The problem I have is there is so much information out there and articles for each fish and topic and they all have different requirements for the same type of fish, "Talk about confusing someone". I ask here because I want to be as close as possible not only for the fish and are snails but I also want to know for myself so that I can be a responsible fish owner and meet the species requirements.
We encounter this problem daily. I have detailed how to avoid misinformation in a number of threads, so here it is again.
The "conflicting" information in the hobby is a continual source of extreme frustration for me and others. The only way to ensure you are receiving accurate advice is to know the knowledge level of the individual giving it. This means not "experience" which for many is worthless to begin with, but that individual's knowledge of the biological facts involving fish. Some individuals study biology and have degrees, which should and in my experience does qualify them. And there are those non-professional individuals who have spent years in research, learning from the professionals. I have spent considerable time over the last ten years researching topics involving fish biology and habitat, always confirming any "ideas" with individuals such as those mentioned, and never venturing to counter the science or the empirical facts.
If you compare the data among similar sites--meaning those owned/operated/managed by other professional biologists and ichthyologists and knowledgeable individuals, it becomes apparent that they tend to agree very closely on such data. These sources are more reliable for obvious reasons than someone who posts a couple of videos on Youtube spouting some fanciful often ludicrously half-baked idea that has no scientific basis. One general site that you will find most of us on this forum use and recommend is
Seriously Fish, and here we are dealing with a scientific-fact based site. Most of the data comes from trained ichthyologists, biologists, and those who have researched such sources. So there is sometimes a factual scientific certainty to the data, and other times a scientifically-reasoned conclusion in the data, depending upon the subject. This is not to say the data is guaranteed perfect, but it does give the data in general a much stronger certainty of being accurate.
Forums can be a good source of reliable information, depending who is on them of course, but at least here we have peer review; anything I post is seen by others and can be questioned, and this is much more likely to be valuable in the long run. This happens to be the backbone of scientific discovery, so it is a "tried and true" process, at least it can be most of the time. Arguing over scientific fact is not what such knowledgeable individuals do as it is pointless. As an analogy, evolution is now accepted proven scientific fact, yet many do not "accept" it, but that changes nothing, it is still undisputed fact.
