text:
Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero/Archive 2

President of Spain
"José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero (born 4 August 1960) is the President of Spain."
 * President of Spain? Spain is a constitutional monarchy. It should be "Prime Minister". - Mike Rosoft 09:26, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Spain indeed is a constitutional monarchy but the official title of the Spanish PM is Presidente del Gobierno or President of the Government. Nevertheless his official title, the office-holder is commonly referred to in English as the "Prime Minister". In Spain, the PM is often called simply Presidente and Spaniards will often translate the title in English to President which sometimes causes some linguistic confusion. --fdewaele 25 November 2005 11:35 CET
 * Yes, there is a confusion of terms. In Spanish, the word "presidente" may mean either "president" or "chairman, head of an organization". In Czech, the title of the head of government is "předseda vlády" (lit. "chairman of the goverment"; "předseda" is a translation of "president" - from Latin, "to sit before"). It is always translated "prime minister", and so it should be in this article. - Mike Rosoft 21:52, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Zapatancas' point of view
First, I want to thank Katefan0 for the interest he has placed in this article and in trying to solve the problem going on here for too long. To help solve it, I will expose my point of view about the subject. I am going to divide my exposition in the following points:

 * General statement about what my intentions in the Wikipedia have been.
 * My point of view about the supposed complains against the article: spelling, neutrality and general use of the English language.
 * My opinion about SqueakBox behavior.

General statement about my intentions in the Wikipedia
First of all, I want to make clear that my only intention in the Wikipedia has been to increase the available knowledge about the current Spanish political situation. I have always tried to provide facts and, whenever it has been possible, I have cited sources supporting those edits I considered facts. As a logical consequence, whenever a user has removed something I considered a fact I have tried to recover it and to convince the user about the convenience of preserving what he has deleted (or to let him convince me he was right).

To provide a little evidence about this, I would include this link to the version of the article I consider that best summarizes what my activity here has been, as I provided most of the information there. It can be observed that almost every paragraph includes a reference.

To illustrate what I believe that has been my typical behavior when dealing with a user who had removed something I consider that should be preserved I include the following link. I posted that message in the talk page when a user removed the information about Zapatero’s supposed belonging to Freemasonry, a "rumor" stronger everyday in Spain.

My point of view about the controversial points of this article
I want to make clear that the confrontation here only involves SqueakBox and me, as there seems not to be other users actively interested in this article. So, by now, the strong complains against the article has been expressed by SqueakBox and nobody else.

Spelling issues
SqueakBox first edited the article on May 2, 2005. At that time, the article has been written using American spelling for almost two months (for example, this version of March 7, 2005 used only “American” words). It has included American words since the edit by Merovingian of March 15, 2004, when he included the term ‘organization’. At the time, the article was still a stub made of five paragraphs and 320 words that included two words spelled the British way: ‘modernising’ and ‘organisation’ (that is, the article included both forms organization and organization). As can be checked using the history page, from that day, and more or less until March 2005, the use of American words increased in the article until it finally became completely American.

Although SqueakBox found an article that used American spelling consistently, he changed the spelling of some words to British claiming that “EU articles should not be written in American”.

Other users did not accept that and the article continued to use American spelling (for example, take a look at this version of the article by Pbhayani of July 7, 2005).

On October 26, 2005, SqueakBox decided again to ask the spelling to be changed arguing that all articles about Spanish politicians are written in British English (something false, for example, the article about Aznar uses American spelling).

A request for comments was submitted whose results can be found in the file 2 of the archived talk.

JamesMLan contributed the following rules from the Manual of Style:
 * Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the spelling of that country.
 * If an article is predominantly written in one type of English, aim to conform to that type rather than provoking conflict by changing to another.
 * If all else fails, consider following the spelling style preferred by the first major contributor (that is, not a stub) to the article.

As I reasoned in the talk page, I believe this rules imply that the article must use American spelling because:
 * The article does not focus in a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country.
 * The article was predominantly written in American English before SqueakBox decided to change it to British English. (And he is the only user who wants to change it).
 * As I have said, the mix of spellings started when the article was still a stub. The major contributors to this article have been Pbhayani, Miguel and me (Zapatancas). All of us have used American spelling.

This reasoning, a little more elaborate, was posted by me on the talk page (Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero/Archive 2). I expressed that, in my opinion, that closed the discussion. I received no answer from SqueakBox.

After that, however, SqueakBox has insisted on using British words, even though he seems unable not to mix spellings. In the article currently blocked (authored by him) there can be found the following British words: 'organised', 'legalised', 'normalise', 'criticised', 'organisers', 'unfavourable', 'rumours', 'honouring', 'legalising', 'travelled'. And the following American ones: 'minimize', 'criticized', 'organized', 'favor', 'favorable', 'traveled'.

Neutrality
Squeak Box has repeatedly accused me of being a POV warrior and the article of being NPOV. However, he has never reported a single non-neutral passage in the talk page.

On May 20, 2005, he introduced for the first time a NPOV tag. I asked him what passages of the article he believed to be not neutral. As it can be found in Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero/Archive 1, he provided no positive answer. Therefore, I change the NPOV tag to its long form, which asks all the users accessing the article to report disputed passages.

Nobody reported anything. That prompted me to post a NPOV ultimatum in the talk page on July 6, 2005. After one month and two weeks, no disputed passage had been reported and I said that if in another week nothing was it was clear that the NPOV tag made no sense. Finally, Pbhayani removed the tag. As I have said, nobody had reported anything.

Recently, on November 16, 2005, he included the NPOV tag again. He did not report any single passage in the talk page. He has not done yet.

However, he has removed the following passages justifying in the edit summaries that they are not neutral:

 * "The opposition People's Party considered the decision [of accepting the participation of Gibraltar as a partner in the discussions about its future] a surrender of Spanish rights over the colony, but Zapatero justified it as a new way to solve a 300 hundred years old problem." That paragraph expresses the views of the People Party and of Zapatero about a decision by the Socialist Government. Both points of view are treated as point of views (that is, not like proven facts or universally accepted stances) and they are treated fairly. Why is the paragraph NPOV?

 * "It is believed that Zapatero is a Freemason. Among the major proponents of that theory is Ricardo de la Cierva, a prominent, right-wing Spanish historian." SqueakBox justifies the removal of the passage because it is "speculation about freemasonry". The passage is exactly saying that it is believed Zapatero is a Freemason. That is, the passage does not say Zapatero is a Freemason. So, the passage to be POV should be either false (that is, nobody believes Zapatero is a Freemason) or the number of people believing should be negligible. Ricardo de la Cierva is sure Zapatero is a Freemason so there are people who believe it (that is, the passage is not false). The number of people who believe is not negligible either. Things like "Zapatero masón" (Zapatero is a Freemason) can be found in street graffiti, in political posters, in banners in the demonstrations against the government, in the programs of radio stations opposed to the Government or in TV programs. If the keywords "Zapatero+masón" are searched in Google, the search engine provides 14,100 links if only the results in Spanish are returned. Thus, I believe that "Zapatero is believed to be a Freemason" is an objective fact and, because of the very definition of non-neutrality, it cannot be POV.

 * "As a student, he [Zapatero] admired the agrarian reforms of Mao Tse-tung as well as those in the Soviet Union." SqueakBox claims this is communist POV. In the version of the article of May 13, 2005, that passage also appeared with a cite pointing to the page 71 of the book "Zapatero. Presidente a la Primera" by Óscar Campillo Madrigal (probably the biography about Zapatero most sold to date). So, or SqueakBox has evidence proving that biography is inaccurate or I believe that passage cannot be removed alleging it is POV.

I want to emphasize that SqueakBox has never reported any single disputed passage in the talk page so it could be discussed effectively in order to make a better article. The passages I have just mentioned were deleted by him alleging POV only in the edit summary, after removing them. And I do not believe any complain against them could not have been solved better bringing them to the talk page.

Use of the English language
I have never hidden I am from Spain. I have no problem recognizing my English is far from perfect and, consequently, I have never complaint if somebody has corrected any of my mistakes.

SqueakBox posted on July 14, 2005 this: "BTW Well done Pbhayani for an excellent job. When I tried to clean up Zapatancas' English he reverted me so it is great sopmeone else has done both that and removed the POV, SqueakBox 17:30, July 14, 2005 (UTC)" ([Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero/Archive 1# NPOV ultimatum]). He claims I revert the article to unintelligible English (he did yesterday, November 24, 2005, in the Administrators' noticeboard). He also claims that I revert to "Spanish English", as can be seen (here).

The truth is that dozens of users have taken part in the improvement of the article. Some of them were Spanish speakers but a lot of them were English native speakers. Especially, Pbhayani, who was an English speaker, worked very hard in the article. The result of his work can be found in his version of July 7, 2005. As it can be observed, the structure and content of the current article and that version are extremely similar, as few variations have taken place since then. As it has been said, SqueakBox define Pbhayani's work as superb.

SqueakBox has provided some examples as proofs of the "terribly bad" English (he calls it Spanish English) of the article:
 * "[…] it discriminated citizens for its sex". That passage was first introduced on the version of March 7, 2005. Nobody corrected it until November 24, 2005, including SqueakBox himself. So, if it is a mistake so terrible (and not a simple slip of the tongue easy to fix), why nobody, including all the English speaking editors of the article, has been able to fix it for eight months?

 * SqueakBox has also criticized the incorrect use of capitals. He claims that the header “Personal Life and Youth” introduced by the first time in the version of November 16, 2005 from the IP address 140.247.42.158, located in Massachusetts (USA), is an example  of  Spanish English because only the first word of a header is capitalized according to the Wikipedia style. That was the style the article has used for months and it was used before SqueakBox arrived in May. Since November 23, SqueakBox removes almost every capital he finds in a header, introducing mistakes as he does not understand that common nouns are capitalized in English when they behave like proper nouns. For example, he changes European Union to European union or ‘Spanish Civil War’ to ‘Spanish civil car’ (that is, he has several times written car and not war). The very Wikipedia articles can be used to learn that European Union is written capitalized (it is the name of political institution) and that Spanish Civil War must be also capitalized (it is the name of a war).

SqueakBox behavior
First of all, I want to make clear that I am trying to express my opinion. I do not try to offend anybody with this section.

My opinion about SqueakBox is that he acts in bad faith. He is from Britain, but he claims to live in Honduras, far from his family and, probably, alone; perhaps because his family and he are not in good terms. I believe that he does not like his life and that makes him feel bitter against the world. As so many people in the "real world", I think he wants to forget his internal pain making others feel miserable.

In my opinion, the following facts prove this:

 * When he first come to this article, it was divided into several parts because it had become very long. There exist the main article on Zapatero, and others like "Zapatero’s foreign policy", "Zapatero’s domestic policy" and so on. He substituted those articles with redirects to the main article and, although he moved some of the data in the extended articles, an important part of it was lost. He did not ask the opinion of those who had invested their effort into creating those articles. He has never explained why he did not ask those articles to be deleted if he believed them so useless. (In fact, they can be still accessed.)

