Talk:Mudkip

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GFDL PokéBall design This article is part of Pokémon Collaborative Project, which aims to improve the encyclopaedic coverage of the Pokémon universe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project, ask for advice, and see what our current focuses are.
Portal:Pokémon
 Pokémon Portal
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
Good article GA This article has been graded as a Good level article, at the assessment page, of the Pokémon Collaborative Project.
PCP To-do:

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mudkip article.
Good articles Mudkip has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.
Famicom style controller This article is part of WikiProject Computer and video games, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Portal:CVG
 CVG Portal
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
CVG To-do:
Wikitendo logo This article is part of WikiProject Nintendo, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Nintendo related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of low-importance within Project Nintendo.
Nintendo To-do:


Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Peer review Mudkip has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

To-do list for Mudkip:

 edit - history - watch - refresh
  • Expand Manga Section
  • Add third intro paragraph
  • Bring up to FA status
  • Source everything, even if it is common knowledge, unless it's something like "The sky is blue"

Should Sugimori's new art for the starters be used on the wiki?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.57.121.167 (talk • contribs) .

I need some mention of the internet phenomenon "so I herd u like mudkips".—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.106.22.46 (talk • contribs) .

Not necessary. The phenomenon is pornographic in nature, and thus not really appropriate for this. Rockhound 14:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] GA Failure

Reasons -

  • Stubbish article
  • No references
  • Unsourced pokédex entry
  • No manga entry

Good starting, but this is extrememly stubbish. See Combusken, which is also on GA, for the level required. Highway Rainbow Sneakers 21:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, there are two references.--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 21:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested Review

Since you requested comments on the Wikiproject:Nintendo page, here's my 2 cents. This article needs to explain more of the pokemon terminology. It's preferred that Wikipedia articles about fictional characters assume that the reader doesn't know anything about the source the character appears in -- in this case, the Pokemon video games, card games, manga, etc. Examples of things that should be explained:

  • What's a "starter" Pokemon?
  • What kind of "series" is the "Pokemon Adventures" series? Is that a comic? A cartoon?
  • What's the "Advance Generation Arc"?
  • What's a "widely used basic water type"? This is a card in the collectable card game, right? What makes a water-type "basic", and widely used by who? (In tournaments? Or is it just a common card. Do you have a source for that information?)
  • What's a Ground-type? Explain what it means to be a combination water-ground type.
  • In the video game section, there's this line: Due to Mudkip's weakness to electricity, most people evolve it into Marshtomp at the first chance they get. What does it mean to evolve something?

You might try looking at the article for Bulbasaur, which is featured, for ideas. Good job adding information and references to this article! -- Lee Bailey(talk) 04:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I think I addressed most of those concerns you gave.--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 16:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
definitely getting better. I would also write out "EX" as "Expansion" or "Expansion pack" and write out "the card game" rather than abbreviated TCG. It took me a minute to guess what those stood for. :) -- Lee Bailey(talk) 19:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
EX doesn't stand for anything. It is what nintendo is naming all the cards with.--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 19:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for spreading the wiki-love. :) This article's a lot easier to understand now for people unfamilar with Pokemon. Sorry I didn't understand the whole "EX" thing, but it's clearer now from context anyway. The only thing I can see at this moment is that you may need more information on the it's appearance in the anime, unless its appearance there was minor. But good work making this article more accessable. -- Lee Bailey(talk) 13:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Yah, I know. It's appearence is actually pretty major (from what I can tell, at least), but I don't watch the anime.--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 13:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

PS:You are welcome!--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 13:45, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

  • Sorry that I have not been watching this page (I forgot to put it on my watchlist when I first reviewed it). I see you have done a lot to improve the explanation of pokémon related topics. There are two things that I would suggest elaborate on further. As I mentioned before the term "overused" means nothing to anyone who does not have a pretty indepth knowledge of the Pokémon world. In order to figure out what it meant I had to click the source and read through the pages it lead me to. Sources are meant to be verifiers, not mandatory reading. The other thing that needs a minor expansion (no more than a sentence or two) is when you mention the term "'star' card". Once again, one who does not partake in the Pokemon Trading Card Game would have no idea what this meant. (A bit of context would go along way). There has been a significant amount of improvement from when I first read it. Great job!--SomeStranger (t|c) 01:16, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pokédex refs

If you are referencing a pokedex entry, do it correctly, as in Torchic. Highway Rainbow Sneakers 21:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


There needs to be a section on 'so I herd u liek mudkips' —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.203.12.18 (talk • contribs) .

