Talk:Gobiidae

message: The Goby or Mudskipper article did not mention a fact which I think belongs in Wikipedia, but I have no experience of mudskippers. I learned this from a man who grew up in Malaysia:
*A mudskipper can outrun a boy.
This meant something to me, because in the U.S., 
*a rabbit can outrun a boy.  
Do you think it is appropriate for Wikipedia? The article says that mudskippers live on the coasts of Australia, too. Is it OK to put in this fact? Thank you. 169.207.85.217 18:13, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
replies: text: ok by me; not knowing the difference in detail I thought they were the same, and Mudskipper redirects to Goby.  Properly we should really move Mudskippers to Mudskipper, but it's easier to redirect Mudskipper to Mudskippers, so if no one has objections I think I will do so.  bikeable (talk) 17:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

message: The mudskippers now have their own, distinct article. The comments on mudskippers here are now much briefer and serve only to link them in with the gobies. I don't see any reason to merge these two topics: while mudskippers are gobies, they're very distinct from them; would be merge the article on humans with the article about great apes?
Can we remove these articles from the list of articles needed merging?
-- Neale Monks 11:36, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I took the merge notice off both pages and redirected Mudskipper to Mudskippers.  bikeable (talk) 14:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Goby/Mudskipper revision 

message: List_of_Gobiidae_genera Should this list figure into this article ? Nhobgood (talk) 10:25, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gobiidae - Genera list 

message: *Talk Page: I would suggest adding a segment on the talk page describing what edits you have done.  
*General: Add more hyperlinks to other pages.  Also, some links are red, which means that right now, they are not linked to any existing page.  Consider re-formatting these to have them link to actual pages.  Also, all species should be italicized. Make them italicized with double apostrophes on both sides of the name.  Try to incorporate the Research section into other parts of the article instead of giving it its own section.
*Burrow Building: Double check the phrasing used. For example, consider "helps to provide" as opposed to "helps providing," and "mating opportunities" instead of "mating opportunity."
*Sex Change: Some of the phrasing is awkward. ("are not that different" instead of "do not differ much." Also consider changing the phrase "fills up for.") Consider changing "in an experiment" to "it has been shown."
*Sex Determination: Are the quotations around "socially-influenced" necessary?
*Reproduction: Is mentioning sex changing again necessary? (Consider, "In species with sex changing,...")
*Symbiosis: Are those terms supposed to be bolded? There are also some grammatical errors. VAleles (talk) 22:49, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: I would recommend improving the organization of the Behavior section.
Here are my suggestions:
Kleptogamy
*An alternative subheading: Mating
*How do non-sneakers mate? Give a general description about mating system and introduce kleptogamy as an alternative strategy.
Use of landmarks 
*An alternative subheading: Navigation (Use of landmarks seems to be a navigation mechanism of gobies. )
Habitat choice
*Foraging behavior and its relation with predation risk is not explicitly explained in this page. I would recommend changing the subheading to foraging and elaborating more on foraging (explain why there is a trade-off between foraging and avoiding predation). *The cited reference seems to be focusing on effects of predation pressure on foraging behavior rather than habitat choice.
*Also, try reordering the subsections of the Behavior section in the order of importance. 
My suggestion is: Mating / Sex change and sex determination / Foraging (If you decide to elaborate more on this topic) / Symbiosis / Burrow construction / Navigation
-Allasse0927
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2C61:D6E0:7514:1649:3AFA:54CB (talk) 06:28, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer review 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Goby. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120603075849/http://homepage.mac.com/nmonks/Projects/FAQ/6b.html to http://homepage.mac.com/nmonks/Projects/FAQ/6b.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:29, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the section Kleptogamy this passage appears:
"The paired males most of the time think that the sneakers are females"
Because there is no way to determine what a fish thinks, this is entirely inappropriate.
We can report on what a fish does, or possibly what the results are of scientific tests on the fish or its environment.
But we cannot tell what a fish thinks.
I should think this would be obvious to anyone editing Wikipedia. 2601:200:C000:1A0:4174:5FF8:7FA:3410 (talk) 19:54, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Rephrased "Most of the time the paired males mistake the sneakers for females". —  Jts1882 | talk  12:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate claim