Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:16, 20 March 2014

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Japan: Flora and fauna Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 09:01, January 23, 2025 (JST, Reiwa 7) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Flora and fauna task force. WikiProject Japan to do list: edit history watch purge Peer review: None A-class review: None Featured content candidates –  Articles: None Pictures: None Lists: None Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One Add requested images to articles that need them. Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions. Improve and expand Japan-related stubs. Create some requested articles. Help translate an article from the Japanese Misplaced Pages into English. Assess unassessed articles Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Fishes Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

1

Origin

In fact the fish and the Japanese Kanji "錦鯉" were both originated from China in Jin Dynasty (265–420). It was first developed by Buddhism monks in temple pools. It became popular in Tang Dynasty. The fish became a element of literature especially Tang poems. One example:

Tang poet Lu Guimeng 〈奉酬襲美苦雨〉: "層雲愁天低，久雨倚檻冷。絲禽藏荷香，錦鯉繞島影。 心將時人乖，道與隱者靜。桐陰無深泉，所以逞短綆。" (Buhuzu (talk) 21:08, 20 February 2010 (UTC))

A few links have been added as references to the origin of the common carp and selective breeding done for carp with mutations to arrive at koi. There seems to be some dispute as to the origins, which would be expected. But any dispute regarding Origins should have references to back it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.240.1.2 (talk) 01:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

There is currently a reference that goldfish were selectively bred from the common carp. However, clicking into the reference indicates that the goldfish was selectively bred from the Gibel carp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.2.124.130 (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

There was much information related to goldfish origins in the 'Origin' section that I don't see as related to Koi, being they originated from two seperate species of carp. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.2.124.130 (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that information related to the origins of goldfish should not be in the Origin section for Koi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jediknight95758 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

You're agreeing with yourself. Please do not engage in sockpuppetry. OhNoitsJamie 19:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree on several counts with the individuals (individual?) For one, the information was verified. The references were updated to not be commercial. All of the statements were verifiable in the sites listed. I also agree that origins of goldfish do not belong in origins of koi. In true 'encyclopedia' fashion, the origins of another species would not appear in the origin information of a different one.

I'm also not seeing this 'lawrencekhoo' individual participating in the Talk discussion. It seems odd to me that one user would be expected to use the Talk section first, but another user would not be.

This origins section for koi should also not address the broad group of carp as a whole. There is a[REDACTED] entry for carp that should capture that information. The Origins section for koi should specifically address the origins of Koi from the common carp (Cyprinus carpio). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexa415 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

There are seperate articles to address the carp family origins as a whole, as well as the origins of goldfish. The origins of goldfish should not be comingled in an article about koi, specifically in a section related to the origins of koi. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.26.179.0 (talk) 08:26, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Currently the article states that Koi were developed in the 1820s. But the article also discusses Hanako, supposedly a koi born in the 1750s. Sound fishy? 140.180.34.83 (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

There was a revision that was altered with a claim of 'vandalism', from LawrenceKHoo. I saw no vandalism. All information was sourced, relevant to the article, and verifiable. How was any of that 'vandalism'. In fact, there is now more irrelevant information in the current version. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.78.243.111 (talk) 05:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The prior version that was altered with the false allegation of 'vandalism' was from me. You are correct that there was no vandalism, and the prior version was fully verifiable and sources added. The user LawrenceKHoo again reverted it back without making any attempt to utilize these talk pages, and made another false allegation that inaccuracies were introduced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.48.52.241 (talk) 22:26, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Hanako Anachronism

If Koi truly were first developed in the 1820's, then allegations of Koi exceeding 200 years in age (e.g. Hanako born c. 1750, later in the article) are obviously false. The idea of 1 ring = 1 year is an assumption that does not appear to have been verified for this species. Fishbase gives a much more plausible maximum lifespan of 38 years for the common carp, likely applicable to the koi derivatives.

I've also been bothered by those statements for some time. We should inject the proper amount of skepticism into those reports of long lived koi. Please feel free to do so, I'll try to add something later. LK (talk) 08:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I take the 1820s date as the development of organized breeding, which doesn't preclude naturally-colored individuals having been found earlier. Indeed, if word got out to the countryside that brightly-colored fish were desirable and worth some money, that would be an incentive to try one's hand at making more... Stan (talk) 17:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Koi pond: dup or ad?

Can someone examine the Koi pond article to double-check that it worths staying in Misplaced Pages as is, or merging here, or maybe removing? It is written a bit like in promo style, but definitely non-encyclopaedic. Honeyman (talk) 13:35, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Should Asian Carp and Koi article be merged

Shouldn't these two articles be merged or make the Koi article a sub-section in the Asian Carp article. Seems redunant.

Asian Carp is Chinese domesticated:

grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella)

common carp (Cyprinus carpio)

silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys molitrix)

largescale silver carp (Hypophthalmichthys harmandi)

bighead carp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis)

black carp (Mylopharyngodon piceus)

common goldfish (Carassius auratus)

crucian carp (Carassius carassiu)

Koi is domesticated common carp (Which the Chinese already domesticated) Why do we have a separate article about Koi?