Then write one. I don't thinks it's of much signicance myself, though.--Ac1983fan (talk • contribs) 21:40, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To do

This is close to GA, couple more things needed -

  • lead image needs fair use rationale
  • the references still need formatted as such -
    • For Pokédexes
      • <ref>The in-game [[Pokédex]]es from the [[Pokémon video games|''Pokémon'' video games]] ([http://example.com A copy of them from example.com]) URL Accessed June 16, 2006.</ref>
    • For all other references (not books)
      • <ref> [http://example.com Link title/summary] ''Example.com''. URL Accessed June 16, 2006.</ref>
  • You need to have a small list of the available toys/merchandise relating to Mudkip (see Torchic for a fabulous example).
  • Add some descriptive intros, (like those in some of the more advanced articles) I know they are generic, but non-Pokémanics will be utterly lost without them

Good luck and if you need a hand just ask, Highway Rainbow Sneakers 19:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] As A Meme

Does Mudkip really need to have a section for it being a meme on 4chan? UberVash 06:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

No, which is why it got deleted. ;) Highway Return to Oz... 12:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, when the time I wrote that, it was still there.  :P UberVash 17:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I found it very helpful, as I came to this article actually looking for the source of the meme. And apparently right after I posted this, the section was removed. There is no reason to remove this, so I'm replacing it until someone gives a good reason not to include it. Agivith 20:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Is "delete crufty obscene content - I'm not deleting it "because" it's obscene, but it's kinda not notable and patronizing people with learning difficulties, hardly neutral" not a good enough reason? Highway Return to Oz... 21:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Then remove the parts you believe lack neutrality. When I want information, I come to Wikipedia; it's hardly fair to delete helpful and factual information just because you don't like it. Agivith 04:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
It's removed for non-notability. /b/ and all its memes are not notable. lurk (wikipedia) moar, or GB2/Encyclopedia Dramatica/, where they spend all day in their parent's basement writing about nothing (like articles about parents basements) and banning everyone who contests, to feel cool on the internet. TheBilly 01:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
It isn't relevant. Someone made a joke, and it isn't enclyopedic at all. Highway Return to Oz... 06:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Some would say that pokemon isn't encyclopediac, eitier. But, It's besides the point.--Ac1983fan(yell at me) 20:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree. If you guys think that pokemon itself is worthy of being in wikipedia, it seems reasonable that

this mention of Internet lore should be just as valid. I am one of the people who came to this article in search of information about this meme. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.236.175.187 (talk • contribs) .

