Talk:Wels catfish

Untitled

Intro could use a bit of crafting. The details of the body should be lower down in the article. Perhaps something about the amazing size and/or ecological issues could be foreshadwed in the intro to fill it in, and the anatomy description could be made into a section of its own. --DanielCD 22:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Largest, not second largest of its region + thoughts on maximum size

Sturgeons are not true freshwater fish (that live their whole lives in fresh or brackish water), they're anadromous fish (born in fresh water, migrate to the sea, return to spawn in fresh water). Hence, the Wels Catfish is the largest freshwater fish in its region (well, at least in Europe it is). If sturgeons were included, the Beluga would be the World's largest freshwater fish, insted of the Giant Catfish Pangasianodon gigas – in fact, a number of top spots in size ranking would be held by sturgeons, as several species (Beluga Huso huso, Kaluga H. dauricus, White Sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus, Chinese Sturgeon A. sinensis, Atlantic Sturgeon A. oxyrinchus and Sturgeon A. sturio – as well as the Chinese Swordfish Psephurus gladius) grow larger than the Giant Catfish.

I'd also like to se more detail on the Romanian record fish, such as the catch date and a photograph. Its measurements seem suspectfully approximate, not to mention misconverted (220 kg=485 lb, not 440). The largest reliably measured specimen that I know of was the 144 kg (317 lb) fish from the Po River in 2000. I admit it's likely that there probably were even larger specimen caught in the past, when the species was more numerous, but have any of them been properly documented? Many fish books have credited a specimen of 256.7 kg (566 lb) and 335 cm (132 in) caught in the Desna River in modern day Ukraine in 1918 as the largest ever measured; however, a photo reveals this wasn't a Wels Catfish at all, but a Beluga, a sturgeon. There are even larger 19th century claims of 300–400 kg (661–882 lb) and 400–500 cm (158–197 in), but I find these too obscure – not to mention absurd – to be taken seriously.

You can find a vast gallery of large recent Wels Catfish here, and based on it I'd say that a modern day specimen of more than 220 cm (86½ in) in length or 80 kg (176 lb) in weight is quite exceptional, and over 250 cm (98½ in) or 110 kg (243 lb) truly immense. Makes anything over 300 cm (118 in) or 200 kg (441 lb) rather hard to believe.

--Anshelm '77 12:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fishing

The Fishing section in the article could do with a rewrite for example: 'one of the best baits are the bloodsuckers.' I would assume that the bloodsuckers mentioned are leeches. Bass fishing physicist 02:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fishing section deffinatly needs a rewrite, pellets (hallibut pellets and specialist catfish pellets) are now an extremely popular bait on the continent and in the UK. It should also be mentioned that these fish have been introduced to the UK by the duke of Bedford with specimins reaching well over 60lb. Fish of over 200lb are also caught every year on the Ebro system, I dont know about other parts of the world. It is also rumoured that commercial fishermen in russia have netted these fish to over 600lb! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalbananas (talk • contribs) 00:32, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo

I would like that the horrible photo -Som.jpg- on the right is taken out. Is not a respectable photo, is full of blood... in my opinion... Marco Candini, Italy

I see no reason to remove it. Wikipedia is not censored, after all. —An gr 07:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

214lb catfish in Spain

Is this [1] a wels catfish? 81.147.148.17 (talk) 16:38, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalized or not?

What is up with the constant dropping of the capitalization on "wels"? Is it "Wels catfish" or "wels catfish". I see it both ways in the article. The link I clicked on to get here said "wels catfish". Which one is correct, and why isn't it capitalized? It looks like it ought to be, somehow. A mention on what "wels" means, if it's not a title/name, would be nice..45Colt 14:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .45Colt (talk • contribs)

It shouldn't be capitalized; I've removed the capitalization (except at the beginning of a sentence etc.). Wels comes from the German word Wels (which is capitalized, like all nouns in German), which is just the word for this fish. It's distantly related to the word whale. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name: "wels catfish", or just "wels"?

Is "wels catfish" the commonest name for this fish? I've normally seen it just called a "wels". 62.172.108.24 (talk) 15:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen it called just "wels" in English. In German, yes (and then with a capital "W", of course), but not in English.

"Wels" is the German word for "catfish".

In German, the species Silurus glanis is more correctly called "Europäischer Wels" (= "European catfish") or "Flusswels" (= "river catfish").

However, often it's just called "Wels" (= "catfish") by Germans, because it is either the only species of catfish living there or the by far biggest and most important one, making it essentially THE catfish.

Whoever came up with that brilliant idea to use it for the English common name probably had no idea what the literal translation of "wels catfish" would be.

My advice to you: If some ignorant idiot a long time ago got away with calling that species "catfish catfish", just call it whatever you want. I doubt you would come up with anything even more stupid. 84.58.19.59 (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stomach - incorrect translation

In the Wikipedia-article we have (02.10.22) this very very stupid sentence:

'Fishermen credible to Antipa (probably Romanian zoologist Grigore Antipa, 1866–1949) told me that children bathing in the stomachs of catfish were caught in the bones of their hands and feet.'

I am hungarian and the original of this text is in hungarian, I have read it, I understand it.

It should be correctly:

'Fishermen credible to Antipa (probably Romanian zoologist Grigore Antipa, 1866–1949) told me that bones of hands and feet belonging to children bathing in rivers were found in the stomachs of catfish'