Talk:Squid

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 5 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Izzy8484.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 10:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Teuthida vs. Sepiolida etc.
okay with just mentioning Sepiolida and other squid orders in the second paragraph, but should we also try to include them in the taxobox somehow? It's a messy issue at this point. --Chinasaur 17:10, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * It's not messy at all. they are descendants of the article just higher than Teuthida/squid: Coleoidea. I hadn't had them listed in the first place because They are already mentioned higher up in the article tree, and they are shown in the classification listing. Someone looking for them will find them. - UtherSRG 18:30, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. It's good. --Chinasaur


 * Since the title of the article is Squid which is a familiar and general term for a marine animal with 10 arms with suckers rather than Teuthida which is a well defined biological taxon, all living squid should be included. Adding Spirulida and Sepiolida to both the discussion and taxobox would make each more consistent with the overall subject. Let's not confuse article sequence with biological phylogeny or descendancy. J.H.McDonnell (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Calamari Etymology?
So this article says In American fish markets and restaurants, it is usually known by the Greek plural calamari. But Calamari says It. calamari also Fr. calmar, Int. calamar Which one is right? -Cjensen 23:38, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * AskOxford says "ORIGIN Italian, from Greek kalamos ‘pen’ (with reference to the squid’s long tapering internal shell and its ink)." - UtherSRG (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Mantle
I didn't see any reference to the mantle in this article. I've added the word in the sentence "Like all cephalopods, squids are distinguished", but there may be a better place to mention it. Mantle (mollusc) does a good job of describing it, but has nothing specific to squids. - joe 19:05, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Reproduction
The article states that male cuttlefish pretend to be female by hiding one pair of arms as females have 3 pairs. Surely all cuttlefish have 8 arms thus 4 pairs. Either editing or correction is needed

Physical description
i need the physical discribtion of the squid. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rkavuru (talk • contribs) 22:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

...
If we're going to mention that they're "popular as food" in the first line of the article, ought we add a note about the popularity of tentacle porn? Njál 01:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
 * No, I think not. - UtherSRG (talk) 04:03, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Its certainly not popular in English cuisine and there are no known English squid dishes. Tastes great but only usual eaten in England in Italian, Spanish, Chinese dishes etc. Will edit main text. JDN

please make more info om the squid. i'm making a 5-page essay on it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.200.116.131 (talk • contribs).
 * We do not "make info". We read the various published literature on the subject and add it as we have the time and energy. You would do well to go to the library to do your homework, instead of trying to copy someone else's work. - UtherSRG (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Dear God..! oh, I don't usually laugh out loud but that's pretty darn funny. Tentacle porn? "Please make me information so I don't have to type 'squid' into google?" lol! ... ... yea, you have the patience of a saint, sir UtherSRG. JimmmyThePiep 08:06, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Lifespan
A mention of average lifespan should be added, I don't know anything about squids so I can't. --Plankton5005 06:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Slang
Squid is also used as slang for an underclassman, more specifically a freshman in highshool. Also used as a slang for a person that knowingly breaks the law, litters and shows disrespect for others. Squids in this respect think only about what is best for them and not what effect they have on other people or groups of people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.80.160.16 (talk) 18:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC).


 * Ah; you should add a disambiguation page so that nobody misakes the sea creature Squids with the freshman Squids. It might get confusing otherwise. JimmmyThePiep 08:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Or See Also --Kurtle (talk) 21:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Navigation below the "crush pressure"?
One of the questions a Physics assignment I saw recently asked how squids are able to navigate below the "crush pressure". Personally I'd never heard of such a thing, but in case someone here knows it's another tidbit which could be added. I'll look on Google to see if I can find some answers. --Oreckel 01:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


