Talk:Patagonian toothfish

Copyvio
Many of the phrases from this article are exactly the same as those at other random web sites. I am rewording it slightly in order to stop any possible copyright violations. - Mark Ryan 17:07, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * Sorry.. didn't see your message before I started editing. If you think it's still too close to the lifted article(s), go ahead and rewrite again. I'll try to get a taxonomy box fixed up soon. Hadal 17:20, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * LOL When I got the edit conflict, I set about trying to merge both versions into one, but found yours was a better version than mine anyway. Just one issue: are you sure the depth figures are correct? the initial version said up to 3000 feet, not metres. A conversion of that gives me 975 metres. Also, isn't the toothfish caught in the Indian and Southern oceans too? That's where Australian Customs is always arresting illegal fishing boats... Maybe it'd be worth mentioning the illegal fishing of it... because it's a huge issue here, and a major reason why Australians don't like the Japanese much is because of their whale-killing and illegal fishing. - Mark Ryan 17:32, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * You're right, they're also caught in the Indian and Southern Ocean (I've added mention to it in the article). The depth figures were gleaned from here, which I for one consider an authoritative source. Added a bit on the illegal pirate fishing with a link to the BBC report. If you'd like to expand, please do.. you'd be more familiar with the situation than I could ever be by reading a few ecology websites. :) Hadal 18:19, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Size
So the average catch size is 20 lbs but large specimens reach 440? Is this correct? Anchoress 19:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The fish is 1-2 meters long, it must weigh far more than 20 lb. This page says the big ones are 120 kg, which is 265 lb. So i can believe 440 lb toothfish have been caught, but i have a hard time believing any adult could be only 20 lb. Can anyone else find any other sources on their size? Foobaz·o&lt; 00:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe not, this page claims the average weight is only 10 lb. Since they live for many decades, continuing to grow, they must get quite big eventually but most fish caught are much younger. Foobaz·o&lt; 00:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I am a buyer for a large catering company and we use quite a bit of this fish - our average filets are over 10lbs - that would mean a fish yields 20 lbs of usable meat - these fish yield out at about 50% so that would mean the average fish is about 20K and not 20 lb >>tom gillespie 11-14-07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.74.161.114 (talk) 14:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * from DUHAMEL G., GASCO N., DAVAINE P., Poissons des îles Kerguelen et Crozet, p. 330 :
 * fish are common up to 110 cm (and big ones are known up to 215 cm)
 * relations between weight (kg) and total length = LT (cm) are :
 * weight (♂) = 33,343 x LT3,2601
 * weight (♀) = 31,978 x LT3,2685
 * transformation ratio for filets is 3.40 (so to give a filet of 10 lbs a fish is about 34 lbs)
 * --Channer 18:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

POV: Sustainability as food
A number of seafood consumer choice organisations such as Seafood Watch are relying on outdated information, and still have Chilean sea bass on the list of fish American consumers who are sustainability-minded should avoid.

This line sounds suspicious like a marketing ploy. It all but says that this fish is a sustainable food source, but that is contradicted later in the article where Greenpeace has as early as 2010 placed the fish on their redlist.

Also, their is a serious POV problem with the Colto section: the main article even uses a first person "our" at some point in the article. This altogether sounds like someone possible FROM Colto has been modifying this article. Whether Colto is or is not doing great work with respect to sustainable fishing, Wikipedia is not the right place to advertise an agenda. -- unsigned comment by User:174.63.81.103 at 2011-11-05T16:48:23


 * The COLTO section was lifted verbatim from http://www.colto.org/about-us/, so I have removed it as copyvio/plagiarism. In any case, as you say, the material about COLTO needs third-party sources to conform to WP:V and WP:RS. --Macrakis (talk) 21:39, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

This page in the news
It appears HRH Prince Charles and others have been reading this! JRPG (talk) 22:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Patagonian toothfish. 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/20130412183508/http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/SeafoodWatch/web/sfw_factsheet.aspx?gid=11 to http://www.montereybayaquarium.org/cr/SeafoodWatch/web/sfw_factsheet.aspx?gid=11

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:06, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Patagonian toothfish. 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/20051115123912/http://www.traffic.org/toothfish/tooth4.html to http://www.traffic.org/toothfish/tooth4.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061001171335/http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=3149 to http://forum.wgbh.org/wgbh/forum.php?lecture_id=3149

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Conservation Status
Why is there no conservation status bar for this fish as for most other species. Was it removed at some point? Scatman149 (talk) 13:50, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Because it has not been evaluated and assigned a status by the IUCN.Quetzal1964 (talk) 16:17, 17 September 2021 (UTC)