Talk:Goldfish/Archive 1

Relevance

"On the television show MythBusters, Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage explored the idea by each trying to train goldfish to navigate a maze over a 45-day period. The result was that the fish could definitely be trained to navigate the maze."

How is this paragraph relevant to the discussion of goldfish? I propose it be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.23.23.158 (talk • contribs) 2006-05-13 23:16

Has anyone seen this video of trained goldfish? I don't know if it belongs in the article, but it's quite amazing.--Daveswagon 21:03, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

It really shouldn't go in the article since those fish were pulled through the water via magnets.--User:Nenn 13:03, 30 January 2007

better history source

I'll add some info from this site soon too. -EKN http://www.kokosgoldfish.com/disease.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by EKN (talk • contribs) 2006-02-01 00:16

Actually, this is a better source for dating.

http://www.bristol-aquarists.org.uk/goldfish/info/info.htm jynx 17:30, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Have you already added any additional info to the main page?- EKN —Preceding unsigned comment added by EKN (talk • contribs) 2006-02-01 00:15

Carnival prizes

Goldfish are often given away at fairs and carnivals in the US as well.. generally they are won by tossing a ping pong ball into a small spherical bowl containing the fish. Suppafly 22:46, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Feel free to add this information to the article. Edward 23:30, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Fishbowl size

Are you sure the fishbowls mentioned are too small? 10 gallons is a sphere of 1 foot 4.5 inches (38 liters, 41cm) diameter --Random|832 21:19, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Goldfish bowls are really, really, really bad - If filled to the top, the surface area of the water is so low compaired to the volume of water that large fish (like goldfish) have trouble getting enough oxygen out of the water and will 'slurp' oxyiginated water from the top. Strangly, a goldfish bowl that is half filled is almost ok - but it's still bad. If you want your fish to last years - you really do need 10 gallons or so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjohnson (talk • contribs) 2005-01-17 06:11

15 or more gallons per fish is optimal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

I realize that tiny 1L bowls are not good for fish, but are >75L tanks as it says in the article really needed? This seems insanely large, given that (from experience) you can have about 10 saltwater fish of comparable size in a tank that big. Wouldn't an aerator (to oxygenate the water) couple with a small tank be fine? Telanis (talk) 21:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Old sanctuary link

The goldfish sanctuary, linked at the bottom, hasn't existed in five years, and only the front page of the site is still up. Objections to removing the link? Anyone able to find a link to something similar, yet actually in existance? --66.69.150.85 13:54, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The organisation may be defunct, but their site does have some decent information for the hobbyist. I'm not so sure the link is useless, but I wouldn't object to its removal. -- Hadal 06:26, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Varieties

Question... I was thinking of putting up pages about the various goldfish varieties (ryukin, comet, oranda, etc) and I was wondering if it'd be appropriate to list them from this page. --67.149.163.154 06:18, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Certainly. Perhaps a summary section with links to the varieties' more detailed articles? NOAA has good PD colour plates of ryukins and orandas, which could be put to good use. -- Hadal 06:26, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Under chinese classification, the article says that there are 4 chinese classifications of fish. This is then followed by 5 different types. I found this confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.150.218.106 (talk) 11:35, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Pregnant twats

I couldn't find this on the snopes site: "here is an urban legend that a pregnant goldfish is called a "twit" or "twat", but this was debunked by The Straight Dope." Perhaps a direct link would be useful? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.36.64.164 (talk • contribs) 2005-09-29 23:22

Lifespan

The entry says that the fish quickly reach adult size and can survive for years. How old is considered adult, and what is their average lifespan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.163.57.20 (talk • contribs) 2005-10-06 23:33

I don't have any real experience of raising fish, but I was looking for lifespan information recently, and found a reasonable article online - http://www.adelaideaquariums.com.au/Faqs/freshwater/fish/goldfish.asp. This suggests 5-10 years for home-based pets, 15-20 for outdoor fish, and a 'record' of 43 years. If someone cares to verify this, we should add it to the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.156.74 (talk • contribs) 2005-12-02 21:38

Common pet names

If anybody really cares...the most common name for a pet goldfish is (allegedly) Jaws, not Wanda (nor, as you might hope, Asshole). Fishhole 09:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Given the fact that goldfish aren't licensed or registered in any way, there is no way that there exists any real data on what the most common name is. But why, exactly, dould you think we would "hope" that "A-hole" would be the most common name for goldfish?69.226.43.10 (talk) 02:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Ponds