It's something created on a forum, it lacks enclyopedic worth. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 10:39, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I thought the point of an encyclopedia was to record information? "enclyopedic worth [sic]" is a value/qualitative judgment. We're not here to record Highway's opinion on what constitutes an encyclopedia. Besides, the fact that several posters came to this article specifically to look for this information should be indication enough that it has "worth".
If we're going to delete things just because they originated in Internet forums and other such discussion groups, by the way, we can start with the numerous articles on Usenet and Internet memes/phenomena that Wiki has.--71.112.234.168 04:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Policy states memes must be notable, and "I herd u like mudkips", is far from that. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 07:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Well obviously if there are people searching Wikipedia for the origin of the meme (myself included), it IS notable enough to have a small little blurb, you eletist Pokefanboy. -FreakmanJ 12:14, 20, October 2006 (EST)
Le sigh. I'm not a fanboy, of Pokémon anyway. I'm following policy. If you want to find out about non notable memes, then go to the forum, not to Wikipedia. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 22:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
And still you dodge the issue, because "notable" is also a qualitative/value judgment.--71.35.109.198 18:43, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Which is where it fails, someone just made it up on a fan forum. Ergo, not notable. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 18:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I hardly see why the fact that mudkip is a meme is less notable then an entire article on one of over 400 monsters in a video game. Mudkip itself is not very encyclopediac, and if you are going to play that game most pokemon articles should be deleted. Mudkip as a meme is rather prominent throughout the internet, just because it was not stolen (er, picked up) by YTMND does not make it unnotable. I'm guessing more people would come here to find out about the source of the meme than would come to learn about the actual pokemon. The suicide forest 16:15, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Pokémon is a multi-billion dollar franchise, and Mudkip is one of the most identifiable Pokémon of them all. It has appeared in the video games, the manga and the anime, as well as TCG, all in prominent roles, and has featured in mass merchandise production. That's one hand of the arugment.
The other hand is a crude "meme" that someone made up for a laugh on a fan forum, that has never featured in any game, media coverage, manga episode, TCG card or official website.
Mudkip is notable, the meme isn't. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 16:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
This "unnotable" meme is now common on many forums, blogs, and internet communities throughout the internet, not just 4chan. It makes sense that a lot of people who stumble upon the meme would go to wikipedia to find out about it, as wikipedia is widely considered the definitive authority on all matters the internet, despite what common sense may dictate.
Furthermore, internet memes and fads have long since been accepted into Wikipedia as something that is worthwhile to include in this encyclopedia, and in the case of memes spawning from video games the games from which they spawned from. See such articles as "O RLY", "Genji: Days of the Blade", and "Zero Wing" among others. While the meme may not yet warrent its own fad, it certainly should be mentioned somewhere that the various users of the internet can find it. Because of this, and because you seem to lack an arguement besides that memes for laughs do not belong on wikipedia even if they are influential (Which they apparently do) I propose that we re-add this section to the page. The suicide forest 18:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
In addition to issues of notability, Reliable Sources states that Bulletin boards, wikis and posts to Usenet, and all other web forums, are not reliable sources, and should never be cited in an article. If you can find any issue of Official Nintendo Magazine, or Nintendo Power, or even CVG which discusses the Mudkip meme, it becomes notable. A bunch of posts to any forum is not notable. Laïka 11:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
Many of the Memes noted in Wikipedia are not in boards, etc. By "they are not reliable resources" the Reliable Sources page is referring to using forums as sources for stories not relating to that forum. For example, citing a forum post that says "Jesus was an extraterrestrial" is not appropriate. However, for something originating on a webpage I see no reason why you shouldn't use a forum as a resource.
But that's the primary source, when the primary source isn't reliable, there is no article. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 16:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
How is the primary source not reliable if the events HAPPENED on the primary source? That's like saying we should delete the history on the Wikipedia page because the events happened on a Wiki. Your arguement is MASSIVE FAIL. The suicide forest 15:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
It's not unreliable. You see, the primary source can't decide how notable it is. For example, let's say I'm bob monkery pie, and I make an article on myself. It get's deleted, becuase no newspaper, or news website has ever mentioned me. So, unless you can find a reliable news article, the meme stays out. Also, don't make fake comments as other users.--Ac1983fan(yell at me) 16:47, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
If websites can't be reliable resources for things that ahppen ON THEIR site, then why is the Wikipedia history section still on the site? Shouldn't it be deleted as well? By Wikipedia's own rules, Wikis are not reliable resources. Either make an argument that makes sense, or GB2/debate class.
Also, I did not make a fake comment as another user. I made a very real comment as a fake user. No, it's not a sensible difference, but neither is having 500+ articles on pokemon when popular culture is "irrelevant". The suicide forest 17:38, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Same difference, that's seriously against policy. You can get banned for forging a comment to try and prove your point. And, you did it pretty badly, considering mudkip is a character in a video. (edit conflicted comment)Look, it's not reliablitlity, it's notability that's an issue. Now drop it and move on. It's not going into the article. You can argue all you want. Hell, you can even start a straw poll, I don't give a care. but it's useless. It ain't going into the article, that's the end of it.--Ac1983fan(yell at me) 17:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Umm...I wasn't trying to prove a point with that comment. At all. And it was supposed to be obviously a fake. That was kind of the point of the comment.
Back on topic, if the problem isn't with reliability than the last half of this section is useless. If the argument is now over notability, than this meme is becoming more and more prominent all over the internet, no longer just on /b/-related sites. I have seen this meme on GameFAQs, Counter Strike: Source, Myspace, and even in user profiles. ( I believe Alakazam9891 has a reference in his userpage) Internet culture is very obviously suitable for Wikipedia, and as we have noted before quite a few people have come to this page trying to find out about the meme, most likely many more than have come wondering what a mudkip is. I agree with the Cornflake guy, pokefanatics need to realize that no one outside of their community cares about pokemon so much as to warrant 600+ pokemon articles, and if actually useful information can be added instead of the circle-jerk information we have now, it should be added. (Note that I actually love the pokemon RPGs and have been a big fan for a while, but this is rediculous.) The suicide forest 13:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
No, You're ridicuous. This argument is over. No matter how many forums it's in, or user pages, or myspaces, it is still unnotable unless a legit, recognized news source writes an article on it. If you'd "liek" to discuss this further, why don't you go to The Pokemon collaborative project talk page, and get rejected there. sorry.--Ac1983fan(yell at me) 14:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
Oh, and I'd almopst forgotten to link to this as well.--Ac1983fan(yell at me) 14:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
No YOU'RE rediculous. You haven't made any arguement other then "it's not notable because it's not on a credible new source" which is true for the vast majority of internet culture mentioned on Wikipedia. And the reason I will not be going to the pokemon project talkpage is that both having a commitee for pokemon things and having 700+ articles about pokemans(sic) in a supposed encyclopedia is complete ludicrous. Also, everyone on that "comittee" is a circle-jerking 13-year-old who will rally against anyone suggesting that every minor pokemon detail does not deserve its own page of that anything that might be possible useful knowledge not endorsed by Nintendo be included. It is people like them, along with you, that gives what is an amazing RPG series such a bad reputation among the gaming community, a process for which I have had a front row seat as I have been playing pokemon games since you were four years old. Furthermore, your linked-to page is not only dated in April, when this meme was in its fledgling state (For reference, "so i herd" now generates over 12,000 hits on google and will doubtlessly continue growing stongly) and all the delete votes were either by people protesting memes on Wikipedia in general, an opinion which has obviously not become policy, people citing the (then true) google numbers and pokefreaks voting it down for no real reason.
Nonetheless I am tiring of this charade. Since your entire argument rests on reputable news sources being needed for notability for memes, I will make you this offer: within the next 48 hours, find a reputable news source for "Do a barrel roll". Do so and I will leave. Fail and I will start a massive revert war with myself and many of my friends, both online and offline that will surely result in this page being eventually added to the hallowed halls of WP:LAME. The suicide forest 01:26, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Tell me, where is there an article on wikipedia on "Do a barrel roll". I searched, and all I got was a redirect to the list of characters page for star fox, and no mention of the meme. I refuse to do something completely purposeless. Go ahead, readd, see what I care. I'll just remove it and ask for protection. Also, the earliest you could have been playing pokemon games is when I was 5, not 4, unless you live in japan. So hah.--Ac1983fan(yell at me) 16:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Meh, I put the wrong age by accident. Sue me. Anyway, the article seems to have been moved somewhere, but since logic has long been abandoned as a policy on Wikipedia (Especially regarding video games) my offer still stands. Finally, most of your edits seem to be made during the school day. Don't you have other things to be doing besides editing wikipedia? The suicide forest 17:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Nope. I have no life. right now, we are taking notes in history, and my teacher is talking about nothing.--Ac1983fan 17:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I've decided that I'll be willing to compromise. It's simple. If you can find an existing section to which add a brief mention of it in the article where it would be appropriate, I'll be okay with it.--Ac1983fan 19:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
How about adding a "popular culture" section? It would mention that as one of the more recongnizable pokemon, mudkip has gained popularity in both online and offline culture. (Or something along those lines.) The section would briefly mention the meme with a possible link to more in-depth information, and other mudkip reference is popular culture could be added as well by others. The suicide forest 14:30, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
Since you haven't replied back, I'm going to assume that you feel this is a suitable compromise. I will add this section once I get some free time (probably later today.) I'll leave it up to you and the other members of the pokemon collaborative thingy to find other cultural references. I'm sure there are many.