 * edit* - has something to do with the fact that Squids have no air in them? You can squish them on all sides but there's nothing to "squish"? I don't quite understand it myself and perhaps it's meaningless, but in case this strikes a chord with someone who's determined to add it, go for it. Else this can be deleted - I doubt how many people actually care about this. --Oreckel 02:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

squids
wht do s2quids eat —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.14.255.81 (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Saltwater Squids
Can squids live in saltwater? (I'm asuming they can, but the article doesn't mention, so I thought I'd ask. It's for a project.) JimmmyThePiep 08:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As far as I know there aren't any freshwater squids; they all live in saltwater. I could be mistaken there, but at the very least most of them live in salt water.  The word "marine" usually refers to the Earth's oceans, which are all salt water.  Hope that helps. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk problem solving 16:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Awesome; thanx! I haven't actually started drawing or animating the squid, but I'm going to do that now.
 * See, I'm working on a Flash Animation for school, and the teacher was very specific: 'Be Accurate! Don't mix saltwater and non-saltwater fish!" So far I've got a Blue Tang, a Yellow Tang, a pair of Clownfish, and some strange fish with huge eyes. (So 4 saltwater fish, 1 squid ; which is saltwater, and I'm hoping he won't notice the ambiguous fish.) JimmmyThePiep 12:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Squids Live In Dens Right? I Dont Remember... -Alyssa

Cuttlebone
The only place the cuttlebone is mentioned is in passing in the Squid as food section. I definately think the cuttlebone deserves mention (or at least a link) in the anatomy of the squid, as it is one of the more notable structures a squid has. And don't ask me to write it, because I'm definately no expert.--Vlmastra 20:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Cuttlebone is only present in cuttlefish, not squid. I have corrected the article. Mgiganteus1 21:07, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I guess that makes sense ;).--Vlmastra 04:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

calamares en su tinta
Is squid cooked in its own ink a real dish, or fiction? It sounds, um, somewhat less than delicious. Chris 06:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It is real and not uncommon in several cultures. I've eaten it in Mexico, and seen it on the menus in other countries.  It was pretty tasty. -- &#x2611; Sam uelWantman 03:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Aren't we getting a little off course J.H.McDonnell (talk) 14:39, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

images
I removed some of the images in the classification to prevent image stacking, something that is expressly discouraged by WP:IMAGES and WP:IUP. I also added what is a Wikimedia Commons Featured Picture as the cuisine image. VanTucky (talk) 23:53, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

links do not work
Several of the external links at the bottom of the page do not work (Squidcam--I was disappointed--and the Scientific American Article). If several weeks go by from the time of this post and they are still inoperable we might want to remove them. 67.88.117.162 07:56, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd say that any link that doesn't work or goes to the wrong place should be unhesitatingly removed and replaced if possible by one that does work and is still relevant. Be bold. J.H.McDonnell (talk) 14:45, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

remove offensive text
Can someone edit the offensive material in this article?: The mouth of the squid is equipped with a sharp horny dick that feels amazing in ur butt mainly made of chitin [1] and cross-linked ... 65.209.244.4 20:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * In such cases of sophomoric perversion don't hesitate, get rid of it when ever you find itJ.H.McDonnell (talk) 14:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing info
What do squid eat? What role do they serve in the ocean ecology (other than as food for whales). How are they affected by global warming? What ocean environments are best/least suited for squid? -- &#x2611; Sam uelWantman 03:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Size of the Giant Squid
I have a zoology textbook that says the giant squid (Architeuthis) is ~60ft in length. What should we do about this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.136.212 (talk) 16:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, There is this recent review on the Mesonychoteuthis hamiltoni that is more relevant than the current link