I was wondering about adding information about keeping goldfish in ponds since their does not seem to be any here.--βjweþþ (talk) 16:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Grammar cleanup

Does anyone know why this page is put on cleanup? I can not see any problems.--βjweþþ (talk) 17:43, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Because it's full of spelling, grammar and language mistakes. Just check the History section for example ... Ebogdan 18:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Just get someone to correct them. If people here cleanup articles just because it has grammatical or spelling mistakes, then that's not fair to people whose mother toungue isn't English. jynx 16:54, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

What is this, some bizarre sort of political correctness that drives people to think it's "unfair" to clean up spelling and grammatical errors because the author might not be fully fluent in the language they wrote in? If I contribute to the Spanish edition of Wikipedia, I would certainly hope a native speaker would fix (too my "me Tarzan, you Jane" level of writing. Why would it be "unfair" to do the same for someone else? The whole point of Wikipedia is that everyone contributes what they can to make an article better -- not that we leave something the way it is because that's how a previous editor wrote it, mistakes and all. It appears that this individual is no longer active in Wikipedia, but still, I have to comment because this isn't the first time I've seen this sort of attitude. It gets on my last nerve because it is so totally opposed to the way Wikipedia is meant to function. Worldwalker (talk) 21:51, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Domesticated vs wild

I don't understand the phrase "Domesticated goldfish left to their own devices will over time revert to their wild form." What the **** does it mean ?! If it means what I think it does, well, it's not true. After several matings, goldfish with "wild" colour will appear (similar to guppys), but a number of the fancy coloured ones will remain no matter what (genetics...). Ebogdan 20:22, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I think it means all the gold ones will get eaten beacause they stick out but the 'wild' coloured ones will survive. It still is phrased wrongly anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bjwebb (talk • contribs) 2006-01-18 18:54

Can anyone verify the story from the History section ? Ebogdan 20:37, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

"Domesticated goldfish left to their own devices will over time revert to their wild form." I don't think I typed this sentence. I don't agree with what it says anyway. There aren't any goldfish that are not domesticated! There are no wild goldfish, don't be silly! jynx 17:22, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

There are tons of wild goldfish. Wild populations are found all over the United States, for instance. An example of a fish survey finding wild goldfish in a lake is here:

http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showreport.html?downum=27065500

They indeed revert to the bronze form as the colorful varieties are maladapted for survival in the wild. The "gold" offspring are quickly devoured by fish-eating birds, like the Kingfisher, leaving only plain bronze offspring to breed the next generation.Roughfisher

Those populations should properly be called feral rather than wild. -- Donald Albury 12:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it would make more sense if the sentence was phrased with "the goldfish population will revert" so it doesn't appear as if the individual goldfish are reverting their color to the wild type. -- User:Nenn 13:08, 30 January 2007

I think it should say "A population of domesticated fish left to their own devices will revert to their more bland colors". Wild form makes it sound like the goldfish turn aggressive. Besides the whole phrase "revert to wild form" sounds like something out of a comic book. 24.254.47.90 22:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

"Wild type" is the correct biological term for the normal (as opposed to mutant) form of a gene or an organism. It has nothing to do with behavior or aggressiveness. The fact that comic book writers have used (or misused) scientific terminology does not mean that terminology should be expunged from a scientific article, or from the vocabulary of science overall. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldwalker (talk • contribs) 22:05, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks like a whole bunch of people need to brush up on their biology/evolutionary theory. "Reversion" is absolutely not the right term. Something like the following would be appropriate: "Domesticated goldfish are maladapted for survival in the wild, since their bright coloring attracts predators. Thus over time wild goldfish populations consist of mainly the more bland brown-colored fish, since fish with that coloring are more likely to survive and pass on their genes." Telanis (talk) 06:14, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

40 gallons? Ridiculous

Goldfish need TEN -- still a large amount of water/tank -- nor FORTY gallons each. And this is only for decent-sized mature fish. Filtration and other techniques can make perfectly livable conditions in smaller areas.

