Talk:Atlantic goliath grouper

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fishes Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

-Is it offensive or something to explain why it was called the "Jewfish"? I mean, even if it is based on stereotypes, seems worth explaining-SF

No, it's not, but I've never seen any well sourced reason for it being called a Jewfish. I've seen a lot of ideas thrown around, everything from kosher requirements to the shape of the fish's head, but they're all just conjecture and would need good sourcing to produce something that wasn't original research. Charles (Kznf) (talk) 16:56, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• There is another article with more explanation on the term, along with some of the same information. See Jewfish and the links/references. 66.166.26.49 (talk) 21:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 September 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zgi13. Peer reviewers: Sandrapenelope.

Above undated message substituted from

]

Assessment

Assessed mid-importance for WikiProject Fishes because of conservation status. Neil916 (Talk) 08:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if anyone's seen this article or not, but now there is a pacific and atlantic giant grouper, which were declared separate species ^[1]

Rename, and create new article with a disambiguation page? Or make it two parts of the same article?

) 20:33, 21 August 2008 (UTC) these things are overpopulated in the gulf of mexico[reply]

"They grow to 15 feet and eat small reef sharks and barracuda and are not preyed on by other animals."

Then...

"Goliath grouper eat crustaceans, other fish, octopuses and young sea turtles. Grouper are preyed upon by large fish, such as barracudas, moray eels and large sharks."

I don't know what the correct answer is, but one of these is totally or both are somewhat inaccurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinnsa (talk • contribs) 03:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My father fished off the docks in Florida when he was a kid, back in the fifties. While the smaller grouper may have been delicious, the really large old ones were riddled with various parasites so they were just for bragging rights. RHD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.29.250.122 (talk) 15:40, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What do they eat? What eats them? (other than some humans).

It seems that this claim has no clear evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.56.221.14 (talk) 13:50, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this article lacks a range map. Can one be added? Will (Talk - contribs) 06:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Discussion moved to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Fisheries_and_Fishing#Forceful_editorial_promotion_of_the_euphemistic_term_"harvesting" by author; please comment there. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 18:12, 9 May 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Aaand here we go again. 114.206.49.189 as has been pointed out to you before, "harvesting" is bog-standard terminology. I don't really care about this one instance, but based on the rather embarassing circus you kicked off the last time you tried this, a year and a half ago, I foresee a jolly campaign of replacements all over WP if it is ignored. Thus: please get consensus here for your interpretation that "harvesting" is somehow a conspiratorial euphemism for killing. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:25, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why the term "harvesting" is preferable over "fishing." If you consider "harvesting" a more accurate, more objective, and more standard term than "fishing," please explain why it is so. If you are convinced that "fishing" is no longer regarded as a standard term, please provide sources to support this standpoint. If both terms enjoy equal status as standard terms, please explain why you insist on arbitrarily favoring "harvesting" over "fishing" in this single particular Wikipedia entry when the other relevant entries never use this term.