 * He has accused me of using the sock puppets SqueakingPig and SqueakingPigAttacksAgain that have vandalized his user page. That is false, he has no evidence and I have never been blocked and I have told him so thousands of times. He do not care about that, of course, because he has said I must prove my innocence (I believe it is others who would have to prove I am guilty, that is what happens in democracies, at least).

 * He posted this in May referring to me: “His vicious personal attack has been removed. I expect an immediate apology. If he replaces it or writes something equally nasty he will be repeorted, I am not far from trying an Rfc. His right wing views, which are found in all his encyclopedic writings, are very clear from his latest edits. Wikipedia is not a place to launch a passionate defence of the PP and an attack on Zapatero. Zapatancas appears to be a POV warrior trying to manipulate wikipedia for his own political ends. There is absolutely no nedd for excess articles, and particularly not excessa articles that Zapatancas won't let anyone else edit, --SqueakBox 14:19, May 12, 2005 (UTC)”. As I have said, I only want to provide information. I have never prevented other users from editing nothing. If I have changed other editor’s contribution, I have tried to explain my decision respecting his/her effort.

 * This post is also full of false accusations: “This article is hopelessly biased against Zapatero (my opinion is by Spaniards more patriotic to the USA than their ownm country and region). When I changed it I got loads of persoanl attacks, and am uninclined to reedit until the atmosphere of intimidation here improves. Don't remove the NPOV unless you can answer my objections, --SqueakBox 15:46, May 20, 2005 (UTC)”.

 * More insults: “Who sent you the message. There is a troll on this page. We know who he is, and his rule over this page is shortly to end. The artiucle is a pile of crap, but he uses sockpuppets and nasty insults to get his way. By all means change anything you like, with my full and energetic support. Ya basta, SqueakBox 15:48, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)”

 * More insults mixed with nonsense: “This article does not conform to wiki stanmdards, is full of original research, and has had the spelling changed to US English, so it needs both a cleanuop tag and an NPOV tag until thesde problems are thoroughly sorted. At present this article is a disgrace to wikipedia. SqueakBox 13:56, 16 November 2005 (UTC)” This article does not have original research at all. As I have said, some of its versions included almost a source per paragraph.

 * SqueakBox complete justification of why he included the NPOV tag in November: “[…]Is Zapatancas really claiming the article is clean? conforms to a neutral point of view? contains no original research? if he claims such things I dispute these claims, and will not accept his removal of legitimate tags without cleaning up the article, making it conform to NPOV, and without his original research in it. […]”SqueakBox 13:22, 18 November 2005 (UTC).

Many other examples could be given.
 * SqueakBox’s view of the discussion about the spelling to use: “treported the passage. Viajero had a look and agreed with me. Noen of the people who took part in the recent discussion agreed with you. Now we have ity confitrtmed Spanish kids learn Brit English it is easy to see thatb you don't know how to write in American English. You tried and it was a disaster. I archived the discussion out of space issues, as per standard procedure. What is this talk of my defeat? I thought the discussion ended with a clear consensus to use Brit English, which also follows policy (which are the rules we are duty bound to follow) which states that we should use that English which was initially used, which was clearly British English. BTW the policy also prohibiyts using sockpuppets to vandalise the user page of other users. I suggest you rwead the policies pages, as I have done, and then follow them, as I do, SqueakBox 14:15, 22 November 2005 (UTC)”. Clear consensus? Viajero agreeing with him? (Viajero did not take part in the discussion) I do not know how to write American English? Perhaps, but as I explained I often check my edits with the American English version of the Microsoft Word spell checker. So, how can a user who is acting in good faith say I mix spellings when I have checked several times the whole article with a computer?

Conclusion
To finish, I only have to say that my only aim when I decided to become part of the Wikipedia community was to share my knowledge with others. That is why I have edited the article about Zapatero. As I am Spanish, even though I do not master English, I could contribute knowledge very difficult to find for English speaking people.

I have invested a lot of effort trying to write a good article and trying to preserve information that those who do not like plurality would prefer to remove.

I honestly believe that SqueakBox has acted in bad faith, that his main aim has been to harass other users (in this case, me), that he has never contributed anything useful to this article and that this article could be one of the best in the Wikipedia if it had not suffered his activities.

For all this, I ask SqueakBox to change his behavior and, if he does not, I ask the Wikipedia community to help stop why I consider to be a damaging, unjustifiable attitude. Zapatancas 13:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Zapatancas and his death threats and why I won't have anything to do with the death threat troll
You forsook the right to ask for anything when you opened SquealingPig and SquealingPigAttacksAgain. Unmless you profuselhy apologise I will not co-operate with you in any way or read what you have to say. You have to take consequences for your past actions. I have never acted in bad faith but you clearly have. I am extremely angry at your deviant behaviour and ask you either to apologise or withdraw from this discussion. On the other hand you're threat to erase me if I continue working at wikipedia I meet with the deepest contempt. I have no intention of stopping working here due to Zapatancas' death threats. He has no right to demand anything with his death thereats, which he must withdraw and apologise for if we are to move on. He is far and away the worst and most deviant editor I have come acroiss in over a year of editing, and I for one will not back down to his death threeats. The day wikipedia gives way to it's bullies is the day it goes down the tube. I will continue to defend wikipedia from scum like SquealingPig, and will continue to edit this article to make it better, and will converse with anyone other than Zapatancas about this article or about what to do with deviuant users who create sockpuppets like SquealingPig AttacksAgain. Zapattancas lying accusation that I was behind the attacks on my own page is a truly demented idea from the person really responsible. Giving way in any poinmt to Zapatancas would be like giving way to terrorism. He should have thought about wanting a say in this article before starting to edit as SquealingPig. Now is too late, SqueakBox 13:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

You two guys are becoming EQUALLY ANNOYING. You two both made one fine mess out of this once great article. The blame goes to both sides. - fdewaele 25 November 2005, 15:30 CET

Excuse me but how is that so? I have not vandalised anything in the wikipedia, Zapatancas has made 2 vicious attacks on my user page. There is no justification or equality in such attacks. Also please source youer claims that I have made the article worse with diffs or don't make such claims, SqueakBox 14:51, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Mediation
Is the only solution. I am willing to go through mediation on the condition that a developer checks the edits of SquealingPig and SquiealingPigAttacksAgain and see if they are located from the same place as those of Zapatancas. That way if I am wrong I apologise and if he is wrong he does, SqueakBox 14:51, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

Redirects
It is very important that all these get fixed, and that editors don't start deliberately editing direct links and making them into redirects as one editor was doing yesterday. Such behaviour is in direct contradiction of wikipedia policy, and could be used as evidence of one editor stalking another, ie the stalker deliberately undoes the fixed redirects of the stalked, reverting them back to redirects. Stalking is something the arbcom have recently condemned, SqueakBox 14:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

 * What redirects are you talking about? Zapatancas 09:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Please slow down
Dumping reams of text into this page is less than useless; I didn't even read it. It's much more useful to take your points one by one. Please take it piece by piece. Also, I'd remind everyone to comment on content, not on contributors. I realize sometimes this can be difficult to do when you get angry, but try. · Katefan0(scribble) 17:19, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Katefan0, I understand your point of view and I also understand that it is easier to look the other way when another person is being unfairly attacked. I also believe that the situation going on in the current article probably has no parallels with any other in the rest of the Wikipedia. I would like to ask you two hypotetical questions (although of course they are related to the current situation):

 * Do you believe that a person resented against the world (they exist, don't they?) can use the Wikipedia to hurt people? The Wikipedia is anonymous and it is easy to find vulnerable people. There are a lot of users who have worked hard to write good articles and it is so easy to delete their contributions, to claim that what they have made is useless, to align with the side that looks stronger when a POV discussion is taking place against them and so on. It is so easy to hurt others' feelings in the Wikipedia!!! How is a harssed person supposed to defend his/her rights?

 * Would you believe with no place for doubt that a person who never answered, even though he was asked repeatedly, what he believed to be not neutral in an article where he had added a NPOV tag, can be interested in the content of the article? And if that same person adds again a NPOV tag some months later and does not report anything again?

 * Those were the two hypothetical questions. Now I ask you a "real" question: what are the issues regarding content? I have no idea. I only know that this article is a "pile of crap" and a "disgrace for the Wikipedia".

 * Zapatancas 09:27, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not interested in hypothetical questions. I'm interested in discrete content disputes.  I'll ask again.  Please outline specific information that you would like to see changed. Take it a point at a time. · Katefan0(scribble) 15:43, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Katefan0, I must recognize that yesterday I finally understood what your strategy here is. You have probably solved conflicts in the past where two users seemed to hate each other but, finally, they solved their differences and cooperated in writing a better article. In fact, I can understand that because something similar happened here before SqueakBox first "edit". Another user spent months recovering an old version of the article whenever anybody changed something. When it was eventually possible to communicate with him, he claimed that he had never used the talk page because he did not know how it worked. Once it was possible to solve the problem through dialog, every point of the new article he disliked was discussed and he stopped his negative behavior. And probably, his point of view (once he exposed it) helped improve the article.

Perhaps of that previous experience, I am especially sure that SqueakBox acts in bad faith as it seems strange to me that it has not been possible to change his negative attitude after months of reasoning. But as I understand your skepticism and I am grateful for your interest in solving the problem here I promise I am going to forget all the evidence pointing to SqueakBox's bad intentions.

Because of that, I am open to discuss every content dispute constructively. I would like to "outline specific information that I would like to see changed." However, I cannot because SqueakBox until now has never exposed what he does not like. I cannot explain why I do not agree with him because I have no idea why he disagrees with me.

So, I believe that if the current situation in this article is to change it must be him the first person to explain clearly what he dislikes, in order to allow a serious dialog to start. Zapatancas 08:43, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it takes two to tango so to speak. I'd like to hear from SqueakBox also what his problems are. I can speak at least to one point.  Apparently whether to use Americanized or Britishized spellings has been an issue.  The WP:MOS is fairly clear on this.  Articles on American subjects should use American English; articles on British subjects, should use British English.  Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the spelling of that country.  There is some wiggle room here since Spain isn't an English-speaking country, but I think it can be argued successfully that Spain teaches Britishized English spellings and pronunciations and so therefore, probably, British spellings should be used.  It's true that when there's no clear way to determine whether something is more "American" or more "British," often the first-used spelling style is retained. But in this case I think British spelling should be used regardless. In any case, the spellings should be harmonized -- no "center" and "centre" in the same article. · Katefan0(scribble) 17:18, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, I am happy that, at last we start to talk. Katefan0, you are right in what you have said but I believe it is incomplete. I have already explained above in this page my point of view (in Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero). I summarized here my conclusions:

 * When the article was a stub of 320 words and contained three British words, a user introduced an American one. The use of American words increased and increased until March 2005, when all British words had disappeared. SqueakBox first "edited" the article on May 2, 2005. He claimed the spelling had to be changed because Spain was in the European Union and changed some words from American to British (that is, an article in pure American became a mix of American and British). Nobody paid much attention to him at that time and the use of American English was kept in the article. In October, the conflict restarted and an RfC was asked. No consensus was reached.
 * The Manual of Style of the Wikipedia provides clear rules to decide what spelling must be used. Those rules are:
 * Articles that focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country should generally conform to the spelling of that country.
 * If an article is predominantly written in one type of English, aim to conform to that type rather than provoking conflict by changing to another.
 * If all else fails, consider following the spelling style preferred by the first major contributor (that is, not a stub) to the article.

