Talk:Mudskipper

message: ... for a period of time due to silly meme. Time to give it a break. Please use  here if you wish to have any changes made - Alison ☺ 08:48, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a clarification, the offending meme is "So I herd you liek mudkipz", and that refers to a fictional Pokemon character that isn't notable enough to have its own page. 204.52.215.13 23:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um... The full-prot ended a long time ago, and Alison is aware of what the meme is called - she's been issuing most of the protections. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 00:27, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article fully protected 

message: There is a discussion going on here about what to do about these editors.  For backstory, see Talk:Mudkip/Archive02. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 19:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm implying that those adding it to the article don't. -Jéské (Blah v^_^v) 08:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

text: No, you love spamming.  You'd sooner hop onto a new meme. -Jéské  (v^_^v E pluribus unum) 04:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion on the "Mud_kip" crap the article has been getting 

message: Hello! Can someone add sv:Slamkrypare (fisk) to the end of the article, please? 213.67.50.57 (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We need more eyes on this page as it gets hit constantly.  'Till then,  Semi-protected indefinitely.  I've removed all the vandalism I could find. -Jeremy (v^_^v Cardmaker) 05:48, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello 

message: Someone changed the original sentence into:
"Uniquely adapted to intertidal habitats, unlike most fish in such habitats, they survive the retreat of the tide by hiding under wet seaweed or in tidal pools"
The sentence was something like:
"Mudskippers are uniquely adapted to intertidal habitats and exhibit complex amphibious behaviours during low tide, unlike most fish in such habitats, that survive the retreat of the tide by hiding under wet seaweed or in tidal pools"
The meaning is exactly the opposite...
I would request an emendation.  
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Polgy1 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed sentence contradicts original 

message: now look, I know that the people with edit control over this article think that the whole mudkips meme is annoying and stupid, but if wikipedia is supposed to be a source of information on things, wouldn't it be right to include a note about how the mudskipper is the base for a pokemon that has become a widespread internet phenomenon. If the meme is that offensive to you why not at least mention that it is the source for the pokemon, all it would be is one or two lines at the bottom of the article, serving to help inform people about mudskippers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.116.232.208 (talk) 22:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree ... if we can find a source that passes WP:RS - David Gerard (talk) 18:06, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

text: I've found nothin'. Closest I can find: the Pokedex in the anime calls it "the mud fish pokemon" and a fan site asserting that the Japanese name for "mudkip" is also derived from the Japanese word for "mudskipper". And the mudkip looks like a mudskipper. But claims of links between the two are endemic in fan land - can we find a decent source that the mudkip is at least considered to be derived from the mudskipper? - David Gerard (talk) 16:03, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes, It is about Mudkips 

message: Don't at least some of them have bisected eyes, with the lower part adapted for seeing underwater, and the upper part for seeing on land. Often you can see them swimming with their eyes half above and half below the water surface... --megA (talk) 08:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  bisected eyes? 

message: I would like to add information about how mudskippers move about on land. Dr. Alice Gibb
Alicegibb (talk) 19:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Alternatively, you can wait for your account to become autoconfirmed, then edit the article yourself. (Four days and a mere 10 edits is the threshold for autoconfirmed status.) Rivertorch (talk) 21:25, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 27 December 2012 

message: The source ^ Swanson BO, Gibb AC (2004). "Kinematics of aquatic and terrestrial escape responses in mudskippers". is broken and leads to nothing.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:2820:2201:555B:6760:CD7C:3FE6 (talk) 18:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2nd Source lead to nothing 

message: Dear all,
I do not understand what is wrong with this page. People keep on adding non-scientific statements on mudskippers.
I have been studying this group for 23 years now. I am a professional scientist and I published several scientific publications on mudskippers.
This does not mean I cannot make mistakes. This only means that I do not write "personal opinions", but scientific published information.
Why do you insist adding unscientific, confusing statements to this page?
I once more corrected the text, adding some recent papers, and eliminating dozens of mistakes. The page is clearly not a piece of science, but it should at least not contain unscientific, unsubstantiated information.
Thanks again,
Gianluca Polgar
http://www.themudskipper.org/
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gianluca_Polgar  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Polgy1 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  A new wave of unsubstantiated statements on mudskippers 

message: Not sure how to unravel or fix this, but here's what I can say so far about this Mudskipper article. There is no corresponding article in Japanese, but the Japanese article on ハゼ is clearly　not talking about the same kind of fish. The Japanese article links to an English article on Gobioidei. That same article is linked from this article, but only from the scientific classification table on the right side. The Gobiodei article does link back to the Japanese ハゼ article, but that clearly appears to be an incorrect link and Gobiodei is a much larger category of fish. In the Japanese ハゼ article, there is a scientific classification table, but it stops short at the Gobiodei level, where there is another link to the English article. I think the correct link for this article might be the Japanese article on トビハゼ, but coming back from that article only links to something called "Shuttles Hoppfish". Actually, right now I think the ハゼ article is in the correct place and there is just a missing Japanese article at the level corresponding to Mudskipper. Shanen (talk) 11:09, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not linked properly to corresponding Japanese articles 

message: "Mudskippers do not have the ability to breathe" may be wrong.  That appears to contridict "this is only possible when the mudskippers are wet". Will (Talk - contribs) 08:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible incorrect wording in [[Mudskippers#Adaptions|Adaptions]] 

message: I had thought they'd use their gills, but they close those off. Will (Talk - contribs) 08:31, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add section on how detritivorous species filter mud? 

message: I propose removing the entire section about the secondary meaning of the Swedish word for mudskipper. This article is about the actual fish, not the word itself. It might possibly have a place on Swedish Wikipedia (though it is not included in the Swedish language article) but it has no place at English Wikipedia.
:I removed it. It was, at best, tangential to the subject.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:45, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swedish meaning 

message: Idc 129.126.36.80 (talk) 01:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mudskipper 

message: The redirect Neo-amphibia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Plantdrew (talk) 22:36, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Neo-amphibia]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: For a fish that can grow up to 12 inches long, I would expect this article to include a few sentences about consumption by humans or other predators. Is this fish even edible? ~Anachronist (talk) 01:42, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anybody eat them?