Talk:Baculites

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cephalopods, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CephalopodsWikipedia:WikiProject CephalopodsTemplate:WikiProject CephalopodsCephalopods articles

Palaeontology Mid‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image[edit]

I would be happy to submit an image if I could figure out how to do it. --David C. Wade (User:12.1.19.118)

Response on talk pages. --DanielCD 13:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooland "Baculites"[edit]

The section on "Baculites from Ooland" needs to be eliminated along with the image; these are indeed fossil cephalopods from Ooland but are unrelated to Baculites and do not date from the Cretaceous. This section and image could be moved to a stub for "orthocone," "orthoceras," or "nautiloid" instead, as long as all ocurrences of the word "Baculites" were replaced with something like "Orthoceras" or "orthocone nautiloid."

Article Name?[edit]

Why is the article named Baculite instead of Baculites? Abyssal leviathin 02:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. I moved the page to the appropriate genus title. --DanielCD 13:44, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vertical?[edit]

Strikes me as a lot of nonsense regardless of arguments given. The surface sculpture consisting of slanted sinuous ribs and forwardly slanted aperture simply don't indicate such. Of course that fact that some have speculated this should be included, along with reasons for a horizontal orientation. J.H.McDonnell (talk) 16:58, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Find supporting references and the article can be adjusted as needed per what the literature says.--Kev min § 18:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Species list[edit]

While certain species, such as the type and maybe a couple of more, that can be well discussed may add tenor to the article, it seems having a long list of names serves no purpose other than than to add length. Perhaps the topic even belongs under a subheading in some other section. J.H.McDonnell (talk) 23:42, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Baculites. 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/20130202020933/http://www.somas.stonybrook.edu/~conover/Textbooks/Cephalopods%20Present%20and%20Past.pdf to http://www.somas.stonybrook.edu/~conover/Textbooks/Cephalopods%20Present%20and%20Past.pdf

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 05:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]