Talk:Southern saratoga

message: This endemic Australian species is usually known as Saratoga in Australia.  If I do not get any objections, I will move the page to that name in accordance wiht usual Wiki practice for fish. Nick Thorne 13:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest spotted saratoga should be the new article title, since that common name distinguishes it from the gulf saratoga (S. jardinii). --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 14:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Why?  No one in this country used that name.  This species is called just plain saratoga. Nick Thorne 14:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, if that is the common usage in Australia then I agree it should be the name used for the Wikipedia article. A quick Google search showed simply "saratoga" was the preferred common name (outside the aquarium community), so saratoga it is. Of course, FishBase calls it the "spotted bonytongue," but I don't like their habit of calling all Scleropages bonytongues -- it seems nobody actually uses those as common names; it's always arowana, dragon fish, saratoga, or barramundi, depending on species. --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 20:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I've moved the page, as you can see.  I have noted that Fishbase often uses common names  for Australian fish that are either out of date or not very "common".  Kind of defeats the purpose of having common names, eh?  Personally I would prefer Wikipedia used scientific names for fiah, but the accepted standard/policy is to use common names.Nick Thorne 02:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Common Name

message: thumb|left|
This specimen is clearly a very fine-looking young S. jardini: c.22 dorsal fin rays (vs 15-19 in leichardti), c.32 anal fin rays (25-27 in leich'), rear of jaw extends well behind the eye (jaw joint directly below eye in leich'), scales with pinkish crescents (vs 2 discrete spots in leich'). As this is a nice pic and we don't currently have a whole view of S.jardini, I've transferred this pic to the Gulf Saratoga page.Ozraptor4 (talk) 18:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Title photo

message: In response to this query, the history and talk pages have been merged. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Cas Liber, given that this fish is endemic to Australia, and that no one in this country call this species southern saratoga, why have you merged the two pages into southern saratoga and converted saratoga into a redirect, rather than the other way round? - Nick Thorne talk 05:38, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Same reason we have Australian magpie and laughing kookaburra...we don't use their qualifiers in everyday conversation either but they add exact meaning as kookaburra refers to a genus - Nick what do you call Scleropages jardinii then? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there are magpies in other parts of the world, so "Australian magpie" is entirely appropriate.  The talk page for laughing kookaburra notes that it is the "official" common name - that birdos indulge in the fantasy that there is such a thing as "official" common names is amusing I suppose but irrelevant for fish for which there is no such thing.  There are two species of Scleropages in Australia, this one, saratoga, and Gulf saratoga (S.jardini).  No confusion, no need for unnecessary qualifiers and as far as Wikipedia is concerned for this species, plain old saratoga is in compliance with the WP:COMMONNAME which the current title is not. - Nick Thorne talk 08:27, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been some government attempts at official names of fish - see this. And on google scholar, a lot of folks call it "spotted barramundi". Fishnames has declared its standard name as "southern Saratoga"....whole thing is a mess...my ideal would be scientific name really....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged