. Jiminez-Rosenberg, A. Hinojosa-Medina, R. Funes-Rodriguez, R. J. Saldierna, D. Lluch-Belda D, P. E. Smith, and W. Watson (2003). "Fish Larvae from the Gulf of California" (PDF). Scientia Marina. 67 (1): 1–11.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Gdr 14:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

The omnivorous predator edit

The article doesn't list humans as predators because ... ?

The predator section should list Homo Sapiens as a predator? I would simply & provacatively add it myself but I don't have the research and I know it.

Wikipedia pages that may be related: Sardine, Fishing, Homo Sapiens, Fish (food), Overfishing

Wikivek 14:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging edit

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum caution and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform the project members on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 07:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

GA Reassessment edit

  In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of May 9, 2009, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR. Sasata (talk) 08:59, 9 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

  • The "Morphology" section, currently two short sentences long, tells almost nothing about what the fish looks like.
  • The "Predators" is merely a listing of other species, and not even a proper sentence.
  • The prose and flow in other sections needs to be improved; there are too many one-sentence "paragraphs".
  • The extensive "Further reading" section needs to be converted into in-line citations so that the article is properly sourced.
  • There is a wealth of scholarly literature available on this species that has not been mentioned, so the article does not represented a good general overview of what's known about the topic.
  • Large areas of empty white space are unattractive and should be avoided.
  • The taxobox picture Herringadultkils.jpg lacks source information.
  • Some picture captions are very long; much of this caption text should be moved to article text and better described.

Common staple in (at least) European cuisine edit

Yet absolutely no mention of this fish nutritional value in human's diet. Major omission, not a good article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.231.199.99 (talk) 09:47, 29 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

You are looking at the wrong article. Stop being so pompous and look at Herring as food. --Epipelagic (talk) 10:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
Ooh, thank you :) I seriously wasn't trying/feeling like/ to be pompous ;) I guess I just lacked the imagination to search for
"Herring as food" article, instead of just checking on the most obvious one, when given a jar of atlantic herring and checking it out
on my favourite website ;) Still, could have been easier to find or linked to from this article, IMHO :)
It is pretty strange that the only link to Herring as food in the article is in the template at the bottom. -165.234.252.11 (talk) 16:42, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlantic herring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Atlantic herring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)Reply