In China, it's not uncommon for four-five large goldfish to live in a small bowl, and presumably the Chinese know what they're on about with goldfish. Zuzim 21:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

If anyone has been to a goldfish shop in China (pictures would look nice on the wiki page btw), then you would NOT see the goldfish kept in bowls over night. They are usually kept in very large tanks or algae ponds to keep their luster and health. --Nenn 13:11, 30 January 2007

Really saying, the general formula for goldfish activity volume is its length times its length times its length, in other words, length^3. As soon as you know the water in the bowl is not less than that is ok. Besides, you should not calculate the volume a goldfish needs the way you calculate other fish. Most other fish are caught in the wild, but goldfish (excluding Grass type) are evolved to be domesticated. Goldfish mostly are not very active. And for fancy species such as Bubble Eye, you even MUST NOT put them in a large container, or it will find very difficult to find food!!!!!! So really saying, you should treat different fish differently. jynx 17:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

In his very esteemed book 'Fancy Goldfish: A Complete Guide to Care and Collecting' Dr. Erik Johnson agrees with the 10 gallons per mature fish rule but also adds that the fish keeper should always purchase the largest aquarium that they can afford. Having kept very large fancy varieties of goldfish for over ten years I can attest to the accuracy of this. Larger tanks are much easier to keep chemicaly and biologicaly stable. Goldfish bowls are totally not adequate unless the owner is extremly familiar with water quality testing and mainence, which will have to be performed at least daily. While certain varieties of fancy goldfish such as the stubby-bodied Ranchu and the Bubble Eye are not very good swimmers most goldfish and Koi are very active swimmers and greatly appreciate plenty of swimming room. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gldfish (talk • contribs) 2006-06-17 04:30

Copyvio?

The Common Diseases section really really reads to me like a copy-n-paste job. -- Avocado 17:17, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, it was lifted straight from http://www.kokosgoldfish.com/disease.html. I've removed the offending section. -- slieschke 03:10, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Someone had brought back the section. I removed it as it was clearly the same that was used before. If anyone would like to make a disease section, please do it yourself without copying it from elsewhere. --MercZ 20:42, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

EKN please, if you are going to copy and paste the fish diseases, atleast give credit. And please if you do so, edit the passage to be more Encyclopedia appropriate. --MercZ 04:17, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Repetition

This articles keeps restating facts. While the facts themselves are relevent, things needs only be explained once clearly under the appropriate section. I assume we're all in agreement on this. I encourage others to help clean up. Angrynight 02:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

how do you undo vandalism?

I found this page vandalized and i don't know how to undo. i tried my best. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.13.43 (talk • contribs) 2006-03-22 02:02

Sorry about not marking my edit, it was my first revert. Angrynight 03:39, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Grammar

I've corrected some more grammar considerations. I don't mean to offend anyone for whom English is not their mother tongue, however this is an English Language site and grammar is important to a high quality article. --Brideshead 20:56, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hitler?

Why does it randomly say HITLER in the middle of the sentence saying how long goldfish can grow to be? I don't know much about fish but i doubt Hitler is a fish related term.--JMV290 21:56, 5 April 2006 (UTC)] This is innapropriate and should be reported

Thanks for the free laugh-- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.98.225.118 (talk) 08:53, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Feeding Relevance

Is this statment necesary in the feeding section? "The oldest living Goldfish to date was a goldfish named Goldie, which recently supplanted the previous record holder by living to the age of 45. Goldie was originally won at a fair in Budleigh Salterton, UK"

Unnecessary section...

:As for other goldfish a simple checklist can be followed that should prevent any ailment:

1. Does the tank have at least 10 gallons of water for every fish under 6 inches, with 40 gallons minimum, or at least 20 gallons for every fish under 12 inches, with at least 100 gallons minimum? If not, a bigger tank is necessary.

2. Is the tank at least four times as long and twice as wide as the largest fish in the tank? If not, the fish don't have room to swim or turn around and will be stressed out.

3. Are the ammonia and nitrite levels in the tank at zero, and the nitrates at an acceptable level? The tank needs to be properly cycled (ammonia & nitrite at undetectable levels) and water changes should be done often enough to keep nitrates low.

4. Are the fish being fed no more than they can consume in three minutes, twice per day? Overfeeding is the number one cause of death in goldfish.

5. Are all new fish that are going to be introduced to the tank first kept in a separate hospital tank for a few weeks to ensure that they don't have any diseases? Adding new fish without quarantine is effectively playing Russian roulette with the fish already in the community tank.

6. Lastly, is everything in the tank designed for aquatic use? That lovely conch shell from the beach, or that piece of wood from the yard could be leaching chemicals into your tank that wreak havoc on the water chemistry in the tank.

If these rules are followed, the only occasional worry might be an outbreak of Ich or a power failure. Even then, if the proper stocking levels are being followed even a loss of filtration to the tank for a day or two shouldn't kill off the fish.

I have a problem with the entire section above. It seems to like it was written for The Proper Care for Goldfish and not an encyclopedia. However, it's well-written and there's some great information in there. I think we should re-write the section... or failing that, remove it entirely. Thoughts? ---J.S (t|c) 17:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Overfeeding and its resultant decrease in water quality I would estimate as the second most common cause of goldfish death. The first is suffocation: People think it'll be okay in that little bowl with no pump, no filter, no anything. 75.40.157.88 00:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC) rkyeun

Synchronized swimming?

There is a mention in the behavior section that (groups of) goldfish can be trained to swim in synchronized formation (with each other). I believe there is only one widely distributed, and contested, video purporting to demonstrate this: it is 55 seconds long, shows 2 persons speaking Japanese with overdubbed comments in Chinese (Taiwanese?), and 4 goldfish which seem to swim in tight formation reacting to hand commands. (Search video.google.com for "goldfish ballet" for the video.) This video seems to have surfaced around February 2006. The first reference in the Wikipedia Goldfish article to synchronized swimming appears in edit Revision as of 21:58, 22 May 2006, a timeframe consistent with the appearance of the above-mentioned video, indicating perhaps this content was inserted into the article based on the video.

Whether or not the goldfish in the video are actually freely swimming in synchronized fashion - and indeed, if goldfish can be trained to this extent - appears to be a debated topic on various web forums. In this video, the fish appear to be swimming "freely" in perfect synchronization, but some posters on discussion forums on the web raised the possibility that the fish are not swimming under their own control but are somehow being invisibly dragged along by use of e.g. swallowed magnets and an electromagnet under the table.

As strong evidence of fakery, one forum poster pointed out that in the very last scene of the famous video, the right-most fish of the four is clearly struggling to swim in another direction in the water but appears to be fixed in position in formation by some unseen force or device. The video ends abruptly at this point. Further, but weaker, evidence cited is that the fins of the fish are not moving enough to account for their rapid motion, indicating they are being dragged along in formation somehow.

This relates to the behavior section of the article because it seems to be unclear if goldfish can actually be trained to swim in tight formation, a situation which has only apparently been demonstrated once, on the above-mentioned video. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.120.170.166 (talk • contribs) 2006-07-09 12:49

So:

• Is there another documented example of goldfish swimming synchronzied and in formation?
• If not, what is the believability of only source for this claim: the video described above?

I'd really like to believe that goldfish can be trained to this extent, but the evidence seems weak right now. Goldfish experts, what do you think?

Carp do not exhibit schooling behaviors, and common goldfish rarely seem to understand where they're even going themselves. They're not going to swim in formation like this. On the other hand, they do have some capacity for training. There was an experiment in which a maze was constructed in a tank with clear walls, and orange-ringed holes in the walls. The fish learned to swim through the rings to navigate the maze for a treat of food. 75.40.157.88 00:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC) rkyeun

Good Article

I thought it was pretty well done, so I passed it. It had cited and gave images and the content was well written. Monkey Brain_(talk) 23:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Tank Size

In fact, for single-tailed varieties, such as commons or comets, it is really necessary to have 100 gallons (378 L) (for adult fish). This unreferenced statement must be absolute bullshit. A tank to hold 378 litres would be approximately 3 metres by a metre and a half, weighing around 400kg. What utter nonsense for one comet. --Brideshead 22:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the above assertion of bullshit. As a general rule, I suggest that the gallons of water required for goldfish (and with additional steps, for other fishes as well) be obtained by the following formula: For each fish, round each of length, width, and height up to the next highest inch. Multiply these values together. For each especially dirty fish, such as goldfish, multiply their result by two. Add the values of each fish together. That's how many gallons you need. --- It is thus perfectly plausible to keep a school of twenty neon tetras or zebra danios in a ten gallon tank with good aeration, but I'd only try it with 5 small goldfish under the same space limitations. Bear in mind that small goldfish will grow if well cared-for, and can easily reach a foot or more in length, even in your smaller aquarium. Then you'll need more tank. 75.40.157.88 00:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC) rkyeun

