I didn't mean to single out everyone on that site, I'm also a member, but some of them are so over the top with their tank size requirements that at times I find some of their recommendations downright ludicrous.
I think that it's one thing to be stuck in ones way, and another to totally ignore information that could only help the hobby as a whole. A classic example of that;
http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/showthread.php?491976-Clown-Loaches-Kalimantan-vs-Sumatra
I sent that info to both Martin & Emma a few yrs back, and while neither had any knowledge of the difference in genetics between the two strains, and found that interesting, apparently they both chose to leave Martin's article as-is, when clearly he was confused with regards to Kalimantan vs Borneo vs Sumatra. Martin read one online article (I've also read it), and based everything in his article on that single source. An easy enough mistake to make, but then why leave it when someone points out the flaws? Ego? I dunno, but I certainly don't get it.
Even their species summary for Chromobotia macracanthus is over the top - Maximum size:
16 inches
Really, on what planet would there be 16 inch clown loaches, SL or TL? And even if one won the lottery, and managed to grow a CL out to 16", how many years would it take to reach that size? 20 years, maybe 25?
So using their narrow minded logic no one should be able to experience the joy of keeping this species unless they are equipped to house a rather active fish that will reach 16 inches, and then be prepared to tweak their pH so that it never exceeds 7.0 - more of their valued advice. What a farce.
I'm also not a fan of big fat obese clown loaches, as often seen on LOL, including the infamous "Marge the Barge", so I tend to refrain from posting there.