Talk:Spirula

When upload is available again, I will upload an out-of-copyright (1910) pencil sketch plus my own photograph of spirula shell. Am trying to trace email address for the copyright holder of a photo of the entire creature: Martina Compagno Roeleveld

I have tried various email addresses at museums.org.za and samuseum.ac.za , and all seem to fail. Is there a member in Capetown who could contact the museum directly? dramatic 08:56, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hello -- I've studied this beast at length, and have written two scientific papers about them [1], specifically their evolution and the organisms that encrust their shells. In ten years, I have never, ever read or heard this common name -- "ram's horn squid". It strikes me as being redundant, using a term to "seem" more accessible while actually using a name hardly used by people who would encounter these animals and never by scientists working on them. The reference mentioned on CephBase [2] is official only insofar as those authors say it is: common names are not covered by the rules of the ICZN and don't have any scientific value at all. I really think the best title for this article is Spirula, which is what people working in the field generally call it. Since it's a deepwater squid, it's not something that "needs" a common name, especially one that isn't used much anyway.

Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 16:24, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I completely agree with you. I'd say at least 90% of the "common" names listed on CephBase are in fact quite obscure and far less common than their scientific counterparts. Right now WikiProject Cephalopods follows WikiProject Birds naming conventions. I think a policy change is in order. Mgiganteus1 16:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

See also previous discussion at Talk:Argonaut (animal). Mgiganteus1 16:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I see. Yes, some Wikipedia editors (ones who are not biologists, I suspect) do seem to like that rule about common names! It's dumb rule. Quick Google test: Spirula = 123,000 hits, "Ram's Horn Squid" = 333. Of those 333, only 205 are not mirrors or copies of the Wikipedia article! Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 17:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. I originally created the article at Spirula and someone moved it. There seemed to be several "common name" candidates, so picking one out seemed rather odd. Far better to have various common names redirecting to the scietific name. dramatic 08:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I did just want to say that yes, the animal is deepwater and obscure, however the shell is a very familiar object to almost all beachcombers on shores worldwide that are exposed to the open ocean, in the tropics and also in the temperate zones. Shell collectors know the shell either as Spirula or the "rams horn shell" (try googling that and get 213,000 results, mostly the shell of this species with a few freshwater gastropod Planorbidae shells mixed in). The article now reflects the fact that that shell has been well-known for centuries by that common name. Invertzoo (talk) 14:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Spirula. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060316152536/http://www.tonmo.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=63 to http://www.tonmo.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=63

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:31, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply