Wikipedia:Peer review/Flounder/archive1
This article has a lot of potential, but it's not quite encyclopaedic enough and I have no idea how to go about changing it. It needs a table, more direct facts, (e.g. we need to know average widths) more factual prose, and less cooking instructions, but I'm just a newcomer, so I need help. Vhex Hvexscousin 18:05, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Yes it could use a classification table such as is used in the other fish articles. (E.g. Tuna.) I'm not so sure about the descriptive statements; they seem to personalized. (E.g. 'grotesque change', 'exceptionally odd-looking', or 'luckily'. I actually think the Flounder is a rather interesting-looking creature, rather than grotesque.) You could probably use words like asymmetrical or abnormal, for example. But that's just my opinion, of course. -- RJH 18:15, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- It wouldn't be correct to describe the flounder as "abnormal." In fact such asymmetry appears to be typical for bony flatfish. Examples include flounder, sole, halibut, turbot, plaice, and sanddab. Dozens more such species exist. It is extremely likely that the asymmetry contributes to their survival since it helps to disguise them on the ocean floor.--Johnstone 15:21, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Maybe this page should go to pages needing attention? -- AllyUnion (talk) 08:20, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)