This article is within the scope of WikiProject Knots, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of knots on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KnotsWikipedia:WikiProject KnotsTemplate:WikiProject KnotsKnots articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
Ashley calls this a barrel knot, but mentions that is is "called Blood Knot by Keith Rollo" (p. 259); Ashley calls a different knot the blood knot, namely the double overhand knot when used on whips etc. Usually, Ashley is a good reference for knots, and in addition there seems to be no ambiguity about thich knot is the barrel knot, so I'm tempted to move the article to barrel knot (obviously leaving a redirect from blood knot, and mentioning both names in the article). On the other hand, previous users don't seem to have seen a necessity to move it. So I'm curious about others' views, if possible also indicating references. Thanks, Ibn Battuta (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the knot and article should be named consistent with Ashley unless common usage today is known to be dominated by an alternative name. I don't have a copy of ABOK or I'd straighten this out myself. I recommend you go ahead and make the names consistent with ABOK. And add the ABOK number to the info box. Mindbuilder (talk) 08:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On that note: "Barrel knot" is currently a redirect to this page ("Blood knot"), and is listed parenthetically in the first sentence. I know it's in ABOK under that name, but I've never heard anyone use that name to refer to this knot. Try a Google Image search for "barrel knot", and you'll find almost exclusively pictures of a Double overhand noose, or the stopper variant of that. 2601:602:A080:1240:C367:290D:9405:2A82 (talk) 17:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The photo is indeed incorrect. It shows the next to the last stage of tying the knot but it is unfinished. The cord must be pulled firmly in both directions now, forming a very attractive "barrel" shape which has inverted upon itself, leaving the short ends buried from where they exit the knot. Roykl (talk) 05:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed a similar statement, similarly inserted inappropriately into the article text many years earlier (Special:Diff/78619192, 30 September 2006) by a different editor, or at least from a different IP address (Special:Contributions/216.194.229.49). The statements are so similar that they may have been written by the same person, although they may just both be avid anglers. (The IP addresses seem to be from significantly different locations—Maryland and Ohio—so they're almost certainly not the same editor, just editors equally concerned about the same error but equally unable to correct it.)
I'm pasting both deleted statements here exactly as they appeared in the article before removal, so they can be investigated without undermining the article's credibility in such an intrusive and inappropriate way. I'm giving them here in the order in which they were added to the article, not the order in which they were removed.
The images here are incorrect to present the finished knot as having its free/"tag" ends go from the center of the knot to the extreme ends; they in fact will immediately coil around the standing parts towards the extreme ends.
[Note: boldface was added much later by yet a third concerned editor, in Special:Diff/594943887 (11 February 2014).]
The photo shown was tied incorrect. The tails should not be exposed. If this is used while fishing, the catch will be lost.
It's important to remember that Wikipedia is not a how-to manual, so it's not necessary or even appropriate to give accurate instructions about how to tie this knot. Images must be accurate, though, so the deleted statements do have a valid point that should be investigated. — 8.9.94.16 (talk) 12:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
