Talk:Walking fish

A fact from Walking fish appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 November 2006. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that walking fish can actually skip, crawl, slither, and even climb trees?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2006/November.

Wikipedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2020 and 11 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jeffroudbai.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Climbing Trees?[edit]

I see the main page today in the "Did you Know?" section says that walking fish can climb trees, yet the article only says they are "claimed to climb trees". There are no sources cited to back this up in the article. - UnreferencedVariable 01:58, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you google a bit and help improving the Climbing gourami article (which must contain this source rather than this article). `'mikkanarxi 02:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly could use google and find information about the Climbing gourami but I fail to see how that makes the main wikipedia page and the walking fish article claims of tree climbing acceptable for inclusion in the article. And the Climbing gourami article doesn't even mention tree climbing so why would the sources be noted there? - UnreferencedVariable 03:25, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please learn how wikipedia works. Start from the wikipedia:Welcome, then go to Wikipedia:Five pillars. We are not here to give you all what you want. We are here to do what we can. If you can help with improvements, welcome. `'mikkanarxi 05:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you think I want, but I thought someone might be able to explain why claims without sources are considered acceptable. - UnreferencedVariable 15:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to ask a question, just ask it. Now it is clear what your concern is. No, the claims without sources are not acceptable. If you see a dubious statement in an article, you mark it by adding the text {{fact}} after it. In the article it will be seen in this way: ^{[citation needed]}. In this way voluneer editors who know things and have spare time may quickly see a problem place ans add missing references. If the statement in quiestion is really dubious, you explain in the talk page why you think it is dubious.

In addition, please keep in mind that "Did you know" section is for newly created articles, which are not supposed to be perfect. The nearly perfect ones are called Features articles. I suspect you were thinking about them when you expressed your worry "why would a bad article be shown on the main page" `'mikkanarxi 17:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now, as for references, e.g., [1] mentions "tree-climbing fish". If you know what mangroves are, you will find nothing unusual that a walking fish can climb them. Of course, "don't climb a tree to look for a fish", as Chinese say, and you dont fid a fish perching in a palm tree...

I am leaving it to other enthusiasts to describe "tree-climbing fish", whether it as a fact or urban legend, but they are definitely spoken about. `'mikkanarxi 17:41, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

article cleanup[edit]

I removed the following for lack of relevance:

"Other notable walkers are handfish, who use their pectoral fins to walk about on the sea floor. Their modified fins have the appearance of hands, hence their name."

"Another animal with confusing name is flying gurnard, which does not actually fly, but can walk instead (although flying fish do exist)."

This article is supposed to be about fish that walk on land. I think 'handfish' could be a 'see also' item.

Furthermore, the alleged fact that "many" walking fish are invasive species is not supported within the article. I think the subject is interesting, but this article is in need of a re-write, starting with its organization. - IstvanWolf 23:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this article is only about fish that walk on land, otherwise the amphibious fish article would cover just about all the necessary material. This article should be about fish that use walking as a form of locomotion, whether it be on land or underwater. MiltonT 03:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also... fish from mars?

Hmmmm.