Appearance on American Dad
On the February 8, 2009, episode of American Dad, a key plot point had Francine Smith get an article published in "Ocean Digest" magazine, ostensibly about the Colossal squid. In fact, the left page of the magazine had this chunk of text from Wikipedia's Squid article ("Squid have differentiated from their ancestral molluscs in such a way that the body plan has been condensed antero-posteriorly and extended dorso-ventrally. What before may have been the foot of the ancestor is now modified into a complex set of tentacles and highly developed sense organs, including advanced eyes similar to those of vertebrates. The shell of the ancestor has been lost, with only an internal gladius, or pen, remaining.") and the right page had a passage from the Giant squid article. - Dravecky (talk) 01:49, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Intelligence and Communication Questions
How intelligent are squid? How do they communicate. It might sound funny, but a CBS new clip on Giant Squid showed one being reeled in and it sounded like the squid was making a squeek. When I took a fish farming class we were told that lobsters yell when dropped into boiling water, so what is with this? What kind of brain do they have, how big is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.17.39 (talk) 02:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Italic text

Classification
I simplified the classification in the text to include just those groups referred to as squid, which is no more than a familiar term for a marine animal with 10 arms projecting from its head. Other coleoids can be linked from that page or from the Cephalopod article. If anyone really thinks that superfluous redundancy makes for a better article, go a head and revert. Regards J.H.McDonnell (talk) 14:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

True tales of dentistry
A story in the news about a woman who ate squid and got a surprise.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Penis size
Is this particular detail really relevant?

Teuthida
According to the WoRMS Teuthida is a nomen dubium (includes [Myopsida + Oegopsida] which are not demonstrated to form a clade). So Myopsida and Oegopsida  are no longer suborders but orders. Any comment? DenesFeri (talk) 11:32, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Possible error
I always thought squids had six legs. Is the first paragraph in error? I would attempt to correct the apparent error, but the article is protected. So I am asking if it is an error. 68.100.116.118 (talk) 01:25, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Squid have 10 tentacles, hence the order's name translation as "10 feet." The eight shorter tentacles are termed "arms," and the two longer tentacles are the "tentacles" proper.--Mr Fink (talk) 01:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2015
According to the Wikipedia article about Decapodiformes, squids and cuttlefish has ten arms. This article claims the number of arms is eight. This claim should be corrected in one of the articles. The name Decapodiformes suggests ten arms. !-- End request --> 81.191.82.225 (talk) 18:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Don't see a conflict here, both Decapodiformes and this article say that there are a total of 10, 8 pairs of shorter arms and 2 longer tentacles Cannolis (talk) 18:38, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Squid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100327225259/http://www.foodmarketexchange.com:80/datacenter/product/seafood/squid/detail/dc_pi_sf_squid_0204.htm to http://www.foodmarketexchange.com/datacenter/product/seafood/squid/detail/dc_pi_sf_squid_0204.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:17, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Foot
The link under "evolution" to the article for "foot" gives the article for the human foot, not mollusk foot, which is this link. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mollusca#Foot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Levhatorah (talk • contribs) 21:08, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Automatic taxobox / Paraphyletic group box missing
Currently Squid is in an unusual situiation of having an infobox instead of and Automatic taxobox or Paraphyletic group. The included taxonbar indicates the taxon should be Teuthida, which is a redirect to the Squid page. The taxon is accepted from what I can see. If it is monophyletic then an Automatic taxobox should be added. If it is paraphyletic or polyphyletic then Paraphyletic group should be used. If for some reason the Squid article would like to divorce itself from the Teuthida concept, then that page should be created. Honestly though, I think it could be easily fixed with an Automatic taxobox and then stating that vampire squid are not true squid and that cuttlefish are. --Nessie (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Teuthida is unfortunately obsolete, so Decapodiformes will have to do. The group is monophyletic and a synonym for the clade Decapodiformes with the provisions you mention, paraphyletic otherwise. I'm happy either way. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:53, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * So you think a merge from Decapodiformes to Squid is the best way forward? Which article would the Q81900 in the taxonbar go to, then?