 * If we apply those rules to this article, my conclusions are the following:
 * The article does not focus on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country.
 * The article was predominantly written in pure American English and it had been for almost two months, before SqueakBox decided to change the spelling of some words to British English (that is, a user did not aim to conform to the type of English predominantly used).
 * The mix of spellings started when the article was still a stub. The major contributors to this article have been Pbhayani, Miguel and me (Zapatancas). All of us have used American spelling.

 * As a cosequence American Spelling should be used unless a consensus of active users preferred another spelling.

I have provided a lot of references to previous versions, comments and all that in the section Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and a more ellaborate reasoning. I want also to make clear that "my" last version, previous to the currently blocked one, used only American spelling as the article have done almost always in the last months since March 2005.

In my honest opinion, I believe my conclusions follow a pure logical path, at least if the Manual of Style is a superior guide for all the Wikipedia users. So, if British Spelling is to be used instead, I believe I "deserve" :-) to be explained where the mistake in my reasoning is. Zapatancas 08:37, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm sorry, but I'll continue to disagree with you on this one. Your argument stands primarily on the fact that the article isn't focused "on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country," backed up secondarily by references to what to do if that question isn't clearly answerable.  But I believe that question is in fact clearly answerable and pertinent to this topic.  The article is not focused "on a topic specific to a particular English-speaking country" -- but, it is focused on a topic specific to a particular country that very clearly teaches British English.  That satisfies the first point and therefore I believe we need to go no further.  I think the rest of the stuff about who used what language first is nothing more than wikilawyering, given the strong case that can be made to support the primary rule. I suspect that most folks would agree that this article properly should use British English, regardless of what past folks used. · Katefan0(scribble)/ my ridiculous poll 16:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Katefan0, I am from Spain and saying that British English is clearly taught in my country is not very exact. A little piece of evidence is provided by me :-). In fact, in my opinion, it is more correct to say that most Spanish Schools use English books made in Britain than that Spanish students are taught British English. Moreover, English teaching in Spain is very bad and Spaniards do not learn to communicate in English at school. Besides, the influence of American English is far higher in Spain than that of British English and American spelling is more similar to Spanish. Probably, the schools that really provide a good English education devote some time to explain the differences between both variants.

I must disagree with you in that "most folks would agree that this article properly should use British English, regardless of what past folks used." You can find the contributions of those people who took part in the RfC about the spelling in Talk:José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero/Archive 2 and you can verify that most people believed that there was no clear reason why the article should be written in a specific variant (in fact, I think the only person defending that was SqueakBox). One of the most interesting contributions was that by Angel Riesgo (who is Spanish but lives in Britain):

 * Why the issue of using British or American English in the article on Rodríguez Zapatero should be so important is beyond me. Anyway, for what it's worth, I would like to point out that the style of English taught in Spanish schools is almost universally British English. When I was at school, we used to use British books by Longman or Oxford University Press and teachers would teach us words like "colour" or "metre". The -ize spelling is, however, more usual than -ise probably because British EFL books also favour that spelling, which is acceptable in British English (and used in most printed books, although not in the press). At any rate, English is not an official language in Spain, so I don't think one should assert that Spain-related articles in English Wikipedia should necessarily adhere to British spelling. But it is true that the EU always uses British spelling in its English-language publications, if that is relevant at all. --AngelRiesgo 19:35, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

That is, Angel Riesgo points out that in Spain is really taught a mix of British and American English (as the -ize suffix is preffered) and that he does not believe articles about Spain must use a specific variant of English. Zapatancas 09:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

This link points to today's edition (December 2, 2005) of the English edition of "El País", the most sold Spanish newspaper and the only one with an English version as far as I know. It uses American spelling. Zapatancas 12:49, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Hm, that's interesting. Well, I've stated my opinion and will leave it at that, though it does appear there's some questions left unresolved here!  I still feel that British English is, while perhaps not as ubiquitous as I had assumed, is still used more often than Americanized English, in Spain.  I still think that makes a strong case for using British English in this article, particularly since the EU uses British spellings in its publications as the anon noted above. But, this isn't really a big enough point to haggle over extensively if you ask me. · Katefan0(scribble)/ my ridiculous poll 15:32, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree that the discussion about the spelling is becoming ludicrous and surreal and that too much effort has been already wasted in it. But I cannot resist the temptation of providing an additional piece of evidence!!! I found an old English textbook of mine this weekend and, as you can imagine, I started perusing it to discover what spelling I was taught. What I found was that lessons included at its beginning original English texts (from newspaper articles, books, etc.) and some of those texts used British spelling and others American spelling (for example, throughout the book both forms "neighbor" and "neighbour" could be found). Moreover, the textbook included sections to explain the differences between English and American variants (you know, truck and lorry, candy and sweet, tap and fawcet, t... and bathroom,...) and it was true that the "-ize" spelling was preferred (it was the only one used). So, in my opinion, the conclusion is that the aim of the Spanish education system is to teach English, what includes teaching the differences between variants. That is, in theory, both American and British spelling are taught. (In practise, neither of them is learnt.)

Regarding the use of British English by the EU, the truth is that Spanish is also a European official language, so every official document produced in Brussels must have a copy in Spanish that is the one valid in Spain.

Finally, I must confess I never thought a discussion about spelling could become so tricky :-). Zapatancas 08:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Unprotected
I've unprotected; it's been protected several days. Please, everybody, try to talk constructively and don't edit war. Comment on content, not contributors, even those you have a history with. Thanks. · Katefan0(scribble)/ mrp 20:22, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Removal of POV check
I have removed the POV check tag because nobody has provided any information about any controversial passage. I myself asked Mike Rosoft (the user who added it if I am not wrong) what he believed that could be not neutral but he has not answered me although he has accessed the Wikipedia in the past days. The discussion about the supposed POV has been constant for almost a year. But if the supposed complaints about POV are analyzed the conclusion is that most of them come from the user SqueakBox and that his real goal was to attack, insult and harass those users who have taken part honestly in the improvement of this article. This has become evident in the last month, when he did not even try to justify his behavior after Katefan0 blocked the page so the "conflict" could be solved through dialog and not by edit wars. Zapatancas 14:54, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Freemasonry
I'm going to change the part about Zapatero being believed to be a Freemason. I was frankly surprised to read that -- I had never before heard anything about that issue, although I live in Spain and follow Spanish politics quite closely.

User Zapatancas himself admits it to be a rumour, and not a very extended one in my experience. It is however very plausible that Zapatero might in fact be a Freemason, given his family antecedents. Many of his ideas are also coherent with Freemason ideology. But the text gives the impression (in my opinion at least) that it is a widely held idea.

I think the following text is more representative of reality:

Ricardo de la Cierva, a prominent right-wing Spanish historian, among others, believe that Rodríguez Zapatero is himself a Freemason.

If no one objects I will make the change shortly.

bml 16:22, 2 January 2006 (GMT)

 * I don't object your decision and I even like it :-). In any case, I would like to note that relations between the Spanish Catholic Church and Spanish Freemasonry had been really bad historically (well, they have killed each other sometimes) so, even if it is false that Zapatero is a Freemason, the fact that an important social player in Spain like the Catholic church believes it can have an important influence on the Spanish political life. In my opinion, perhaps the reason why the radio station COPE, owned by the church, is being so active against the Socialist Government could be related to that situation. Zapatancas 17:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Zapatancas 17:01, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Suicide bombers
I must tell that the passage about Zapatero's declarations regarding the sucide bombers can be considered the pure truth. So please, don't delete them. I provided long ago this reference. I know that Libertad Digital is very right-wing, but in this case they are reporting the truth. It was also reported by other media, the problem is that not all of them have their old articles available on the Internet.

That passage had already been discussed here. The discussion can be found in the second file of the archived talk. In any case, if anybody has any doubt after examining the offered data I am open to discussing anything. Zapatancas 16:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Minor changes
I have added some extra information in the Politics with EU and Latinamerica. I think (and have also changed it) that info about Poland should be included in the EU section (as Poland is a member of EU) Mabuimo 20:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)mabuimo

Nice one, SqueakBox 15:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Zapatancas new harrassment
Zapatancas made this edit, implying that this is his/her article and that if I attempt to edit it I am harrassing Zapatancas, apparently I can be blocked merely for editing this article. I urge him/her to read the bit that says If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it, and as I want to edit but am not allowed to I am instead sticking the cleanup and NPOV tags on the article until it can be cleaned up and made NPOV, SqueakBox 16:06, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Clean-up
Have cleaned the article up, removing bad speling, incorrect names and titles, anti-ETA and anti-UK POV and the use of the word terrorism, and so have removed the tags, SqueakBox 22:01, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Blatant vandalism
SqueakBox has mixed spellings again. An RfC was conducted to solve the problem peacefully. He has decided not to respect its result. He has claimed in the past (here) to respect the American Spelling, that is, the spelling that has ensured a consistently written article for more than a year. His actions only intend to harass a user, me. Zapatancas 14:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I've requested the article to be protected here Zapatancas 14:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean mixed spellings. I can't see any? And what do you mean by not allowed, certainly it is not vandalism. By that reason yopu would yourself be a vandal as this article has had mixed spellings since the day you changed the original British spelling. Whatever, this is not a vandalism offence nor is it reason to promote thye weasel terroist word which is equally not allowed or the anti-ETA POV, see NPOV, SqueakBox 15:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Blatant vandalism? This? What am I and everyone else missing./ Please bring your arguments to the page if you want to revert changes made by other users, don't call those changes blatant vandalism, that serves nobody. Please explain in detail how my edit is blatant vandalism, SqueakBox 14:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

You are mixing spellings even though you know that the article uses American English. Mixed spelling is not allowed. Zapatancas 15:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

No I'm not mixing spellings. Please give an example? SqueakBox 23:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Is this the spelling conssensus reached in december you were referring to? SqueakBox 15:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

ETA
Repeated use of the weasel word terrorism is actually discouraged at wikipedia so it isn't okay just on this article. Besides using the word terrorism half a dozen times in relation to ETA is blatant POV, which again has no place in this article, SqueakBox 23:37, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Devious argument
Devious argument used to justify SqueakBox's vandalism.

There is a difference between treating all points of view fairly (even Al Qaeda's) and inventing things. Nobody denies Spain is suffering from terrorism or that ETA is terrorist. Not even the very ETA. Why should it? It started killing in 1968, at that time Nelson Mandela justified the use of violence against the apartheid. They have been proud for years of using terrorism against the "cruel" Spanish government and they are not going to deny now what they have said for decades.

