Talk:Rough fish

message: I have been researching catfish in general, and noticed several state agengies, such as florida, use the term Rough Fish, which I grew up hearing.  Since state parks and wildlife agencies use the term, I figured it needs to be here, so it can be properly wikilinked to fish that fit that description.  I will add cites later.  Pharmboy 01:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: new article

message: I understand the idea behind creating the catagory "edible fish" but it doesn't exist, and is rather against the idea of the article, as many people in many parts of the world consider them inedible.  While a fish everyone agrees is edible would belong in that catagory, if it existed, these fish would not.  These are the "weeds" of the fish world:  a flower to some, a nuisance to others.  I agree they need a catagory, but "edible fish" would be inappropriate, imo.  
Not everyone agrees they are food, or a nuisance.  The catagory should reflect this.  Perhaps "rough fish" itself should be the catagory.   Pharmboy 00:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catagory:  Fish or Edible fish? 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tag these articles upon consensus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories, but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 21:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: I don't think "Reasons for Overpopulation" is neutral, as the very existence of this section implies that all rough fish are overpopulated, which is patently untrue (blue sucker, robust redhorse, razorback sucker, and greater redhorse are examples with extremely limited and possibly declining populations).  This section should be removed; perhaps the information could be added to the species pages of those individual species which have been proven to be overpopulated, but as a broad-brush statement about roughfish it is not only biased but completely false (Becker, George C., 1983) (Buffler and Dickson, 1990).  In addition, many non-rough fish species are overpopulated, while the vast majority of rough fish species are not.  Overpopulation is not unique to rough fishes, and has no relevance to this article.  This section should be removed.
Likewise, Reservoir Damming is completely irrelevant to the topic of rough fish.  It may be applicable to a few species of rough fish, but the vast majority of these fishes have no connection to reservoir damming.  Indeed, instead of being helped by reservoir damming (as the section implies) many native rough fishes have been decimated or become locally extirpated by such practices (Becker, George C., 1983). This section should be removed.
Roughfish (talk) 03:30, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant Sections of Rough Fish Article 

message: The only time I remember hearing the term "trashfish" it had nothing to do with game fishing, but was used as a synonym for bycatch in the northeastern United States, by crews who make their living harvesting a specific type of fish (for example, "we catch the swordfish to sell, we eat the trashfish on the boat"). I don't know if that's a common usage, or if it was just an improper usage of the term by a few individuals. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synonym for bycatch