Talk:Fishing lure

This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Fisheries and Fishing High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

I am new to the wikipedia community and posted this article. I am just looking to hear some feedback on the article. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danishrolls (talk • contribs) 16:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never remove text from talk page unless you feel it is a personal attack. If so, contact a third party to mediate. 64.202.146.213 (talk) 03:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong! Anything that isn't considered constructive or productive for WP editing purposes may be removed in whole immediately...especially your trolling.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 04:01, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the proposed change and the desire to merge decoys into lures, but there is a distinct difference for those that collect. I know of no class of lures that does not have hooks and lures are traditionally pulled using a fishing reel or the boat when trolling and therefore are forced into active motion to attract fish. A subset of decoys have hooks, but the majority do not. Decoys traditionally are not pulled by reels or boats but are tied to a stationary position and may be moved by the current but attract fish not by motion but by simply being there. Decoys are used predominantly when spearing fish during ice fishing so the method for obtaining the fish is different. I feel that there is enough distinction to warrant a separate page, but would not object to linking the two together. —Preceding comment added by birdfarmer (talk • contribs) 13:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem

cite the article appropriately. (some of the books you listed in the article would be suitable for citations). --Epipelagic (talk) 20:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Oppose merge; while I agree that the

WP:MERGEREASON, because "The separate topics could be expanded into longer standalone (but cross-linked) articles". Klbrain (talk) 21:45, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

I have just modified one external link on Fishing lure. 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/20140408211926/http://www.tailwatersflyfishing.com/flies.html to http://www.tailwatersflyfishing.com/flies.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:30, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]