 * As I said, either way is fine by me. I'm not up on the fine details of taxonbars, but if the question is what happens to the broken fragments of the old Teuthida, they ideally won't be in the taxon system at all, but if it can't be avoided then here'll have to do (the alternative being to create a Teuthida stub which just says it's obsolete). I'd have thought the question of what to do with obsolete taxa must come up rather often given the current turmoil in phylogenetics. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I guess that was my oblique way of asking of Teuthida were synonymized with anything. if not, then that link will be broken. --Nessie (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposing merge from scientific name Decapodiformes to common name Squid
* Keep separate. Merging would be an easy solution, but not the correct one. Yes, Decapodiformes is a pretty short article, but it is the parent taxa of squids and not equivalent to it. Particularly the extinct order Boletzkyida and the clade Belemnoidea are "not" squids. Squid-like, squid ancestors maybe, but not squids. Likewise, the taxobox for squid should not equate squids with the superorder Decapodiformes as it does presently. Loopy30 (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge - I don't think we need two articles, and Decapodiformes is pretty short. It seems that Decapodiformes is monophyletic and maps to what people commonly call squid. --Nessie (talk) 20:42, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree- I was going to raise an objection about cuttlefish, but since it's explained that they're a specific subgroup of squid, nevermind about that. So, yes, I think it would be best if Decapodiformes was merged into Squid.--Mr Fink (talk) 22:13, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Support - happy to go along with this solution. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Sounds good  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 22:57, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Striking previous objection. With Belemnoidea and Boletzkyida out of the picture, that leaves only the cuttlefish and the extinct coleoids. I note that the edit that added Belemnoidea to the list of Decapodiformes was made by a now banned editor who was known for edits that included original research.
 * do you have a reliable taxonomic treatment that includes Boletzkyida in Decapodiformes, and also that shows they are not squid? the Decapodiformes article has its inclusion uncited and with a big question mark.  Even Taxonomy/Boletzkyida is unreferenced.  I can see that Belemnoidea are stem Decapodiformes, but can you show me that they are not squids?--Nessie (talk) 02:18, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Nessie, Boletzkyida is problematic. Although described as a new order within Decapodiformes by Bandel, Reitner and Sturner in 1993, Boletzkyida is not currently listed by WoRMS. It should be noted though that WoRMS does not maintain as comprehensive a list of extinct taxa and lists only 45 extinct taxa within all of Cephalopoda (all ranks). In the literature, extinct decapodiform taxa are usually just referred to as coleoids, sometimes being described as “squid-like” (e.g. "An Early Triassic gladius associated with soft tissue remains from Idaho, USA--a squid-like coleoid cephalopod at the onset of Mesozoic Era" by Doguzhaeva et al, 2015). Some authors have taken the position that that any gladius-bearing coleoid is a “squid” (see "A redescription of the fossil coleoid cephalopod genus Palaeololigo Naef, 1921 (Decapodiformes: Palaeololiginidae) and its relationship to Recent squids" by Donovan & Strugnell, 2010) although the use of the gladius as an identifying morphological feature in determining the taxonomy is disputed (see “The gladiuses in coleoid cephalopods: homology, parallelism, or convergence?” by Fuchs and Iba, 2015). Although older, I note that among extant cephalopods, the FAO separates "squids" in the vernacular use from "cuttlefish", "bobtail and bottletail squids", "octopods", "vampires", and "nautiluses" (see Cephalopods of the World by Roper, 2005). Loopy30 (talk) 16:39, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not a WoRMS chauvinist, I will follow whatever taxonomy is the consensus. FossilWorks does not lost Boletzkyida, but it is at WoRMS's twin IRMNG with Cephalopoda as its parent.  In any event, it looks like we shouldn't hang our hat on Boletzkyida.  I was kind of basing the monophyly on the article's cladogram.  This shows a monophyly with cuttlefish, bobtails, bottletails are definitely in, and octopuses, vampires, and nautiluses out, though does not address the two taxa we're concerned about.  Also, we should note that vampires do have gladiuses, despite not being Decapodiformes/squid.--Nessie (talk) 18:45, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything about Boletzkyida, but I do know for Belemnoidea, they're not considered Decapodiformes. I think someone may have accidentally got confused a little while ago because people keep saying they're squid-like, but I've fixed the taxobox now  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 20:00, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I found this which, on page 403, says Boletzkyida is part of the superorder Palaeoteuthomorpha  User:Dunkleosteus77 &#124;push to talk 22:28, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
 * That's the original description. Wonder how it was 'moved' to Decapodiformes? So does this resolve the conflict?  --Nessie (talk) 03:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Seems to be all clear. Let's do it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:14, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Conflicting information in this article and Sepiida, Cephalopoda and sentences that are difficult to understand
These articles are not very clear and quite confusing for a layperson who wants to look up the internal systematics of the Cephalopoda. If it is still unclear, that and the current consensus should be mentioned everywhere. I assume that until recently, only Teuthida were commonly called "squids" and were found to be paraphyletic because they probably contain the cuttlefish? Teuthida redirects to this article, yet it isn't mentioned other than being an order that is part of Decapodiformes (in the infobox to the right) with the remark nomen dubium. What were and happened to Teuthida? In this talk page above, it is proposed that this should be mentioned in a stub page. Either that, or it should be mentioned in Decapodiformes, instead of simply linking to itself. In my opinion, this is relevant, because information regarding Teutida, although obsolete, is still commonly found outside of the English Wikipedia.