Haha you're 13.

Anyway, I stand on both sides of the fence on this issue. While I feel that Wikipedia isn't the place for internet memes (as it is an encyclopedia), I couldn't tell you how many times I've seen something about an internet meme involving the article subject at hand. I mean seriously, when Shadow_the_Hedgehog_(video_game) makes a mention of a meme I've personally never herd of, it only seems fair that a mention of Mudkips meme makes its way onto the Mudkip page, even if it's only in a trivia section. A whole section in the article doesn't need to be made for it, but it could at least be mentioned in some small form. Alakazam9891 01:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

i c wut u did thar The suicide forest 17:55, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I...uh...heard some things.Mudkip 13:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

What kind of things? The suicide forest 15:51, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

The daftest reasoning ever. Anyway, Wikipedia history has notable primary and secondary sources. And I'm sure Jimbo will have written a book about it, or someone directly linked to the creation. It also has the strength of reliable secondary sources, newspapers, wall street, etc. Highway Grammar Enforcer! 17:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

By way of hearsay, it has come to my attention that you are not especially fond of mudkips. — Coelacan | talk 05:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

This whole section is massive fail. Elitist Pokefanatics need to get off their high-horses. --Captain Cornflake 19:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

If you want the meme on Wikipedia badly enough, try making a separate article on it. Then see how long it lasts. ~e.o.t.d~ 11:07, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys, I've got a better idea. Somebody say what the meme is and explain it on the talk page. This one. The one you're reading.

