Talk:Marbled parrotfish

Copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of the large-scale clean-up project of a massive copyright infringement on Wikipedia. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously.

For more information on this situation, which involved a single contributor liberally copying material from print and internet sources into several thousand articles, please see the two administrators' noticeboard discussions of the matter, here and here, as well as the the cleanup task force subpage. Thank you. --Geronimo20 (talk) 04:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt to insert some new information

Hello, I realise that this page has suffered in the past and I am trying to reactivate interest in this fish, one of the smallest species of parrotfish. I've added some information about the size of this fish with an appropriate reference that is not just a popular guide to tropical fishes and that is widely available on-line at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/book/9780080925516 best regards to all AnteRN1970 AnteRN1970 (talk) 07:25, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong and not supported by ref. For a full review of claim check Talk:Parrotfish#re-organisation of info (paragraph starting with "Leptoscarus is not..."). Note also that AnteRN1970=Thescarid (socks – both blocked). RN1970 (talk) 18:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute about size of this fish

If anyone is interested in resolving this dispute, here is some interesting info... The fishbase general information sheet for this spcies reports a max sL of 35 cm based on a single unsexed specimen reported in Jack Randall's section on scarids in a checklist of fishes from the 80s see: http://fishbase.sinica.edu.tw/Summary/SpeciesSummary.php?ID=4360&AT=Dunya Randall, J.E., 1986. Scaridae. p. 706-714. In M.M. Smith and P.C. Heemstra (eds.) Smiths' sea fishes. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

If you look a bit further there are only 2 specimens refered to in the morphometrics section one 25.8 and the other 15.9 Two entries in fisbase morphometrics http://fishbase.sinica.edu.tw/physiology/MorphMetList.php?ID=4360&GenusName=Leptoscarus&SpeciesName=vaigiensis

A more in-depth study that Jack did with a student reports that most of the specimens of this fish are smaller Bruce, R.W. and J.E. Randall, 1985. A revision of the Indo-West Pacific parrotfish genera Calotomus and Leptoscarus (Scaridae: Sparisomatinae). Indo-Pac. Fish. (5):32 p. (Ref. 525)

a detail that Choat repeats in a chapter in Sale's 1995 book on the ecology of coral reef fishes (modal length of less than 20 cm)

Here are a couple of more recent refs that should clarify things for those who might want to know:

Gamoe A. Locham1, 3, Boaz Kaunda-Arara2, Joseph Wakibia3 and Shadrack MuyaWestern Indian Ocean J. Mar. Sci. Vol. 13. No. 1, pp. 69 - 80, 2014

Itaru Ohta**and Katsunori Tachihara Ichthyol Res (2004) 51: 63– 69DOI 10.1007/s10228-003-0197-z

This is not a large fish. To say it is one of the smallest or among the smallest or one of the smaller or ranother small fish seems like a matter of semantics - or style- to me. Is it possible that there is something else going on with these editor/contributors? I was under the impression that these wiki articles are supposed to be encylopedic rather than professional scientific articles, perhaps I am mis informed...

If someone has time ... Tschüß 70.76.232.129 (talk) 13:28, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]