SqueakBox has invented that ETA denies being terrorist to justify his harassment. Zapatancas 09:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Well that isn't an argument it is an attack based on a fantasy harrassment from a known vandal. terrrorism is a weasel word and just because one wants to defy wikipedia consensus is no reason to change it. Given that I am allegedly harrassing you how come it is you who commit acts of wanton vandalsim and them=n blame your victim, SqueakBox 13:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Common name usage
In English he is commonly called Zapatero. he is not known as Rodriguez Zapatero. Therefore we must call him Zapatero and not Rodriguez Zapatero every time we mention him, SqueakBox 23:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Devious argument 1
Devious argument used to justify SqueakBox's vandalism.

User:Cantus changed it (here). If you had acted in good faith you would have discussed that with him. Show other users a little respect. Zapatancas 09:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I haven't committed vandalism, unlike you. Just stop lying, okay? I would also point out that Cantus is a reasonable user not a vandal so please don't compare your shenannigans, bvandalism and edit warring with that honourable Chileño, SqueakBox 13:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

''If you had acted in good faith you would have discussed that with him. Show other users a little respect.'' You don't have to seek out someone's permission to change thjeir edits. That is where you are misunderstanding wikipedia, SqueakBox 15:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Common format
Political parties like the PP and the PSOE are always shortened in subsequent references throughout wikipedia, therefore they need to be called that here as well, SqueakBox 23:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Devious argument 2
Devious argument used to justify SqueakBox's vandalism.

The use of the terms Socialist Party and People's Party (or Popular Party) are very typical in the English press; where, in fact, the acronyms PSOE and PP are rarely used. Even in Spain the "extended" form is often used. Where is the problem in using typical expressions understood by everybody? SqueakBox tries to justify his vandalism and intimidate other users by preventing them from using valid expressions through brute force. Zapatancas 09:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Wiki standard is to use PP and PSO, both of which are habitually used in the Spanish and English media. Presumably vandal Zapatancas merely opposes me because he wannts to build up his imaginary case of being harrassed (I think your English is giving you problems, you are the victomario not the victima), SqueakBox 13:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Capital letters
It is not alright to capitalise words like Terrorism and Socialism in the middle of a sentence' it is plain bad English, SqueakBox 23:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Devious argument 3
I couldn't care less if 'socialist' is capitalized or not. But to claim that George Orwell's English was bad is another devious argument. Here it can be found the text of Homage to Catalonia, written by him, where the term socialist is always capitalized. Zapatancas 09:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

If you dont care about wikipedia that is your problem not mine, George Orwell has nmothing to do with this, SqueakBox 13:18, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Failure to debate
Zapatancas, please debate your points here. Edit warring while refusing to engage in a ny talk page debate is not wikipedia procedure. I have made my argumenht. You are reverting me while refusing to engage in debate, behaviour not normally welcomed at wikipedia. If you want to ahve a case in your pursuit of me I suggest you engage here, SqueakBox 14:55, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Devious argument 4

 * Vandalism is always reverted. To be taken seriously the first rule is not to vandalize any article. Zapatancas 09:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Arbcom
Zapatancas has taken me to arbcom as an alternative to debating on this page. Se Requests for arbitration. The fact that he has chosen that course of action rather than debate is very sad. he has also twice this week asked for the page to be protected in order to prevent me from editing the page. rather than cloudy the issue I urge him to engage in debate about any changes he wants to the article here rathjer than merely edoit war while doing his or her best to erase me from wikipedia. This is the same Zapatancas who has seen fit to vandalise my user page here, SqueakBox 22:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Devious argument 5
When an article is protected nobody can edit it, including me.

SqueakBox has claimed one thousand times I am a troll. Why is he afraid of proving that before the ArbCom? Zapatancas 09:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

100% Proof, and I don't wantn you to stop everyone editing the article, SqueakBox 13:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Zapatancas devious arguments
Indeed, SqueakBox 13:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Conclusion
Zapatancas' conclusion that all my 5 arguments are devious and therefore he cann just revert every edit I make to this article is, IMO, a devious conclusion designed only to justify his reverts. Drop your hostility and personal attacks, read some wikipedia style guides (I have read the lot, have you?) and then come up with some workable compromise as reverting everything I do here is not a reasonable compromise and this issue can only be sorted out by reasonable compromise. His wanting the article protected and his insistence there that unless the article is protetcted or I allow him to fully revert all my edits he will just keep reverting all my edits indicates that he is still not ready to engage in rational and adult debate. Erasing me from wikipedia is not the solution Zapatancas, and your belief that it is the only solution is getting in the way of (estorbando) this article SqueakBox 15:00, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Medal
Zapatancas now claims the medal someone awarded me on my user page was a WP:NPA and his vandalism cleaning it up was necessary to protect wikipedia, SqueakBox 13:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

 * SqueakBox is insulting other users by calling them "rather strange". To remove personal attacks is not vandalism. It is to vandalized other user pages as you did here against my user page. Zapatancas 13:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The trolling behaviour is entirely onesided. Now this individual accuses me of vandalising my user page. I think it takes a special sort opf person to think along such warped lines, and in this case is ridiculous as Zapatancas himself vandalises my page, SqueakBox 14:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Weasel words
Congratulations for removing the weasel word terrorism from your reverts. Now perhaps you can see my edit was made entirely in good faith and that your wholesale reversal of it wasn't. You have actually let me make a new edit for the first time in 6 months. Well done! Progress at last, SqueakBox 14:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I want to remind you that before the ArbCom you will have to source all your claims. So, please, be careful when you say things like that I (that is, a user who accesses the Wikipedia no more than twice per week on average) does not allow you, (that is, a user who spends ten hours a day on the Wikipedia) to edit an article.
 * You continue mixing spellings and introducing other mistakes. Devious arguments are never sufficient to hide vandalism. Zapatancas 16:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The arbncom will only be interested in the personal attacks. The evidence overwhelmingly points to you being SP and I am very glad that someone else is finally going to investigate. At last. False claims of vandalism are normally considered attacks. You access the wikipedia more than twice a week (at least 10 times this week) and I don't remotely work 70 hours a week on wikipedia, what a ridiculous claim, SqueakBox 16:59, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

False claims
Don't make false claims of vandalism when no vandalism has occurred Such behaviour is the sign of a POV troll falsely labelling an edit as vandalism because they find it disagreeable. You need to shape up your attitude Zapatancas as you cannot create consensus with lies, and your lying claim of vandalism means you have to change that behaviour in order for us to find consensus, I am not making lying claims that you are vandalising so you need to (a) actually read the relevant page on vandalism) and (b) withdraw your lying claims, as if you wants a resolution to this editorial dispute you must first of all stop making false vandalism claims. Otherwise I will, quite reasonably, assume that you are still taking SquealingPig as your model on how to behaviour, ie you are not interested in this article or encyclopedia but only in attacking me. In order to integrate as a normal member of wikipedia Zapatancas must stop making what he knows to be fake vandalism accusations as the person making them in these types of circumstances is indulging in trolling and is not serious in the edits they are making to the article. If you want to be taken as a serious editor start acting like one and desist now and forever from false claims of vandalism, something of which I am completely innocent, SqueakBox 13:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I read your rant, and I am still in the dark about how you were accused of vandalizing and why you aren't guilty of such....... and it makes it hard to agree with you. Please explain both.

 * KV 17:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

False vandalism accusations are to be found here, here, here, here, while here he accuses me of destroying his work, here and here opf harrassment, whereas there has been neither harrassment nor vandalsim going on, vandalism is deliberately destroying a piece and is always reverted on site by a variety of users whereas [v this] ios a normal edit meant to help the wikipedia. My rant is because I am at the end of my tether about Zapatanmcas, his vandalism of my user opage and his sockpuppets, which were indeed acts done purely to harrass me, eg , , , , 12:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

See other users comments, SqueakBox 12:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Professor
Please source Zapatero was a Professor not a teacher. Profesor the Es word translates as teacher and I dont believe he was a Professor, ie this needs sourcing SqueakBox 14:52, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you SqueakBox for proving again you have never read the articles and you are not interested on the subject. Only on harassing. Zapatancas 15:34, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

? SqueakBox 01:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

edit by Zapatancas shows I am right. Who did you claim wasn't reading the article? Be assured he was not a Professor, a lecturer and a Professor are worlds apart in the English language. I am concerned that you are letting your hatred of me cloud your judgement. Please lets keep in mind that accuracy in this article of a living person is essential and claiming he was a Professor is simply a mistake, SqueakBox 15:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Read the definition by the Wiktionary. I cannot teach you your own language. Thank you for reading a couple of lines of an article, you are making progress. Now, you have to read the rest. Zapatancas 15:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

current
Why is this article tagged as current? According to El Mundo and RTVE he isn't anywhere in the papers. I have thus removed the current template, SqueakBox 01:42, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Of course Zapatero is not a current event. The article is completely outdated for more than a year. Well, since you started your harassment to be exact. Zapatancas 15:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

In that case you sshould not have put aa fake current tag on the articvle, confusing our readers into thinking something was happening to him. Editing your flaky was not harrassment so I started nothing. You began the attacks with your SquealingPig socket puppet and thus here we are here. At least I can leave the article in reasonable shape, knowing you wont be able to edit it for a year with your semi-comprehensible English and strong anti-Zapatero POV. Phew, a job well done! SqueakBox 02:08, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Solana
Who put in Javier Solana is PP? He is PSOE. If you revert me Zapatancas please ensure that you don't continue propagating this which you know to be untrue. I also dont believe you can accuse me of sabotaging the article or editing purely to harrass you with this one, eh? SqueakBox 01:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I knew you did not read the articles. But it seems you do not even know what the article is about! Zapatancas 15:18, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

It was a cheap and flaky attack and I have removed it, SqueakBox 01:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

"ZP" nickname
The ZP article used to contain:

 * ZP is a popular nickname of the Prime Minister of Spain José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Those two letters were included in the Socialist electoral posters used during the 2004 electoral campaign and are an acronym of the slogan 'Zapatero Presidente' ('Zapatero President').

which should probably be worked into this article somehow. --Piet Delport 10:43, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, SqueakBox 14:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

The truth is that the article contained that information in the past but SqueakBox removed it (see here). No wonder he is going to be banned from this article for a year. The saddest thing of all is that he claims his "contributions" to this article (such us changing "citizen" to "citisen" or using "its sex" when it should be "their sex") are some of the best he has done in the Wikipedia!!! Zapatancas 15:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Your death threat edit looks like it will come to pass eh? Just your watch your back very carefully for the rest of your life as you never know when the tap on the shoulder will be the police wanting to know why a PP activist is making death threats on wikipedia against someone who would not let him stitch up Zapatero. The El Pais will love it. Meanwhile you have to live with the fact that you have threatened someone to death, you have committed serious criminal offences in Honduras, etc, SqueakBox 16:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Fishes

WikiProject Fishes aims to help organise our rapidly growing collection of articles about fish taxa. Issues outside the scope of this WikiProject include fishkeeping (fish aquarium topics), fishing, fisheries, fish cuisine topics, fish farm topics, fish market topics, fish processing topics, fish product sales topics, fish products topics, and fish trap topics.

