Talk:Channel catfish

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fishes Mid‑importance 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.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2013. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Washington University in St. Louis/Behavioral Ecology (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

The tag reads, "The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject." It seems misinformed to complain about any bias specific to the US when the species is native to that region. It's a bit like tagging {globalize/Australia} in an article about kangaroos. — VoxLuna ☾ ^orbit_land   04:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"They have also been introduced into some waters of landlocked Europe and parts of Malaysia.[1]"

landlocked links to Czech Republic and Europe links to Romania. Isnt that more ED then WP? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.242.53.165 (talk) 16:58, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great additions to the behavior sections. My edits were mostly minor. I noticed you used a semicolon a lot when I thought it was more clear and nice for the reader if a period was used instead. I made changes to the places I thought a period fit best. I also edited the way some sections were worded and took out redundant info in a few sentences. The biggest changes I made, however, were to move the Pectoral Stridulation section to be the next one after Sound Production and put a [citation needed] at the end of the paragraph because I felt like it was missing a final source. Finally, I inserted two more Wiki Links for chemosensory and stridulation. Additions to make the article a little more broad in its coverage is what I recommend for the next edit. Be sure to update the introduction so that is reflects the rest of the article. I put a class banner at the top of the Talk Page so that other Wikipedia editors know it is the subject of a class project! Great Work! Claire.Edelman (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page is very thorough in the behavior section. I think length and weight are best put under characteristics. As such, I moved length and weight under the characteristics section. I didn’t have many edits, just additions. The characteristics section also needed some rewording; as such I restructured the section. In addition, the section lacked detail on the taste reception of the channel catfish, as it was very broad. As such, I added information to that section, under the header “feeding”. liu.alexander (talk) 21:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a description of the catfish in the beginning intro in order to help readers understand what the channel catfish looks like. It would be much more effective to have the length and weight section as one of the first sections of the page. Also a section on reproduction and diet would help the page just as general information. The section on behavior seems to be more about how the function of communication works in the channel catfish rather than actual behavior patterns such as interaction between two different channel catfish. Overall, the page is very well done and informational. Junsu.shinn (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:57, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice contribution! I changed the headings of your behavior section so that communication was a subheading. Please check that out to see if the new article structure seems appropriate. You might consider changing your headings titles to be more concise. The communication section is very thorough, though sometimes it seemed too technical or like I was missing some background info which might not be great for Wikipedia's general audience. I actually combined the Sound Production and Pectoral Stridulation sections because the topics were similar and the paragraphs flow together reasonably well. Otherwise, I made some minor grammatical changes and changed some sentence structures to make them less wordy or more clear. I also added a few wiki links. If you continue with this organism, I would suggest dedicating more words to any information you can find about mating or perhaps swimming behavior. If you want to write outside behavior, you might add a section about human interaction with them since they are an important food source. The article's lead also suggests that catfish are farmed more now though the rest of the article doesn't elaborate. Andrewkamel (talk) 01:32, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made very minor grammatical changes to the text, primarily focusing upon making your writing more concise. My main suggestion for improvement would be generating an expansion of the “Feeding” section. Given the fact that your “Communication” section is so in-depth, I think that balancing the behavior setion would be the most productive improvement. However, I realize that this proposal is somewhat nitpicky because your article is already quite detailed. In addition, I made a minor change to your organization, grouping “Hearing” and “Communication to predators” under the broader category of “Communication.” Although this can certainly be changed back to its original format, I think that separating hearing from communication is ineffective and may confuse the reader. Perhaps, “hearing” should be separated from the “Behavior” section and a new “Physiology” section could be placed under “Characteristics.” However, this is a minor suggestion and is certainly not required in order to improve the overall quality of the article. I also added some hyperlinks, including “drumming” and “swimbladder,” which may assist the reader in conveniently finding other information about aspects of the article that are not common knowledge. You article is, however, well-cited throughout all sub-sections. --Gschalet (talk) 01:36, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While this article has very thorough information regarding communication, other information should be added to get this article up to good article status. Taxonomy, morphology, and diet sections should be added. Also, information about behavior beyond communication should be added. The length and weight section should be part of the morphology section. The length and weight graph should be next to the morphology section. Many citations are missing, which need to be fixed. More pictures should be added throughout the article. Its scientific name rather than its informal name should be used throughout the article. LibbyWard (talk) 23:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 11 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zachthatguy (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Lindseybean28 (talk) 21:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]