Cephalopod also seperates cuttlefish from squid, it also mentions Teuthida which links to this article. If the information in the article decapodiformes is correct, than the taxonomy in the article Cephalopoda is simply outdated and wrong, isn't it? The phylogenetic tree on that article (Cephalopod) includes sepiida in decapodiformes, although it mentions "The attachment of the clade including Sepia and Spirula is unclear; either of the points marked with an asterisk may represent the root of this clade." (whatever exactly that means... how could that clade possibly include itself? In the first place, why are there genera like Sepia and not the order Sepiida shown?)

The sepiida article as well clearly seperates cuttlefish from squid and implies in the very first sentence that "squid" are an order, yet that word links to "Decapodiforma" which is a superorder that seems to include cuttlefish. If it is true that cuttlefish are now in the superorder of squid, even if they have their anatomical specialities, it just should be mentioned there.

I have trouble understanding this sentence in Squid: "Orders are shown in boldface; all the families not included in those orders, except Sepiadariidae and Sepiidae are in the paraphyletic order "Sepiida", are in the paraphyletic order "Oegopsida". Everything after the first comma doesn't grammatically make sense to me.

--2003:F6:2717:1400:BDF6:C51C:B722:51E8 (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2020
Change of grammar and spelling RPG2428 (talk) 23:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.  JTP (talk • contribs) 23:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Wording regarding Schmitt trigger
In the Schmitt trigger diagram I assume the signal U isn't an example from an squid's axon - just a arbitrary example of a varying analogue signal. I propose making the wording more clearly reflect this. Jonpatterns (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 October 2021
In the section on sensory parts, I notice that 3 cm is not 1 inch. Search for " 3 cm (1 in)"  I don't know which length is correct, I'm afraid. 2A01:4C8:801:FB34:3D09:D99:9185:EE1A (talk) 12:27, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I have adjusted the conversion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:30, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Decapodiformes and Squids are not the same thing
Squids are a type of decapodiform, but that doesn’t mean they’re synonymous. Cuttlefish are decapodiformes, but they are not squids. There should be a separate page for decapodiformes. Am spooky ocapus (talk) 22:12, 12 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree. According to Biology and Evolution of the Mollusca, Volume 2 (2020), the term squid is equal to the traditional Teuthida (currently the orders Bathyteuthida, Myopsida, and Oegopsida). This means that only half of the decapodiform orders currently accepted by WoRMS represent squids. For example, the bobtail squids shouldn't be regarded as squids. This article is problematic because it encompasses a group broader than the term squid, but narrower than the superorder Decapodiformes. Do you have opinions? --Paranaja (talk) 16:34, 13 April 2022 (UTC)