At the end of October 2021, there were 33,888 articles within the project's scope. During October 2021, the most popular 500 articles received 7,931,480 views, averaging 255,854 views per day.

Related WikiProjects
This WikiProject is an offshoot of WikiProject Tree of Life:

 * WikiProject Science.
 * WikiProject Biology
 * WikiProject Tree of Life
 * WikiProject Animals
 * WikiProject Fishes

It is the parent project of:

 * WikiProject Aquarium Fishes
 * WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing (co-parent with WikiProject Sports)
 * WikiProject Sharks

It is worth keeping one eye on several Wikiprojects that overlap with this one, including:
 * WikiProject Cephalopods
 * WikiProject Cetaceans
 * WikiProject Conservation worldwide
 * WikiProject Ecoregions
 * WikiProject Marine life

Associated Portal

The Fish Portal is the associated portal of WikiProject Fishes.

Participants

 * For recruiting additional members, see users associating themselves with fish.

 * 1)  - any but has a fondness for tropical reef fish
 * 2)  - all species but with some level of expertise in tropical reef fishes, and the largest freshwater ancestral species.
 * 3)  - Seahorses and pipefish, et al.
 * 4)  - Fish biologist expanding and updating articles on north Atlantic fishes.
 * 5)  - mainly images and references
 * 6)  – I've developed many articles for this project, mostly about fish types, habitats and ecology or related to fisheries.
 * 7)  (Created 2 fish articles before signing up here. Black scabbardfish and Amphiprion akallopisos)
 * 8)  Lover of fishes, specifically wrasses and salmonids. Not active much, but would love to help in any way I can.
 * 9)  I am interested in fish
 * 10)  Hiii I just created articles for most grayling species and now start working on other freshwater species in Russia and East Asia! Have a good day!
 * 11)  I hate fish stubs, so I make them bigger
 * 12)  Freshwater fish
 * 13)  I like fish. They're fascinating and it's lovely to know more about them init?
 * 14)  Fish biologist/anatomist studying a variety of fish taxa, from pupfishes to cichlids to bramids. Editing when I have the time.
 * 15)  Interested in expanding and improving all articles on North American Salmonidae
 * 16)  I LOVE sharks
 * 17)  Lifelong fish enthusiast with particular interest in Centrarchidae family
 * 18)  Sporadic editor on marine organisms of Southern Africa, including fishes.
 * 19)  Pupfish. Lots of Pupfish. Main Goal: Make ichthyology better.
 * 20)  I got interested in this sort of thing for the Fish Quiz itself I am willing and ready to help!
 * 21)  I try to add more to fish articles that are stubs
 * 22)  (ive created 12 articles for this project, but i just realised i didnot sign the project page)
 * 23)  Autopatrolled user with more than 50 pages under my belt. Largely focused on neotropocal characiformes.
 * 24)  Editing or creating drafts for articles, especially of Sri Lankan fish.
 * 25)  I've recently created many fish species articles, and a genus article, and am interested in creating many more.
 * 26)  I love sharks
 * 27)  - Yuriy Kvach
 * 1)  Interested in expanding and improving all articles on North American Salmonidae
 * 2)  I LOVE sharks
 * 3)  Lifelong fish enthusiast with particular interest in Centrarchidae family
 * 4)  Sporadic editor on marine organisms of Southern Africa, including fishes.
 * 5)  Pupfish. Lots of Pupfish. Main Goal: Make ichthyology better.
 * 6)  I got interested in this sort of thing for the Fish Quiz itself I am willing and ready to help!
 * 7)  I try to add more to fish articles that are stubs
 * 8)  (ive created 12 articles for this project, but i just realised i didnot sign the project page)
 * 9)  Autopatrolled user with more than 50 pages under my belt. Largely focused on neotropocal characiformes.
 * 10)  Editing or creating drafts for articles, especially of Sri Lankan fish.
 * 11)  I've recently created many fish species articles, and a genus article, and am interested in creating many more.
 * 12)  I love sharks
 * 13)  - Yuriy Kvach
 * 1)  (ive created 12 articles for this project, but i just realised i didnot sign the project page)
 * 2)  Autopatrolled user with more than 50 pages under my belt. Largely focused on neotropocal characiformes.
 * 3)  Editing or creating drafts for articles, especially of Sri Lankan fish.
 * 4)  I've recently created many fish species articles, and a genus article, and am interested in creating many more.
 * 5)  I love sharks
 * 6)  - Yuriy Kvach
 * 1)  Editing or creating drafts for articles, especially of Sri Lankan fish.
 * 2)  I've recently created many fish species articles, and a genus article, and am interested in creating many more.
 * 3)  I love sharks
 * 4)  - Yuriy Kvach

Other participants
See Category:WikiProject Fishes participants for participants who have associated themselves with the project using the User WPFishes or User WPFishes2 userboxes.

Structure and criteria for inclusion
Articles should normally be about particular taxa. For example:

 * '''Class: Actinopterygii
 * Order: Catfish, Cypriniformes
 * Family: Gourami, Centrarchidae
 * Genus: Black bass, Lepomis
 * Species: Largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides

If a family has only a single genus, the family name should redirect to the article on the genus (e.g., Elassomatidae). If a genus has only a single species, the generic name should redirect to the species (e.g., Centrarchus).

When a genus contains only a small number of similar species, the articles may be combined with the article on the genus (e.g., Crappie, which includes the white crappie, Pomoxis annularis, and the black crappie, P. nigromaculatus.)

Also see the lists at Tkinias/Fish, SpeciesFishes1, SpeciesFishes2, SpeciesFishes3, and MarineFishList

Common names
Common names should be written in sentence case rather than title case, following normal English usage and that of FishBase. Use, for example, "largemouth bass", not "Largemouth Bass". Place names or personal names that form part of a common name remain capitalized, hence "Guadalupe bass" (in reference to the Guadalupe River) or "White Cloud Mountain minnow" (in reference to White Cloud Mountain in China).

Systematic names

 * Use systematic or "scientific" names according to established biological usage.
 * Capitalize but do not italicize names of taxa higher than genus, e.g., the family Exocoetidae.
 * Capitalize and italicize generic names, e.g., Xiphophorus.
 * Italicize but do not capitalize specific epithets.
 * Refer to species using full names, e.g., Xiphophorus hellerii or X. hellerii but not hellerii.
 * Neither italicize nor capitalize anglicizations of systematic names, e.g., "the pumpkinseed is a perciform fish".

Article titles
Article naming for fishes differs, as detailed below, from Naming conventions (fauna).

Use the common name for any species that satisfies at least one of the following criteria: Use the Latin name for any species that fails to satisfy criteria 1(i) to 1(iv), including such situations as the following: Guidelines
 * 1(i) The species has a single common name that is widely used and never used for any other species. While the species in question may have additional common names, those names are rarely used. Example: Greenland halibut.
 * 1(ii) The species has a widely recognised common name that is so rarely applied to other species that confusion as to the subject of the article is unlikely to arise. Example: Guppy.
 * 1(iii) Within the area where the species is endemic and/or of commercial importance, only a single common name is used by the relevant legal, conservation, fisheries or local institutions, even though other common names may exist. Example: Atlantic salmon.
 * 1(iv) The species has a common name that is normally separated from similar common names by use of geographical, descriptive, or other modifications to those names. Once differentiated, these names satisfy criteria i, ii, or iii above. Examples: Shovelnose sturgeon, Little shovelnose sturgeon, False shovelnose sturgeon.
 * 2(i) The same common name is regularly applied to multiple species. Example: Green spotted puffer.
 * 2(ii) There is no single common name used for the species. Example: Black widow tetra (a.k.a. Black tetra, Petticoat tetra).
 * 2(iii) The species has different common names in different English-speaking countries. Example: Plec (UK), pleco (US).
 * 2(iv) The species simply has no widely used common name. Example: Dermogenys sumatrana.
 * Regardless of the title used, articles should include the scientific name in bold and italics and all significant English common names in bold in the first paragraph (and preferably the first sentence).
 * The first paragraph should differentiate the fish from other species with which it might be confused. This may be done by explaining the ambiguity, with links to other fish (e.g., at tilapia), or by mentioning geographical distribution, for example:
 * The guppy (Poecilia reticulata), also known as the millionsfish, is a small fresh and brackish water fish from Central America.

 * Disambiguate species that might be confused by using a disambiguation hatnote (e.g., at freshwater hatchetfish). A simple form of disambiguation hatnote is:
 * This article is about the ; for the see .

 * Create a disambiguation page when the ambiguity involves many fish and a hatnote would be too long. Example: Tigerfish.
 * Before renaming articles, discuss the reasons for doing so on the Talk page. In cases of disputed naming, where a consensus cannot be reached on the article's Talk page, the matter should be discussed at WikiProject Fishes to allow a consensus decision to be reached.

Regional lists of species

Lists of fish species should follow the form: List of fishes of . The definite article may be needed for the name of some regions. Note that "List of fish of ..." is incorrect when dealing with a list of the species.

Higher taxa
Articles on taxa above species should be titled using the common name, if one exists and is unambiguous. Otherwise, the scientific epithet should be used. When FishBase or other references give a common name of "xes and ys" or "xes or ys" for a higher taxon, the scientific epithet (possibly anglicized) should be used for the article title.

Articles on taxa above the generic level should be titled with the Latin form of the name and not the anglicization, e.g. Cyprinidae not cyprinid, and Perciformes not perciform. The anglicizations may be freely used in article text however.

Taxonomy
Taxonomy at the level of genera and species should follow FishBase. Higher-level classification should follow the 2016 fifth edition of Fishes of the World by J.S. Nelson, T.C. Grande and M.V.H. Wilson for consistency. If applicable, disputes in classification should be noted in article text.
 * Note: When listing the species authority (the author(s) who originally named the species or subspecies of interest), in the taxobox or elsewhere, parentheses matter. For example, "Foogenus fishii Smith, 1900" has a subtly different meaning than "Foogenus fishii (Smith, 1900)". Parentheses indicate that Smith originally placed fishii in a different genus, and the species was subsequently placed in Foogenus. See more at Binomial nomenclature and Template:Taxobox (Animalia usage).

Categorization
Wikipedia categories should be created for well-known families, using the plural of the common name of the family (Category:Centrarchidae or Category:Cyprinidae), and for orders, using the common name (e.g., Category:Catfishes) or the scientific epithet (e.g., Category:Cyprinodontiformes). For very small families (e.g., the pygmy sunfishes), only the order category may be used, but usage must be consistent among members of a family.

Taxoboxes
All articles on taxa should have taxoboxes (constructed using the taxobox template, not built from scratch) including kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species. The new taxa above class should not be indicated, since they can be found elsewhere in Wikipedia. Taxa between class and order should not be used, since they are unstable and can be found in the class and order articles. For large taxa, intermediate classifications may be indicated in the taxobox. For example, Perciformes should indicate their suborder and (if one exists) superfamily, and members of large families should indicate subfamilies. All members of a taxon should, however, be consistent in the usage of intermediate classifications.

