Talk:Shoaling and schooling

Predator inspection

Perhaps this subject is also related ? Shyamal (talk) 14:26, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Also circular milling in fish along the lines of ant mill. Shyamal (talk) 11:56, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Possible star article

Shouldn't this be nominated as a Star Article? Bruinfan12 (talk) 13:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly support this sentiment. What an excellently written article! Brockle (talk) 14:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations to Epipelagic (by far the lead contributor) for this charming and informative article. Long may he swim in the WP lagoon. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Hear, hear! --Tryptofish (talk) 20:18, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

File:Pyranha Pygocentrus piraya group 1280 boosted.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Pyranha Pygocentrus piraya group 1280 boosted.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:16, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Why is reference section called "Notes"?

Resolved

The reference section is strangely called Notes, and then there is another section called "References" that contains unlinked references. I think these unlinked references should just be merged into the Further Reading section Bhny (talk) 18:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

No that's not at all "strange", see WP:LAY. The "References" section contains classic references that have (not yet) been integrated into the text. The "Further Reading" section is just that, other references that are useful, but of lesser status. This arrangement is particularly useful to anyone with a serious interest in the topic, or interested in developing the article further. --Epipelagic (talk) 23:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I've not seen a layout like that. The closest I could find was WP:EXPLNOTE part B or D, where you have shortened footnotes in Notes and expanded references in References. This article, on the other hand, has 2 similar sections one linked and one unlinked. Bhny (talk) 00:06, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I've change "References" to "Reading". Are you more comfortable with that? Footnotes are often called "Notes", which you can check by looking at featured articles. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

that's better. I would also change "Notes" to "References" Bhny (talk) 16:06, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

also can you give me one example where the {reflist} is named "Notes"? Everyone I've seen has a group name like- {reflist|group=notes}

Yes, I see your point :) --Epipelagic (talk) 19:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

A related point

Please let me suggest combining "Readings", "Further readings", and "Recent articles" into a single section of "Further reading" (singular). Doing so would be more logical, and more consistent with WP:LAY. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Resolved also. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:28, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Etymology

Might be worth (briefly) mentioning that both words come from the same source (shoal from Old English, school from Middle Dutch, both Germanic cognates. 109.176.224.23 (talk) 13:00, 10 July 2013 (UTC)