Talk:Stethacanthus

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stethacanthus article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Palaeontology Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fishes Low‑importance

	Fish portal This article is part of WikiProject Fishes, an attempt to organise a detailed guide to all topics related to Fish taxa. To participate, you can edit the attached article, or contribute further at WikiProject Fishes. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.FishesWikipedia:WikiProject FishesTemplate:WikiProject FishesFishes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Category removal

I notice Category:Prehistoric fish has been removed, leaving Category:Extinct fish. Isn't this losing information? The extinction could have taken place last year. At least Category:Prehistoric fish indicates that the extinction took place in prehistory. GrahamBould (talk) 09:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely right. I'll change it back. Abyssal leviathin (talk) 11:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lenth

Was it really only 70cm long? i have a book that puts it at 2m max. Spinodontosaurus (talk) 20:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

The "Etymology" section says that the name comes from "chest" and "thorn," which is correct, but then says that this refers to the anvil-shaped dorsal structure, which I think has to be incorrect as it is neither on the chest nor thorn-shaped. Stethacanthus *does* have two large chest spines, which I assume is where it derives its name. I believe that whoever wrote this just assumed that the anvil-like structure, which is what the species is visually known for, had to be what the name derived from and ignored the chest projections. 69.127.246.158 (talk) 22:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]