See WikiProject Tree of Life/taxobox usage for the full details of taxobox construction.

An example taxobox, for the warmouth (Lepomis gulosus), is given at right. Note that the specific name is L. gulosus, not simply gulosus, and that the generic name is not bolded, since the article is not about the entire genus Lepomis.

Images
An image should be included in the taxobox if an appropriate one is available.

Higher taxa should use images reflecting their types, if possible. For example, Lepomis uses an image of L. auritus, the redbreast sunfish, which is the type species of the genus, while Centrarchidae uses an image of Centrarchus macropterus, the flier, which is the type (and only) species of Centrarchus, the type genus of Centrarchidae.

The taxobox image should ideally picture a single fish, facing left, in a horizontal orientation, cropped to 20 percent of the fish's length around the fish's body, and should be 250 pixels wide. (The image should not be resized manually; the full-size image should be uploaded and markup used to create the 250px image. Note that very large images may be resized before upload so that they will fit in a normal browser window when enlarged.)  For articles long enough to warrant inclusion of additional images, these may be placed as thumbnails in the article body, ideally showing the fish in its native environment.

Note that images of fishes which do not possess right-left symmetry should not be flipped to obtain a left-facing fish; doing so would, for example, convert a righteye flounder into a lefteye flounder.

Text captions should not be used on taxobox images in species articles, but in articles on higher taxa, the article caption should indicate the species pictured (if known), in the format " Common name (Genus species) ". If the species depicted is not known, the caption should identify the fish as closely as possible, as in "Pygmy sunfish (Elassoma sp.)"

It is always beneficial to have a picture that communicates a sense of scale. This can be achieved by Anyway, any image is better than no image - esp. if you have only third party material available, or if you don't want to get the animal out of its living environment.
 * placing standard sized physical objects next to the fish (human hand or body, tape measure, etc.), before taking the photo. Sometimes the background scenery will already do the job.
 * painting a measuring scale into an existing image, if you know its exact scale (that's not the same as knowing the average size of the species, btw).
 * painting a reference shape (human silhouette, etc.) into the picture, if your idea about the scale is less accurate.
 * painting a measuring scale is highly unscientific if it is based on nothing but a guess. In this case you should use the image as it is!

Introduction
The first paragraph should give the common and systematic names of the taxon featured in the article, as well as some information about its classification. Species articles should follow the form:
 * The foofish (Barus foous) is a species of freshwater fish in the baz family (family Bazidae) of order Quuxiformes. It is native to the Big River basin in Ruritania.

Higher order articles should follow the form:
 * Barus is a genus of freshwater fish in the baz family (family Bazidae) of order Quuxiformes. The type species is the common barfish (B. vulgaris), and fishes of this genus are known as the barfishes.

Succeeding paragraphs should give, in order (omitting paragraphs for which no information is available):

 * 1) Taxonomy (includes classification, evolution, subspecies, etymology of name (especially for genus names, which FishBase normally provides), alternate common names, important binomial synonyms, etc.
 * 2) Description, including size, weight, and age data from FishBase
 * 3) Distribution and habitat
 * 4) Feeding, diet, and related information
 * 5) Reproduction (life-cycle, breeding, etc.)
 * 6) Importance to humans (aquarium fish, game fish, commercial fishing, research uses, etc.)
 * 7) Conservation status (if not Secure) for species, including explanation for the classification, and mention of members classified as Vulnerable or worse for higher taxa
 * 8) Trivia (state fish, national emblem, ships bearing the name, other uses of the name, etc.)

Other sections
Information on keeping fish in an aquarium should be put in a section entitled "In the aquarium". Breeding and dietary information pertaining to captive fish should go here, rather than in the main section, which should refer primarily to the fish in its natural habitat.

Other sections may address topics of interest warranting discussion longer than a brief paragraph.

FishBase
For a FishBase entry on an order, use:

For a FishBase entry on a family, use:

For a FishBase entry on a genus, use:

For most FishBase entries on species, use:

For most FishBase entries on subspecies, use:

For FishBase entries that are problematic for the above templates, get the numeric ID from their URL and use:

For all FishBase templates, year and month refer to the FishBase revision consulted, not the date on which you consulted FishBase; the revision can be found from the FishBase home page.

ITIS
For an ITIS entry, use:

For the ITIS template, year and date refer to the date on which ITIS was consulted. Date can be in either U.S. or international format, as it will be wikified.

Talk pages
WikiProject Fishes' project banner is Fishproject. Please place at the top of an appropriate talk page. Placing the template on the talk page will help to direct editors to this WikiProject Fishes main page. This is how the template will look when it has been added:

Stub templates
Remember to mark up stub articles with the appropriate stub template at the bottom of the article. This automatically adds it to the appropriate page and inserts the banners to the bottom of the page. These are the current stub templates:

The pages were counted on January 18, 2023.

* Stub templates with very few articles are often upmerged into a parent category. To propose a separate category, please visit WSS/P.

Categories
Please make sure to add articles to the appropriate categories among the ones listed on WikiProject Fishes/Categories. If there are any categories that you think should be created, please request them in the tasklist on this page or on the talk page.

In some cases, there might be more appropriate ways to group articles than categories, such as lists or article series boxes. For more information, see Categories, lists, and series boxes.

Userboxes
User WPFishes User WPFishes2

Userbox enthusiasts may want to add one of these userboxes to their userpage to show that they are members of this WikiProject, by adding User WPFishes or User WPFishes2. For more userboxes, see additional fish related userboxes.

Barnstars

 * Awarded to users who've shown great editing skills in improving articles related to Fish.

or

Article assessment
See WikiProject Fishes/Assessment.

Article traffic
See WikiProject Fishes/Popular pages.

Collaboration

 * Since Image:Trachurus symmetricus baitball.jpg is the image used on the project banner, it is important that the article Pacific jack mackerel be improved. Please work together to improve the article on Pacific jack mackerel.

 * I originally nominated the article for deletion as original research. There seems to be some confusion with this article about whether it represents a distinct species and whether it's actually been scientifically described. It's been improved, but it'd be great if an expert would comment on the AfD, improve the article, or otherwise help us figure this one out.  Graymornings (talk) 11:30, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review
See WikiProject Fishes/Peer review

Any fish article requiring a review may be placed here for review specifically by members of the wikiproject.

Bluespotted stingray

Featured articles

 * A History of British Fishes
 * American paddlefish
 * Cretoxyrhina
 * Cutthroat trout
 * Electric eel
 * Goblin shark
 * Manta ray
 * Megalodon
 * Ocean sunfish
 * Oceanic whitetip shark
 * Pacific blue-eye
 * Pallid sturgeon
 * Pigeye shark
 * Porbeagle
 * Queen angelfish
 * Rainbow trout
 * Smooth toadfish
 * Teleost
 * Francis Willughby
 * Silky shark

Good articles

 * Acanthopagrus butcheri
 * Alligator gar
 * Alopias palatasi
 * Ambassis macleayi
 * Ampullae of Lorenzini
 * Atlantic blue marlin
 * Atlantic torpedo
 * Atlanticopristis
 * Australian blacktip shark
 * Australian swellshark
 * Australian weasel shark
 * Banded archerfish
 * Banded houndshark
 * Bigeye sand tiger
 * Bigeye thresher
 * Bignose shark
 * Black dogfish
 * Blackmouth catshark
 * Blacknose shark
 * Blacktip reef shark
 * Blacktip shark
 * Blotchy swellshark
 * Bluespotted ribbontail ray
 * Bluntnose stingray
 * Borneo shark
 * Bowfin
 * Bramble shark
 * Cape Fear shiner
 * Cardabiodon
 * Caribbean reef shark
 * Christmas darter
 * Coffin ray
 * Common stingray
 * Common thresher
 * Convict cichlid
 * Cookiecutter shark
 * Copper shark
 * Coral catshark
 * Creek whaler
 * Crocodile shark
 * Crossback stingaree
 * Dark shyshark
 * Deepwater stingray
 * Devils Hole pupfish
 * Diamond stingray
 * Dracopristis
 * Dusky shark
 * Dwarf pufferfish
 * Electric fish
 * Electric organ (fish)
 * Epaulette shark
 * Estuary stingray
 * False catshark
 * Finetooth shark
 * Finless sleeper ray
 * Fish
 * Frilled shark
 * Giant freshwater stingray
 * Great hammerhead
 * Great northern tilefish
 * Great white shark
 * Grey reef shark
 * Halfbeak
 * Hardnose shark
 * Horn shark
 * Izak catshark
 * Jamming avoidance response
 * Japanese angelshark
 * Japanese sleeper ray
 * Kitefin shark
 * Kuhl's maskray
 * Lateral line
 * Leopard shark
 * Longfin mako shark
 * Longtail butterfly ray
 * Mangrove whipray
 * Marbled electric ray
 * Milk shark
 * Murray cod
 * Nervous shark
 * Night shark
 * Nursehound
 * Ocellated electric ray
 * Onefin electric ray
 * Pacific angelshark
 * Pacific electric ray
 * Paddlefish
 * Pelagic stingray
 * Pelagic thresher
 * Pelvicachromis pulcher
 * Peppered maskray
 * Halloween darter
 * Pink whipray
 * Plain maskray
 * Pondicherry shark
 * Porcupine ray
 * Prickly shark
 * Puffadder shyshark
 * Pyjama shark
 * Quagga catshark
 * Reticulate whipray
 * Rhina ancylostoma
 * Roughtail stingray
 * Round ribbontail ray
 * Sacred Cod
 * Sand devil
 * Sand whiting
 * Shark
 * Sharptooth houndshark
 * Short-tail stingray
 * Sixgill stingray
 * Slender smooth-hound
 * Smalltail shark
 * Smalltooth sand tiger
 * Smooth hammerhead
 * Sparsely spotted stingaree
 * Spinner shark
 * Spotted eagle ray
 * Squatina squatina
 * Stephanolepis cirrhifer
 * Sturgeon
 * Tasmanian numbfish
 * Tasselled wobbegong
 * Tawny nurse shark
 * Thinopus
 * Thornback guitarfish
 * Tiger catshark
 * Tiger shark
 * Tiktaalik
 * Toxotes chatareus
 * Transitional fossil
 * Velvet belly lanternshark
 * Viper dogfish
 * Whale shark
 * Whiskery shark
 * Winghead shark
 * Yellow stingray
 * Zebra shark
 * Cloudy catshark
 * Leopard catshark
 * Portuguese dogfish
 * Yellowtail flounder
 * Smalleye hammerhead
 * Galapagos shark
 * Smoothtooth blacktip shark
 * Sicklefin lemon shark
 * Whitetip reef shark
 * Silvertip shark
 * Sicklefin weasel shark
 * Barndoor skate
 * Common torpedo

Former featured articles

 * Tetraodontidae

Former good articles

 * Asian arowana
 * Atlantic herring
 * Cichlid
 * Fugu
 * Goldfish
 * Oscar (fish)

Did you know? articles

 * Abyssobrotula galatheae
 * Acanthemblemaria maria
 * Acanthogobius flavimanus
 * Acanthopagrus butcheri
 * Acanthurus nigricauda
 * Acanthurus achilles
 * Acanthurus dussumieri
 * Acanthurus guttatus
 * Acanthurus olivaceus
 * Acanthurus polyzona
 * Acanthurus tractus
 * Acrochordonichthys
 * Adriatic sturgeon
 * Aeoliscus strigatus
 * African pompano
 * African sawtail catshark
 * Alectis
 * Alepes
 * Alligator gar
 * Alligator pipefish
 * Alopias palatasi
 * Amatitlania septemfasciata
 * Ambassis jacksoniensis
 * Ambassis macleayi
 * Ambloplites
 * Ameiurus platycephalus
 * American conger
 * American paddlefish
 * Amia? hesperia
 * Ammodytes americanus
 * Amphiprion akindynos
 * Ampullae of Lorenzini
 * Anableps anableps
 * Anoplogaster cornuta
 * Antilles catshark
 * Aquaculture of cobia
 * Arabian carpetshark
 * Argentine seabass
 * Argyropelecus affinis
 * Argyropelecus sladeni
 * Arothron reticularis
 * Ascocotyle pindoramensis
 * Asterotrygon
 * Astrapogon stellatus
 * Astronesthes niger
 * Astronesthes richardsoni
 * Atlantic flyingfish
 * Atlantic bumper
 * Atlantic stingray
 * Atlantic torpedo
 * Atlanticopristis
 * Auchenipterichthys
 * Australasian snapper
 * Australian blenny
 * Australian reticulate swellshark
 * Australian sawtail catshark
 * Australian swellshark
 * Bagarius
 * Bagrichthys
 * Bait ball
 * Balao halfbeak
 * Balkhash perch
 * Balloon shark
 * Banded archerfish
 * Banded butterflyfish
 * Bar jack
 * Barbantus curvifrons
 * Barbeled houndshark
 * Bat ray
 * Batasio
 * Robert J. Behnke
 * Belted cardinalfish
 * Bennett's stingray
 * Benson (fish)
 * Bentfin devil ray
 * Bering cisco
 * Bianchengichthys
 * Big skate
 * Bigeye sand tiger
 * Bigeye trevally
 * Bigmouth chub
 * Bigtooth cardinalfish
 * Billfish
 * Black-spotted whipray
 * Black dogfish
 * Black ghostshark
 * Black rockfish
 * Black seadevil
 * Black swallower
 * Blackbelly triggerfish
 * Blackchin guitarfish
 * Blackchin shiner
 * Blackedge whipray
 * Blackfin scad
 * Blackish stingray
 * Blackmouth catshark
 * Blackside hawkfish
 * Blackspot shark
 * Blacktip reef shark
 * Blacktip sawtail catshark
 * Blacktip shark
 * Blacktip trevally
 * Yvonne Blenkinsop
 * Blind swamp eel
 * Blind cave eel
 * Blind electric ray
 * Blind shark
 * Blob sculpin
 * Blood parrot cichlid
 * Blotched catshark
 * Blue runner
 * Blue trevally
 * Bluegrey carpetshark
 * Bluespotted ribbontail ray
 * Bluespotted trevally
 * Bluestripe butterflyfish
 * Bluntnose stingray
 * Blurred lanternshark
 * Boa catshark
 * Boops boops
 * Borneo shark
 * Borophryne
 * Bothrocara brunneum
 * Bowfin
 * Brachygobius nunus
 * Brachyplatystoma
 * Brachysomophis cirrocheilos
 * Brassy trevally
 * Brazilian large-eyed stingray
 * Breitensteinia
 * Broad stingray
 * Broad whitefish
 * Broadfin sawtail catshark
 * Broadhead catfish
 * Brown lanternshark
 * Brown shyshark
 * Brown stingaree
 * Brown whipray
 * Brownsnout spookfish
 * Bubba (fish)
 * Paul Bujor
 * Bumpnose trevally
 * Bunocephalus
 * Butler's frogfish
 * Butterfly stingaree
 * California lizardfish
 * Cape Fear shiner
 * Carangoides
 * Caranx lugubris
 * Caranx sansun
 * Carapus acus
 * Carpet shark
 * Caspian lamprey
 * Cauca molly
 * Centrolophus
 * Cephaloscyllium
 * Cephalurus
 * Cepola macrophthalma
 * Cetopsis
 * Chaetodon nippon
 * Chaetodon zanzibarensis
 * Chaetostoma microps
 * Chain moray
 * Chameleon goby
 * Chasmodes saburrae
 * Chesterfield Island stingaree
 * Chilean jack mackerel
 * Chinese stingray
 * Chionodraco rastrospinosus
 * Christmas darter
 * Chupare stingray
 * Circular stingaree
 * Cleftbelly trevally
 * Coastal fish
 * Coastal trevally
 * Coastrange sculpin
 * Colares stingray
 * Comanche Springs pupfish
 * Common bluestripe snapper
 * Common eagle ray
 * Common guitarfish
 * Common stingaree
 * Common stingray
 * Cook's swellshark
 * Cookiecutter shark
 * Copadichromis borleyi
 * Copella arnoldi
 * Copper shark
 * Coral Sea stingaree
 * Coral reef fish
 * Coregonus hoyi
 * Coreoleuciscus splendidus
 * Cornish jack
 * Coryphaenoides rupestris
 * Cottonmouth jack
 * Jonathan Couch
 * Cowtail stingray
 * Crazy fish
 * Crested bullhead shark
 * Crossback stingaree
 * Cryodraco
 * Cui-ui
 * Cyclopteridae
 * Dagetichthys lusitanicus
 * Daggernose shark
 * Daisy stingray
 * Danube bleak
 * Dark shyshark
 * Dash-and-dot goatfish
 * Dekeyseria
 * Demersal fish
 * Mary Denness
 * Devils Hole pupfish
 * Diamond darter
 * Dibranchus atlanticus
 * Diplecogaster bimaculata
 * Dipturus teevani
 * Diversity of fish
 * Doctorfish tang
 * Dollfus' stargazer
 * Doubleband surgeonfish
 * Dracula fish
 * Draughtsboard shark
 * Dwarf black stingray
 * Dwarf catshark
 * Dwarf lanternshark
 * Dwarf pufferfish
 * Dwarf pygmy goby
 * Dwarf sawfish
 * Dwarf sawtail catshark
 * Dysommina rugosa
 * Easter Island butterflyfish
 * Eastern school whiting
 * Eastern shovelnose ray
 * Eastern shovelnose stingaree
 * Echeneis neucratoides
 * Edaphodon
 * Eigenmannia vicentespelaea
 * Elacatinus
 * Elacatinus chancei
 * Elacatinus horsti
 * Electric organ (fish)
 * Emmelichthyops atlanticus
 * Empetrichthys latos
 * Enneapterygius bahasa
 * Entomocorus
 * Epactionotus
 * Epaulette shark
 * Erismatopterus
 * Estuary stingray
 * Etheostoma variatum
 * Eudontomyzon danfordi
 * Eumecichthys
 * European flounder
 * European pilchard
 * European sprat
 * Evermannichthys bicolor
 * Exocoetus obtusirostris
 * Exocoetus volitans
 * Exoglossum laurae
 * Eyed flounder
 * False scad
 * False scorpionfish
 * Fenestraja plutonia
 * Figaro (genus)
 * Finetooth shark
 * Finless sleeper ray
 * Fish development
 * Fish diseases and parasites
 * Fish egg fossil
 * FishCenter Live
 * Flagtail swellshark
 * Flat needlefish
 * Forage fish
 * Forcipiger longirostris
 * Freshwater whipray
 * Frilled shark
 * Frogfish
 * Galápagos ghostshark
 * Gangetic whiting
 * Garra barreimiae
 * Gecko catshark
 * Gerres nigri
 * Giant mottled eel
 * Giant oceanic manta ray
 * Giant stumptail stingray
 * Gillellus inescatus
 * Ginbuna
 * Glanapteryginae
 * Glandulocaudinae
 * Glyptothorax kurdistanicus
 * Graceful shark
 * Graus nigra
 * Graveldiver
 * Great northern tilefish
 * Green lanternshark
 * Greenback stingaree
 * Greeneye
 * Greeneye spurdog
 * Grey reef shark
 * Grey skate
 * Grey triggerfish
 * Grunion
 * Guachanche barracuda
 * Gulf sturgeon
 * Gymnothorax pictus
 * Haemulon
 * Haemulon vittatum
 * Halichoeres maculipinna
 * Hallucinogenic fish
 * Haploblepharus
 * Haplochromis vonlinnei
 * Haplophryne
 * Hawaiian cleaner wrasse
 * Headlight fish
 * Heliobatis
 * Helogenes
 * Hemiancistrus
 * Herring scad
 * Heterandria formosa
 * Heterobranchus bidorsalis
 * Hiodon woodruffi
 * Hippocampinae
 * Hippocampus kuda
 * Holacanthus passer
 * Honey blue-eye
 * Hoosier cavefish
 * Horabagrus
 * Horn shark
 * Horse-eye jack
 * Hortle's whipray
 * Houndfish
 * Clark Hubbs
 * Humpbacked limia
 * Hypancistrus
 * Hypophthalmus
 * Hypoplectrus nigricans
 * Hypseleotris compressa
 * Ichthyoplankton
 * Imposter trevally
 * Indian threadfish
 * Inimicus
 * Inimicus filamentosus
 * Irrawaddy river shark
 * Ives Lake cisco
 * Izu stingray
 * Japanese bullhead shark
 * Japanese lates
 * Jenkins' whipray
 * Jolthead porgy
 * Juil ciego
 * Kai stingaree
 * Kapala stingaree
 * Kessler's gudgeon
 * King-of-the-salmon
 * Kitefin shark
 * Knifetooth sawfish
 * Knobbed porgy
 * Konye
 * Krabi mouth-brooding betta
 * Labrus viridis
 * Laccognathus embryi
 * Laemonema barbatulum
 * Largetooth cookiecutter shark
 * Lasiognathus
 * Leopard shark
 * Leopard-spotted swellshark
 * Leopard whipray
 * Lepidotus
 * Leporacanthicus
 * Leporinus fasciatus
 * Leuresthes tenuis
 * Leuroglossus stilbius
 * Limia melanogaster
 * Lined topminnow
 * Linophryne indica
 * Liparis fabricii
 * List of fish of Hawaii
 * List of threatened rays
 * Littlehead porgy
 * Lizard catshark
 * Lobed stingaree
 * Lollipop catshark
 * Longcomb sawfish
 * Longfin crevalle jack
 * Longfin trevally
 * Longfin yellowtail
 * Longnose eagle ray
 * Longnose sawtail catshark
 * Longnose stingray
 * Longnose trevally
 * Longtail stingray
 * Lookdown
 * Lost River sucker
 * Louisiana pancake batfish
 * Lucky iron fish
 * Lutjanus fulvus
 * Mackerel
 * Mackerel scad
 * Macrourus berglax
 * Magosternarchus