 * There's also way too much emphasis on one single cladogram, which is only one of the cladograms in the same study. This should be a good article, but it seems very unprofessional to me. --Paranaja (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * You know you are free to edit it, if you have the references to cite just go ahead and edit the article. If there is any controversy about the taxonomy then you should detail that. The article does mention that "accepted that Sepiidae cuttlefish are a kind of squid, then the squids, excluding the vampire squid, form a clade as illustrated". I do agree, however, that a separate article on the Decapodiformes would be better and squid could then just cover the Myopsida and Oegopsida.Quetzal1964 (talk) 18:15, 13 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Plantdrew merged Decapodiformes with this article with the summary "consensus to merge", so I didn't want to revert the merge without discussion. The text that you cited sounds to me like original research, because it uses the term squid in a way that I haven't seen elsewhere, and it suggests a novel idea – not given in the source – that would make the terms squid and decapodiform synonymous. The literature that I've read mainly uses the term squid in the strict sense; for example, Octopus, Squid, and Cuttlefish (2018) say the following: "Strictly, they [pygmy squids, bobtail squids, and bottletail squids] are not squids, and we try to avoid confusion throughout this book by referring to them instead as idiosepiids, bobtails, and bottletails." Inofficial groupings tend to be difficult, but I think it's obvious that in this article, the circumscription of the term is not in line with the one used in the literature. I can try my best to change this article for the better, if there's no one supporting the current version of the article. --Paranaja (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I wasn't the one who merged it, I just made some edits to the redirect post-merge. Wikipedia's classification is not internally consistent. Sepiolidae lists the order as Sepiida, but describes the family as being bobtail squid, and that article has a taxobox for order Sepiolida. I agree that cuttlefish aren't considered squid. Defining "true squid" to the exclusion of bobtail squid and others isn't very helpful. I'd support a separate article for Decapodiformes, with the squid article revised to treat it as a common name for some members of Decapodiformes (the squid article should still include a cladogram of Decapodifomres). Plantdrew (talk) 18:03, 14 April 2022 (UTC)


 * If bobtail squids are squids, what about vampire squids? I think this article should be about the traditional Teuthida/Teuthoidea because that's how many sources still define squid. A broader definition is okay only if there are sources to support that definition. The phylogeny of Decapodiformes is so unresolved that there need to be either multiple cladograms or none. The one currently in the article is far from a consensus: it shows a paraphyletic Oegopsida despite most studies supporting monophyly. --Paranaja (talk) 07:48, 15 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Plantdrew, I apologize for the misconception about who did the merging, I apparently mixed between the lines. Anyway, Decapodiformes is now back as a separate article. Seems like it's still unclear what group this squid article is supposed to be about. --Paranaja (talk) 17:31, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2022
Change ‘An inhalant siphon behind the funnel draws water into the mantel cavity via a valve.’

To ‘An inhalant siphon behind the funnel draws water into the mantle cavity via a valve.’

mantle is mis-spelled 213.165.186.61 (talk) 12:46, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ RudolfRed (talk) 18:29, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

squid phylogeny
1. bottletail/pyjama squids are shown to be distantly related to cuttlefishes, when they are a family of sepiida

2. the pygmy squids are a family within the order sepiolida (not to be confused with sepiida, the cuttlefishes), and not a seperate order.

3. Oegopsida is split into many families and subfamilies while Myopsida and Spiruila are shown in a single taxon. Pancakes321 (talk) 08:57, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Flypaper
An image description reads: "The whip-like tentacles of Mastigoteuthis are covered with tiny suckers to catch small organisms like flypaper". The word flypaper links to a fly killing device which doesn't seem correct. Schmiphi (talk) 10:14, 19 November 2023 (UTC)