Isn't Koi just the shortened Japanese word for Asian Carp or Chinese domesticated Common Carp. Seems redundant, we can end up with all sorts of names (The vietnamese name for Carp then have an article on that, Thai name for Carp and have a article on that, and on and on, etc. Seems redundant. We should merge these articles. --165.214.4.23 (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

One of the things that should be noted. Koi is not the shortened word for Carp in Japanese. Goi is the Japanese word for you standard common carp which has not been selectively bred. Koi is the shortened form of the word, Nishikigoi which specifically refers to carp that have been selectively bred for color.

It should also be noted that if you look at the timeframes for domestication, from as early as 27 BC, the common carp was known to have been domesticated already in Europe in the Roman Empire. This would pre-date Chinese domestication.

Finally, under your logic, to merge all of these articles into one, under the premise that it is the same species of fish; you would need to merge all of the breeds of dog into one species since they are all Canis lupus and merge all of the breeds of domesticated cats into Felis catus. 153.48.52.241 (talk) 19:44, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

No, it is not the same as saying combine all the breeds of dogs, the Chinese already selectively bred the common carp for color in the Royal palaces. The Koreans had it as well, they always talk about the vibrant colors of the fish that were bred to make the colors stand out more, even in the the forbidden garden ponds. To take your dog example, what's happening is the Chinese have selectively already bred the Shih Tzu and the Japanese take the Shih Tzu and are calling it by a Japanese name lets say Koi Tzu and stating it is unique to Japan. Koi is completely ingoring the fact that selective breeding for Asian Common Carp already took place. They are picking a subjective concept like vibrance in color when it looks exactly the same, stating it is brighter and calling it another breed (It is like saying Japanese Shih Tzu is redder or has a brighter white coat so it should be called Koi Tzu and unique, but things like color brightness is so subjective it is impossible to argue. That does not work, you can't do that, especially when the Chinese already selectively bred it for vibrance in color, even the Koreans did it before Japan for crying out loud. The common domesticated carp can go under a subsection of European carp by your logic and Koi should go under the selectively domesticated royal common carp that was popular in China first. --50.46.243.60 (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Koi can live for centuries???

Contradiction?!

"Koi can live for centuries. One famous scarlet koi, named "Hanako" (c. 1751 – July 7, 1977) was owned by several individuals, the last of whom was Dr. Komei Koshihara. Hanako was reportedly 226 years old upon her death. Her age was determined by removing one of her scales and examining it extensively in 1966. She is (to date) the longest-lived vertebrate ever recorded."

Varieties/Asagi Koi : contradiction in Japanese text

The description of the Asagi Koi reads:

"Asagi (浅黄?) A koi that is light blue above and usually red, but also occasionally pale yellow or cream, generally below the lateral line and on the cheeks. The Japanese name means pale greenish-blue, spring onion colour, or indigo. Sometime incorrectly written as 浅黄 (light yellow)."

The name and the "sometimes incorrectly written as" are identical, Unicode hex codes 6D45-9EC4. Google Translate suggested 浅葱 (Ux6D45-8471), but I don't speak Japanese and therefore have no idea whether that's a better translation.

Lincmad (talk) 02:10, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

TI do read, write and speak Japanese, and also work in the koi business in Japan. The correct Japanese for Asagi , as used by koi breeders in Japan is 浅黄 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paulman (talk • contribs) 07:22, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Jawiki

ja:コイ is subspecies Koi or species Common carp? Newone (talk) 10:28, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Are there koi in Central Park? I think I saw one there back in 2005 when I visited New York —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.211.43 (talk) 01:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

age of koi

in the article it says the koi were developed in the 1820s but later on its says the oldest koi was 226, so 1820+226=2046 this cant be right,

also this particular koi is mentioned to have been born in yr1751 both these things cant be true. i think we should put "it has been claimed that the koi lived for 226 yrs" since even common sense will tell you the story is absurd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123465421jhytwretpo98721654 (talk • contribs) 06:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Japanese Koi are originally from the Caspian Sea? Really?

To the person that keeps on introducing this text:

"Cyprinus carpio or the common carp is a species of fish from the family Cyprinidae. The origins of the common carp trace to the Caspian Sea, where the fish naturally migrated to the Black and Aral Seas, east to eastern mainland Asia and west as far as the Danube River"'

Stop it. The source cited directly contradicts that statement. The other sources make it clear that Koi are descended from Carp domesticated in East Asia. Stop introducing factual errors. LK (talk) 05:06, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Hanako the 225-year-old koi

Is it an WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim to suggest that a particular koi carp lived for 225 years, when the article goes on to say that "the greatest authoritatively accepted age for the species is little more than 50 years"? It sounds exceptional to me, but I am no carp breeder. --McGeddon (talk) 17:57, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I don't know if this is a particularly WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim, I suspect that someone has a WP:RS saying that this was a hoax. That source should be introduced so we can put this claim to bed. CombatWombat42 (talk) 18:00, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Deciding that it is an exceptionally remarkable claim, which can only be sourced to a single "here some old animals" fluff piece in a newspaper, would also be sufficient to put it to bed. --McGeddon (talk) 18:19, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

This might be the origin? --NeilN 21:16, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class Japan-related articles
• Low-importance Japan-related articles
• B-Class Japanese flora and fauna articles
• WikiProject Japan Flora and fauna task force
• WikiProject Japan articles
• B-Class Fishes articles
• Low-importance Fishes articles
• WikiProject Fishes articles