User talk:Canelli

Channa micropeltes

Hi Canelli. I chose to redirect Channa micropeltes to Snakehead (fish) because the original article was in pretty poor condition (see the page history), and the latter article seemed to contain a more complete description. I also made the change because many other species names (e.g. Rattus norvegicus, Homo sapiens) redirect to the articles under their common names. Of course, other organisms (e.g. Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Drosophila melanogaster) have their own separate articles, and so there's no reason why Channa micropeltes can't have its own separate article. However, it would need to contain some content that clearly distinguished it from the general Snakehead (fish) article. :) --Alan Au 23:39, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Alan Au. You are completely right about what you have said about the condition of the article. That's why I started to refactor it gracefully. Maybe I do not understand what redirecting in Wikispeak means? In HTTP-speak it is that, when I go for a URL and the contents of the URL has moved to a different URL, the HTTP redirect "brings" me to the contents "of the old URL". Is this the same in WikiSpeak. If so, the article has absolutely no correlation with any certain Channa species. Due to the incoherent starting text I sticked to a more general introduction to snakeheads. That why I would like to see it to be redirected from the genus "Channa" which would be closer to the semantic (broader Channa) contents of the article, much more than the redirect from a certain (Channa) species. Can you agree? In which respect I am wrong? I am happy about enlightenment.

If you cannot follow my line of arguments, you should redirect the article from Channa argus because most of its contents points to the species Channa argus. The pic of the article displays a Channa argus caught by the US government in Crofton, Maryland 2002. --Canelli 12:46, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]