Talk:Minnow/Archive 1

Technically speaking
Removed redirect to gambusia, as it was extremely misleading. Gambusia affinis, the mosquitofish, is the subject of that article, and it is not even remotely a minnow. It is a viviparous member of order Cyprinodontiformes, not a viviparous (minnows and carps) at all. (In fact, the Siluriformes&mdash;catfish&mdash;are more closely related to true minnows than Gambusia is.) &8212Tkinias 08:39, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * I reverted Wiglaf's change; the use of minnow to refer to a stickleback is, according to OED, a specifically British regional usage, not Eurasia-wide. This could probably be clarified, though. &mdash;Tkinias 03:17, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Well done. I am ashamed to admit that I read the text too carelessly and thought that it was yet another anglo-centric text telling that a particular animal was to be found in Britain.Wiglaf 14:39, 11 Apr 2004 (CET)


 * Removed "Minnow, a metaphoric term used (particularly in sports) for an underdog." No sources.--Jsderwin (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Impact of recent student edits
This article has recently been edited by students as part of their course work for a university course. As part of the quality metrics for the education program, we would like to determine what level of burden is placed on Wikipedia's editors by student coursework.

If you are an editor of this article who spent time correcting edits to it made by the students, please tell us how much time you spent on cleaning up the article. Please note that we are asking you to estimate only the negative effects of the students' work. If the students added good material but you spent time formatting it or making it conform to the manual of style, or copyediting it, then the material added was still a net benefit, and the work you did improved it further. If on the other hand the students added material that had to be removed, or removed good material which you had to replace, please let us know how much time you had to spend making those corrections. This includes time you may have spent posting to the students' talk pages, or to Wikipedia noticeboards, or working with them on IRC, or any other time you spent which was required to fix problems created by the students' edits. Any work you did as a Wikipedia Ambassador for that student's class should not be counted.

Please rate the amount of time spent as follows:
 * 0 -No unproductive work to clean up
 * 1 - A few minutes of work needed
 * 2 - Between a few minutes and half an hour of work needed
 * 3 - Half an hour to an hour of work needed
 * 4 - More than an hour of work needed

Please also add any comments you feel may be helpful. We welcome ratings from multiple editors on the same article. Add your input here. Thanks! -- LiAnna Davis (WMF) (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Mudminnows
excuse me, but where do mudminnows fit into all of this? should they be classed as 'true' or 'other' minnows? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohdear15 (talk • contribs) 18:44, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Comment
"Smaller fish in the subfamily Leuciscinae are considered to be 'true' minnows." Speling12345 (talk) 7:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC) WTF

Consider merging with page on Common Minnow
There is a Wikipedia page "common minnow". Maybe consider merging the two.Mschutt (talk) 12:35, 12 December 2016 (UTC)