While I think the 100-gallon suggestion is a bit overkill, it's already been brought up that many goldfish breeders/researchers/vets have suggested a 10- to 20-gallon minimum per goldfish. No matter the size. Goldfish simply expel too much waste to deal with smaller volumes. --Nenn 13:19, 30 January 2007

Breed Mixing

I have read on certain websites (such as aquariumfish.net, a online seller) that goldfish from slower swimming breeds should not be mixed with faster swimming breeds because they crowd eachother out at feeding and nip. Is this true at all? I'm a beginner looking to stock my first aquarium, so someone with more experience please chime in. thanks VanTucky 20:44, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

The general problem is that the faster fish will overeat and consume more food than they should, leaving less food for slower fish. In general this isn't a problem, as most novice fishkeepers overfeed their fish by a factor of three, so food settles to the bottom and the slower fish can pick through it. This leads to decreased water quality as the food degrades. A better solution is to use a plate of glass or plastic sheet in the aquarium to seperate the fast fish from the slow fish at feeding time, and feed both sides of the tank seperately. 75.40.157.88 00:03, 14 January 2007 (UTC) rkyeun

Some of the head-growth breeds also are at hazard of getting hurt by the more wild-form goldfish. Particularly those with bent spine and no dorsal fin have a hard time getting away from unwanted attention (which happens in such curious animals every now and then). In East Asia such breeds are generally kept on their own, perhaps even 2-3 individuals only, so they do not get stressed and live longer and healthier (which may be a problem in the more extreme breeds) Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Name

Where does the Goldfish name come from if they are clearly either orange or yellow. Why isn't it ornagefish? I think this could be explained somewhere in the history section?

When dealing with animals it is a common practice to "embellish" the name. Like the Blue Queensland Healer... a grey dog. I have no idea where a source could be found... it could be one of those things lost in time. ---J.S (t|c) 00:07, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

In Chinese, it's called goldfish as well, so I guess that's why it's goldfish in English. Most of them are metallic-orange or metallic-yellow, hence it is in fact golden. Besides, goldfish sounds much better than orange fish or yellowfish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.75.181 (talk) 02:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

I replaced the image in the infobox, something I've been wanting to do for quite some time. The previous one was rathe murky-looking, and not attractive at all. VanTucky 22:54, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Goldfish breed links list

FYI, 4444hhhh changed the list of links to goldfish breeds from using the {{Goldfish breeds}} tag to using a bunch of individual links to each of the various breeds. A lot of the links were broken because they didn't point to the right article (i.e. "Comet" pointed to the article on chunks of orbiting space ice, not the article on the breed of goldfish) so I fixed those links. I'm not sure if you'd rather go back to using the breeds tag instead though, so I thought I'd make sure you guys knew it had been changed so you could discuss which is better here. -- HiEv 18:00, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Cruelty?

Its debatable whether swallowing a goldfish is cruel. Fish can't feel pain, so it's rediculous to think that harming one is cruel. Giving them away as carnival prizes isn't cruel either; the goldfish get to go to good homes. Remember what the Bible says: God created animals for the use of man. I'm changing "Eddibility and Cruelty" to controversy. 12va34 02:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

"Fish can't feel pain"? That seems like a dubious claim to make. Almost all vertebrates feel pain as far as I'm aware, and thus fish most likely do too. Do you have a source for your claim? Also, goldfish given away as carnival prizes may or may not get to go to good homes. You can't say they all do. As for what the Bible says, that's not particularly relevant as most people define some things as ethical or unethical behaviors despite contradiction with the Bible (i.e. slavery.) Still, I do agree that "Controversy" is probably a somewhat better subject title for those topics since they are debatable. -- HiEv 08:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

What would make you think that fish can't feel pain? Everything with a nervous system (at least, more than simple motor nerves) can feel pain -- that's a large part of what a nervous system is all about. Pain is nature's (or God's, if you prefer) way of telling an organism "don't do that again." It is a basic survival mechanism. If goldfish couldn't feel pain, what would stop them from swimming into sharp rocks in their native environment? Or eating things that could injure them? They would be like those children who can't feel pain who can be injured, or injure themselves (biting their tongues, scratching their eyes, etc.) without ever being aware that anything is wrong.