Looks like you all like mudkips here. Because I happen to have a Mudkip doll here, and...

hay guys, I made a Wikiaccount JUST to talk about this. I know what Mudkips are, and how much ppl liek them. Memes are important, you know? They are sure to be etched into the sands of internet history or something. So if anybody (besides the pokémon fanboys who keep deletin' the thing) cares, I vote that it get a meme section. Or a separate article, called Mudkip (meme) or somethin. And to the dude who axked what a meme is, Wiki it and see. Or seach "Mudkip" on encyclopedia dramatica. How do I ate corm 06:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

An Internet phenomenon (sometimes called an Internet meme) occurs when something relatively or completely unknown becomes hugely popular, often quite suddenly, through the mass propagation of media content made feasible by the Internet.

Considering that Mudkip was already popular before this stupid meme was ever thought up, your reasonings fail. Besides, this article is about a Pokémon, not some lame internet forum line that's filled with horrid spelling. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 08:16, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
"Mudkip was already popular..." Was it really? I had never heard of, nor seen, a mudkip before I read about it somewhere...probably 4chan or EncyclopediaDramatica. Maybe Mudkip (critter)was only popular among pokémon fans? So, that's why Mudkip has a page, because it's popular with a group of people. Mudkip (meme) is also popular among a large group of people (read: most of 4chan, that's a lot of people). What's the harm of having a meme section? If not a section, then there should be a separate Mudkip (meme) page, that Mudkip (disambiguation) could link to or something. I'm not going to take the time to do anything, because I will end up spending a long time on it, only to have it invariably deleted by a young otaku (Why are kids editing an Encyclopdia? This scares me, seriously. It's a sign of the endtimes). It just seems that the 13 year olds are insulted that their favorite Pokémons are being used in a lighthearted or deragatory manner. Listen: most people did go through a Pokémon phase. Mine was back when the TV series was first released in the US. I was 13 at the time, I think. The good ole days, when there were 150, not 500 critters. The current Pokémon fans? Satoshi Yajiri is just milking the franchise for every penny its worth, and you're playing along, lining his pockets with gold buying trading cards and other useless garbage. And guess what? You'll grow out of Pokémon, just like the rest of us did. So, stop being rabid fanboys, most sensible anime fans already make fun of you for liking Pokémon in the first place. And no, I'm not going to "Cite" that ;-). Back to the topic at hand, the O Rly owls got a page, and that's technically a meme. So, is O RLY a meme because something obscure (a nature photographer's picture) got macroed, and became über famous really quickly? By your fancily quoted logic, maybe it shouldn't have gotten a page, just because Snowy Owls were already popular before "O Rly" happened. So IMHO, Mudkip (meme) should get official recognition. Stupid owls. And as an afterthought, people on this talk page are saying the meme came from a horribly spelled forum posting. I thought it came from a comment that someone on Deviantart used to invite somebody to join a Pokémon usergroup. How do I ate corm 04:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
First of all, I'm not some kid. I was 14 when Pokémon came to the U.S. Secondly, I'm not a "rabid fanboy"; I only play the games. And third, I've never even heard of 4chan, so maybe this "meme" is only popular with your little group. Unless a credible source makes mention of this, i.e. magazine article, television, or another authentic news source, it is not notable enough to be mentioned. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 08:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Dude, "little group"? hahaha, ok. You can think that if you want. And look at this: "

I am a degree 6 Zoosexual, sexually and emotionally attracted to Mudkip and nothing else. Animals don't even do it for me. I am cursed to live my life in the misery that my most powerful emotional fantasies will never be even close to coming true." This was posted on page one of /b/ 5 minutes ago. Mudkip, not as a Pokémon, but as a sexual fetish. See? Mudkip needs a disambiguation category. How do I ate corm 16:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

*Sigh*... Perhaps Uncyclopedia is where this should go. They probably won't object to any of it there. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 09:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
"“so i herd u liek mudkips”- /b/tard on Mudkip " lol, they beat us to it. We can't have that, can we? Wikipedia will lose if we don't step up to the plate, man. People will go to OTHER places for important information How do I ate corm 16:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I herd there were mudkips here. --Wooty Woot? contribs 02:22, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Axolotl/Mudpuppy

The morphology of the mudkip is more suggestive of the Axolotl (aka "mudpuppy") to me than of the mudskipper. The gill structures on the sides of the head, the eyes, the legs, and the tail are what I am comparing.

Yes, but it's Wooper, not Mudkip, that is based off the Axolotl. I mean, the French name for Wooper is 'Axoloto'.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/u/d/Talk%7EMudkip_18ce.html"