Talk:Common bream

Eggs
The German Wikipedia says the female lays 100,000 to 300,000 eggs (the figure I've gone with here), the French Wikipedia says 50,000 to 60,000, and the Esperanto Wikipedia says 100,000 to 150,000. If anyone can find an authoritative source for the actual approximate number, that would be great! --Angr 18:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki links
These are the other languages of bream.
 * be-x-old:Лешч
 * da:Brasen
 * de:Brachse
 * eo:Bramo (fiŝo)
 * es:Besugo
 * nl:Brasem
 * no:Brasme
 * sv:Braxen

So at least, da, de, eo, nl, no and sv of this page should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.126.26.43 (talk) 09:26, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe they should be removed from bream. Any article in another language that refers specifically to Abramis brama should be linked here. —Angr 09:30, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

North American bream
This topic needs to include a section on North American Bream, a group of sunfishes including Bluegill, Red-Ear, and others. American readers will expect that information, not a discussion of a European group of carp.

Loganvtn (talk) 11:17, 14 October 2010 (UTC)


 * This article is about Abramis brama: those species belong in the dab, and I've moved them there. Richard New Forest (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Article title
This article is currently called Carp bream, and the intro says (or said) "the carp bream (or simply bream in the UK)". As a Brit I have never heard this fish called anything but "common bream", "bream", or occasionally "bronze bream", and nearly all the Google hits for "carp bream" produce "carp, bream" (that is, the two separate species of common carp and common bream, in a list).

Which English-speaking area is it that calls it "carp bream"? I notice that the article includes material translated from French and German – have we perhaps translated one of their common names too? If, as it seems, the only English-speaking area where this fish occurs is the British Isles, then should we not be using "common bream", the usual British English name in the English Wikipedia? Richard New Forest (talk) 21:33, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm the one who started the article and translated it out of German and French. But that was almost five years ago, and I don't remember where I got the common name "carp bream" from. I probably googled "Abramis brama" and went with the most commonly occurring common name I could find. If there's evidence that "common bream", or "freshwater bream" (which is what this page calls it) is more common, I have no objection to moving it. —Angr (talk) 22:01, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Googling Abramis brama now produces "common bream", "freshwater bream", "bream" and a lot of stuff about a band. The only hits for "carp bream" seem to be WP or derivatives, so perhaps you've generated a new common name...  Richard New Forest (talk) 22:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I certainly didn't make it up. FishBase gives "carp bream" in addition to other common names. —Angr (talk) 22:32, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Here are two more pages calling it "carp bream":, . —Angr (talk) 22:42, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll let you off, you didn't invent it! The last two of those do look as if they might have used WP as their source, especially the last, which is full of web-facts: and I don't believe any British person would use the name like that spontaneously.  The Fishbase one does look more convincing, though no source is given.  Either way it seems that "common bream" is by far the most usual vernacular name.  Richard New Forest (talk) 22:58, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * The fishing in Devon site may well have used Wikipedia as a source, but I really doubt the research paper in the journal Helminthologia did. It was published in 2007 based on research conducted in 2002; they wouldn't have changed the common name they were using on the basis of a Wikipedia article that wasn't started until 2006. The paper was probably already being reviewed by then. —Angr (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, you may be right – they could perhaps have used an American dictionary. Hardly mainstream though. Richard New Forest (talk) 23:10, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Checking the Fishbase link more carefully, I was wrong, they do give their ref for "carp bream": it links to World fishes important to North Americans. However, it seems the main vernacular name Fishbase uses is "freshwater bream".

Are we agreed that Common bream is the most widely used English vernacular name? Richard New Forest (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

British English
This article has been written in American English: this is not appropriate for a species native to Europe and not found in America: the primary (and I think only) English-speaking area where the fish is found is the British Isles. Although I normally write in British English I have no particular objection to American English; indeed I frequently revert articles back to American, and I even occasionally write them in American (as best as I can) where appropriate. However in this case I don't see how it can be justified. WP:RETAIN states that the original English variety should be retained "unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic", which this species clearly has. Richard New Forest (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't agree this topic has "strong national ties" to Britain. The fish is found throughout Europe, not just in Britain. It's an international topic, and international topics can be written in either variety of English. —Angr (talk) 23:01, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * It's native to the British Isles, and not to any other English-speaking area. I really don't see how that's "international" in the context of the English WP.  Please can we have it in its native English variety one of its native English varieties .  Richard New Forest (talk)


 * English Wikipedia is international in scope, not limited to English-speaking areas. A topic whose "home range is in Europe north of the Alps and Pyrenees, as well as in the Balkans" and "is also found as far east as the Caspian Sea, the Black Sea, and the Aral Sea" is definitely an international topic. —Angr (talk) 23:16, 13 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Have a look at WP:TIES, where Institutions of the European Union is given as an example of an article with sufficient national ties to be written in British or Irish English. I can think of no difference between this case and that: both cover a large part of Europe and both include the British Isles.  Please can we now change the article from American English.  In fact I realise that the species occurs in Ireland as well as Britain, so Irish English would be a perfectly acceptable alternative to British.  Richard New Forest (talk) 10:31, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * If it's that important to you, go ahead. I'm just sorry to let go of one of the few articles left here on "Brittipedia" that's written in American English. —Angr (talk) 18:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * OK, appreciated. I must say the predominance of British English on Wikip(a)edia is not something I've noticed!  Richard New Forest (talk) 20:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Take a look at the histories of Yoghurt and Humour. Both started out in American English, were moved to British English without any discussion, and now can't be moved back because there's no consensus to do so. —Angr (talk) 21:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes, there are a few of those, but they are hardly typical of WP. Articles are far more commonly started in American and stay that way, simply because there are far more Americans on WP (and they all start articles while we are asleep...).  Richard New Forest (talk) 22:14, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, that's not my impression. And since I live in Germany, I sleep at more or less the same time as people in Britain do. (Which may have something to do with my impression that not only are most articles in British English, most vandalism is too. I think the British vandals are out while I'm awake, and the American vandals come out when I'm asleep.) —Angr (talk) 22:22, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:22, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Abramis brama Prague Vltava 1.jpg

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:38, 18 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Abramis brama Prague Vltava 1.jpg