My activity
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Image of Lepidorhombus whiffiagonis:
Reasons to Untrust: Other
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "Trachinus draco Linnaeus, 1758":
Reasons to Untrust: Redundant/duplicate
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "File:Mahi Mahi.jpg":
Reasons to Untrust: Poor writing/image/sound quality
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "File:Mahi Mahi.jpg":
this looks like an artistic impression. interesting and showing ome nice details but without any scientific integrity.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Sciaena umbra:
A bit of a bad quality photo.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Sciaena umbra:
A bit of a bad-quality photo.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "File:Eutrigla gurnardus.jpg":
Reasons to Untrust: Poor writing/image/sound quality
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "File:Knorrhane, Nordisk familjebok.png":
Reasons to Untrust: Poor writing/image/sound quality
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "File:Knorrhane, Nordisk familjebok.png":
The image is of poor quality. While some distinguishing characteristics are visible (e.g. dark spot in dorsal fin) the overall quality is so low that I think it shouldn't be presented
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Tainha-olhalvo // Mullet (Mugil cephalus):
The image doesn't really show something important: a dorsal vies of a fish, with difficult to distinguish features.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Spondyliosoma cantharus - Dorade grise:
While this is the species indeed, the overall "green-ness" of the photo makes it rather misleading instead of useful.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Carry reserve: sparids (Diplodus sargus, Sarpa salpa) in a Posidonia meadow mixed with rocks.:
While this is a fine image showing representative species of Sparidae over a seagrass meadow it could be misleadingly associated with Diplodus sargus, only. In the image it can be easily recognised that there are at least three different species: Diplodus sargus (black spot on caudal lobe), Diplodus vulgaris (additional black bar behind head) and the third species being probably Sarpa salpa (more elongate, silvery-yellow without black spots).
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "Image of Peristedion barbiger":
Peristedion is a genus classified in the family Peristediidae, not Triglidae. Thus it should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "Image of Peristedion barbiger":
Peristedion is a genus classified in the family Peristediidae, not Triglidae. Thus it should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on "Image of Peristedion paucibarbiger":
Peristedion is a genus classified in the family Peristediidae, not Triglidae. Thus it should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Image of Peristedion miniatum:
Peristedion is a genus classified in the family Peristediidae, not Triglidae. Thus it should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Image of Peristedion cataphractum:
Peristedion is a genus classified in the family Peristediidae, not Triglidae. Thus it should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Image of Peristedion gracile:
While Peristedion is considered to be a gurnard in common name, the genus is classified in the family Peristediidae and not Triglidae. Thus this photo should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Image of Peristedion greyae:
While Peristedion is considered to be a gurnard in common name, the genus is classified in the family Peristediidae and not Triglidae. Thus this photo should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
-
Evangelos Tzanatos commented on an older version of Image of Peristedion miniatum:
While Peristedion is considered to be a gurnard in common name, the genus is classified in the family Peristediidae and not Triglidae. Thus this photo should not appear in the page of the family Triglidae.