As for goldfish from carnivals going to good homes: The people who win a fish at a carnival rarely have a proper fish tank set up and cycled awaiting the fish when it arrives. More often than not, the fish is dumped into some totally unsuitable fish bowl, fed who knows what, and dead in a week. Moreover, the fish are usually cheap feeder goldfish which, since they're not meant to be maintained long-term, are overcrowded, underfed, and generally very, very unhealthy fish, so even if they are not fatally stressed by their carnival experience and are properly cared for by their new owners, the chances of them surviving are slight.

Finally, if we took all our rules from the Bible alone, then slavery would be legal and shaving would be a crime. All that aside, though, use does not mean waste. If a father were to give his son a new sports car for his 16th birthday, and that son trashed the interior, painted curse words all over it, ran it with no oil, and finally totaled it, would the father be pleased with his son? Would he say "I gave you that car for your use, so it does not matter that you wantonly destroyed it; here's a new one"? Or would he say "From now on, you're walking"? I certainly know what my father would have said. Likewise, if God created the world and the animals in it for our use, do you think he will be pleased if we trash up his world and torture his animals? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Worldwalker (talk • contribs) 22:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Mixing fish

Can Goldfish be kept in the same tank as other fish? 41.244.142.138 14:02, 30 July 2007 (UTC)Juan

While this isn't quite the place for such a question (this is for discussing the article itself), yes they can. Just remember that they're coldwater fishes and you should'nt be lumping them in with any tropicals. Shrumster 15:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Unless you have a pet Pike of course... Think outside the box 18:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

A pet Pike will eat any Goldfish you got in the fish tank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.55.128 (talk) 10:33, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Reorganize article

I believe that as a biological article, the article should be reorganized and reprioritized into a more biological mindset. As it reads, it's more like a pet article than an actual organismal article. More focus on the biology, less on their pet qualities. Shrumster 15:11, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Listed at Good Article Reassessment

Questions have been raised regarding this article's status as a Good Article. Editors have raised concerns that this article may not meet the standards spelled out in the good article criteria. There is an ongoing discussion over improvements needed for this article located at the Good Article Reassessment page. Any editors that have an interest in maintaining and improving this article are invited to participate in that discussion. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 00:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Temperature and outdoor survival

Goldfish most certainly can survive quite well at water temperatures below 50 degrees. Goldfish kept outdoors in cold climates (northern US, for instance) winter over under ice, even in small garden ponds, so long as the water does not freeze solid. They spend the winter in a state of torpor and start feeding again when temperatures get up to about 50. Hell, guppies can survive below 50, and they're tropical fish. The overnight temperature swings in an office aren't going to kill them either, except maybe for some of the more delicate varieties.

Also, at least some fancy goldfish can survive outdoors, although in an environment with predators the fancy ones will generally be eaten first as they are more visible and/or slower. However, they can survive and breed. I have second-hand knowledge (and the person in the next room has first-hand knowledge) of a breeding population of feral goldfish that formerly existed in upstate New York which had multiple generations of long-finned and fancy colored goldfish, some of them of huge size, descended from a few fish which had been released there. They lived in settling ponds for wash water from a sausage and meat-packing plant, which led to them being somewhat more carnivorous than your average goldfish. And there were a lot of them. As he describes it, "the water would boil when you threw in a sausage." True story: his boss went to catch a few to put in the boss's wife's garden pond, slipped, fell into the water, and the goldfish tried their best to eat him. Their best wasn't very good, of course, due to them being goldfish, but it must have been a sight to see!

I'm just not up for editing this right now; I've got enough keeping me busy with some other articles and my so-called life. Anyone else want to correct the relevant sections?

Worldwalker (talk) 23:20, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

I changed the "optimal temperature" to match what was listed in the article cited for the data. It was listed as a static 77F, while the article says 68-72.63.231.159.216 (talk) 14:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Good, thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Sources

This article requires more published sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David.palmer99 (talk • contribs) 03:55, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Breeding .gif

Not sure what is supposed to be happening in this animated gif - some sort of foursome? - does this really contribute information to the article? Bitbut (talk) 11:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd vote for removing it. Carl.bunderson (talk) 03:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Gif-be-gone. Bob98133 (talk) 15:13, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

I've now removed it. Carl.bunderson (talk) 00:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Semi Protect?

I think its a good idea to semi protect this article. A glance at the history suggests that there are lot of frequent unproductive edits which have been reverted. Can some admin look into it? --Nvineeth (talk) 03:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Typos

would it upgrade the article to correct typos? Ferrel goldfish yet.