Talk:Barbel (fish)

Barbel vs. barb
Are you confusing the common name barbel of the fish, Barbus barbus with the common name barb which is the usual term for fish in the Barbus, Puntius, Capoeta, Barbodes, and other genera? The first sentence of this article seems fishy (pun intended). Neil916 00:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure who wrote this - I created the new page when splitting up 'barbel' into 'barbel (anatomy)' and 'barbel (fish species)', and didn't alter the text - it definately needs a clean up and some more info. to make it clearer. I assume the article is supposed to be about Barbus barbus - it may need more disambiguation later.HappyVR 11:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks like the article barbus definately needs expanding.HappyVR 14:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

more
Ok - There's a small problem here - this article calls the english species Barbus barbus and says there are 50 more species. (Need more info.)

I've created an article Barbus barbus and linked to and from this page - the specific fishing info. on this page could be combined if someone can sort out any confusion between classification. I'll have to search for more species of barbell before I can do any more.HappyVR 12:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The text in question was created in July of 2004 by an anonymous user in July of 2004 who has done nothing but make that modification to the (then) barbel article. The information is unsourced and I think it should be treated as sneaky vandalism that escaped notice.  I've dropped most of the unsourced information (with the exception of fishing in the UK which I've tagged with a Citation needed tag) and merged it into the Barbus barbus article, unlinked this page from everything and tagged it for deletion.  Neil916 15:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Found many species of Barbel (mostly Barbus genus) - suggest not to delete for now - page acts as common name disambiguation now. Will see what to do about species found (no articles as yet). Genus Barbus page needs updating. Work in progress.HappyVR 21:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Is it necessary to have two disambiguation pages for "Barbel"? There already is a Barbel (disambiguation) page, shouldn't the common names for the additional species you found just be added there with links to the species articles? Neil916 21:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems that Barbels (the group of fish known as barbels) are sufficiently diverse to need an article to themselves - I would have used the genus Barbus but that has members that are not barbels unfortunately. The other possibility is to deal with them at the Barbus barbus page but that doesn't really seem right. As they form a group I think they should have a group page.HappyVR 22:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll withdraw the nomination for deletion. I agree that the Barbus barbus article wouldn't be the place for them. Neil916 23:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Article name.
Given that one of the other main senses of "barbel" is "a body part of some fishes", I wonder if "Barbel (type of fish)" might be more useful than just "Barbel (fish)" for disambiguation purposes? —Ruakh TALK 19:17, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Barbel (fish). 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120313010502/http://www.sicm.org/anglingdiary/Thebeginnersguidetobarbel...thespecies.html to http://www.sicm.org/anglingdiary/Thebeginnersguidetobarbel...thespecies.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)