 * Malabar trevally
 * Malapterurus beninensis
 * Mangrove whipray
 * Marbled whipray
 * Margariscus
 * Masked stingaree
 * Mastacembelus ellipsifer
 * Medialuna ancietae
 * Mekong freshwater stingray
 * Melanocetus murrayi
 * Menticirrhus americanus
 * Menticirrhus saxatilis
 * Mexican blind brotula
 * Mexican native trout
 * Microchirus azevia
 * Micromyzon akamai
 * Milk shark
 * Millet butterflyfish
 * Mimagoniates microlepis
 * Mirrorwing flyingfish
 * Mitotic stingaree
 * Mobula kuhlii
 * Mobula munkiana
 * Mogurnda adspersa
 * Monacanthus chinensis
 * Monacanthus ciliatus
 * Monocentridae
 * Monterrey Spanish mackerel
 * Mormyrinae
 * Mouse catshark
 * Mullus barbatus
 * Murray River rainbowfish
 * Mylossoma duriventris
 * Myrichthys maculosus
 * Myxocyprinus
 * Nanocetorhinus
 * Narcine entemedor
 * Narrowbar swellshark
 * Naso vlamingii
 * Natal shyshark
 * Neocyema
 * Neosilurus hyrtlii
 * New Caledonian stingaree
 * New Ireland stingaree
 * New Zealand eagle ray
 * Niger stingray
 * Night shark
 * Nomorhamphus ebrardtii
 * Northern river shark
 * Northern sawtail catshark
 * Northern sennet
 * Northern whiting
 * Notoscopelus bolini
 * Notoscopelus caudispinosus
 * Notoscopelus elongatus
 * Notoscopelus kroyeri
 * Notoscopelus resplendens
 * Novaculichthys
 * Nursehound
 * Opisthoproctus
 * Orange-spotted trevally
 * Oreochromis aureus
 * Ornate rainbowfish
 * Ornate wobbegong
 * Ossubtus
 * Ostracoderm
 * Ouachita madtom
 * Oval electric ray
 * Owens pupfish
 * Oxyurichthys microlepis
 * Ozichthys
 * Pacific angelshark
 * Pacific blue-eye
 * Pacific chupare
 * Pacific crevalle jack
 * Pacific herring
 * Pacific leaping blenny
 * Pacu
 * Pain in fish
 * Painted swellshark
 * Palatogobius grandoculus
 * Paleopsephurus
 * Papyrocranus afer
 * Parapercis alboguttata
 * Parapercis hexophtalma
 * Parapterois
 * Pareuchiloglanis
 * Pariosternarchus
 * Patchwork stingaree
 * Peacock flounder
 * Pearl stingray
 * Pebbled butterflyfish
 * Pelagic fish
 * Peppered catshark
 * Halloween darter
 * Percina roanoka
 * Permit (fish)
 * Phallichthys
 * Phallichthys amates
 * Phallichthys tico
 * Philypnodon grandiceps
 * Philypnodon macrostomus
 * Phreatobius cisternarum
 * Viktor Pietschmann
 * Pimelodus pictus
 * Pincushion ray
 * Pineapplefish
 * Pinguipes brasilianus
 * Pinguipes chilensis
 * Pinhead pearlfish
 * Pinirampus
 * Pink salmon
 * Pitted stingray
 * Platax
 * Plate fish
 * Platycephalus endrachtensis
 * Poecilia catemaconis
 * Poecilia chica
 * Poecilia gillii
 * Poecilia kykesis
 * Poecilia orri
 * Poecilia petenensis
 * Poecilia picta
 * Poecilia vivipara
 * Poeciliopsis lucida
 * Poeciliopsis monacha
 * Poeciliopsis prolifica
 * Pomacanthus semicirculatus
 * Pomacanthus xanthometopon
 * Pondicherry shark
 * Porbeagle
 * Porcupine ray
 * Potomac sculpin
 * Prietella
 * Prognathodes aculeatus
 * Protemblemaria perla
 * Protoblepharon rosenblatti
 * Pseudolithoxus
 * Psychedelic frogfish
 * Puffadder shyshark
 * Purple eagle ray
 * Pygmy ribbontail catshark
 * Pygmy seahorse
 * Pygmy whitefish
 * Pyjama shark
 * Queen parrotfish
 * Rainbow runner
 * Rajiformes
 * Razorbelly scad
 * Red Irish lord
 * Red-lined wrasse
 * Red porgy
 * Red stingray
 * Redeye gaper
 * Redside dace
 * Redtail splitfin
 * Rendahl's messmate
 * Reticulate whipray
 * Retroculus lapidifer
 * Rhina ancylostoma
 * Rhinesomus
 * Rhinogobiops
 * Rhinogobius flumineus
 * Rhinopias frondosa
 * Rhycherus filamentosus
 * Rhynchactis
 * C. Richard Robins
 * Robust redhorse
 * Romanogobio uranoscopus
 * Rosefin shiner
 * Rostroraja texana
 * Roughnose stingray
 * Roughtail catshark
 * Roughtail stingray
 * Round fantail stingray
 * Round ribbontail ray
 * Round scad
 * Royal fish
 * Sabertooth fish
 * Sacramento splittail
 * Sacred Cod
 * Saddled swellshark
 * Salmon run
 * Sand steenbras
 * Santanichthys
 * Sarcoglanidinae
 * Sargassum fish
 * Satanoperca lilith
 * Saucereye porgy
 * Savannah darter
 * Scarus globiceps
 * School shark
 * Scorpaenopsis diabolus
 * Seaweed blenny
 * Semicossyphus darwini
 * Serpent eel
 * Shadow trevally
 * Shagreen ray
 * Shark agonistic display
 * Shark meat
 * List of threatened sharks
 * Sharpsnout stingray
 * Sharptail mola
 * Sheepshead minnow
 * Shoaling and schooling
 * Short-tail stingray
 * Shortnose sturgeon
 * Shrimp scad
 * Sicyopterus lagocephalus
 * Siganus doliatus
 * Sillago
 * Silver pearlfish
 * Sixbar wrasse
 * Slender grouper
 * Slender sawtail catshark
 * Small-eyed whiting
 * Small-scale whiting
 * Smallmouth scad
 * Smallscale archerfish
 * Smalltooth sand tiger
 * Smooth lanternshark
 * Smooth toadfish
 * Snake mackerel
 * Snakeskin gourami
 * Snubnosed eel
 * Sommen charr
 * Soringa whiting
 * Sorubim
 * Southern African frilled shark
 * Southern sawtail catshark
 * Southern sennet
 * Spadenose shark
 * Sparsely spotted stingaree
 * Spawn (biology)
 * Speartooth shark
 * Speckled catshark
 * Speckled swellshark
 * Spicara maena
 * Spicara smaris
 * Spined loach
 * Spined pygmy shark
 * Spinner shark
 * Spiny-back eel
 * Spiny butterfly ray
 * Spot-tail shark
 * Spottail pinfish
 * Spotted blue-eye
 * Spotted houndshark
 * Spotted stingaree
 * Spotted swellshark
 * Spotted wobbegong
 * Springer's sawtail catshark
 * Squatina mapama
 * Squatina squatina
 * Star pearlfish
 * Starry smooth-hound
 * Stegastes leucostictus
 * Steindachneridion
 * Steinitz' prawn goby
 * Stephanolepis cirrhifer
 * Stephanolepis hispidus
 * Sternarchogiton nattereri
 * Sternoptyx diaphana
 * Stomias boa boa
 * Stoplight loosejaw
 * Stout whiting
 * Sturddlefish
 * Sturgeon
 * Surf bream
 * Swell shark
 * Sydney skate
 * Symphurus thermophilus
 * Synbranchus marmoratus
 * Synodus intermedius
 * Synodus isolatus
 * Taillight shark
 * Tawny nurse shark
 * Tecopa pupfish
 * Telatrygon acutirostra
 * Tembeassu marauna
 * Thaumatichthys
 * Thelodonti
 * Thoburnia rhothoeca
 * Thornback cowfish
 * Thorntail stingray
 * Threadfin acara
 * Threadfin jack
 * Tidepool sculpin
 * Tinirau clackae
 * Totoaba
 * Toxotes chatareus
 * Toxotes kimberleyensis
 * Toxotes lorentzi
 * Trachelyopterus insignis
 * Trachinotus goodei
 * Trimma nasa
 * Trimma tevegae
 * Trypauchen vagina
 * Tsunami fish
 * Tubemouth whipray
 * Typhleotris mararybe
 * Urolophidae
 * Vadigo
 * Velvet belly lanternshark
 * Verlorenvlei redfin
 * Vinciguerria attenuata
 * Vinciguerria lucetia
 * Violet goby
 * Vision in fish
 * Walking fish
 * Warming's lantern fish
 * Weberian apparatus
 * West African bichir
 * West African catshark
 * West coast seabream
 * Western Atlantic seabream
 * Western shovelnose stingaree
 * White-edge freshwater whipray
 * White-margin fin smooth-hound
 * Whitecheek shark
 * Whitefin dogfish
 * Whitefin swellshark
 * Whitefin trevally
 * Whitenose whipray
 * Whitespotted grouper
 * Wide stingaree
 * Wimple piranha
 * The world's 100 most threatened species
 * Woundfin
 * Xiphophorus milleri
 * Xiphophorus nigrensis
 * Xiphophorus pygmaeus
 * Yantai stingray
 * Yellow-edged moray
 * Yellow shovelnose stingaree
 * Yellowfin whiting
 * Yellowhead wrasse
 * Yellowspotted catshark
 * Yellowspotted trevally
 * Yellowtail scad
 * Yellowtail trumpeter
 * Zebra shark
 * Zebrasoma scopas
 * Australian angelshark
 * Liopropoma santi
 * Cloudy catshark
 * Leopard catshark
 * Longhead catshark
 * Narrowmouthed catshark
 * Narrowtail catshark
 * Atlantic sawtail catshark
 * Longfin sawtail catshark
 * Slender catshark
 * Whitesaddled catshark
 * Chromis nitida
 * Pennant coralfish
 * Portuguese dogfish
 * Yellowtail flounder
 * Flying fox (fish)
 * Brazilian guitarfish
 * Atka mackerel
 * Keeltail needlefish
 * Pacific ocean perch
 * Pluma porgy
 * Arothron multilineatus
 * Spearfish remora
 * Torpedo scad
 * Fluffy sculpin
 * Galapagos shark
 * Whitespot ghost shark
 * Sicklefin lemon shark
 * Rainbow shark
 * Whitetip reef shark
 * Silky shark
 * Sharpnose shiner
 * Barndoor skate
 * Little skate
 * Mottled skate
 * Humpback smooth-hound
 * Speckled smooth-hound
 * Spotless smooth-hound
 * Sandyback stingaree
 * Striped stingaree
 * Groovebelly stingray
 * Pale-edged stingray
 * Smalleye stingray
 * Marlin sucker
 * White suckerfish
 * Honeycomb whipray
 * Western school whiting

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Wikipedia:WikiProject Fishes