Talk:Cataquack

Is it just me, or do these guys look like a single segment of a Wiggler with added bill and tail? --Someone Else 11:03, 23 November 2007 (EST)

They do, but why are you asking?

Eh, I don't know... It was just an observation. --Someone Else

Is there any proof that Cataquacks are birds? Other than a duck-like bill, they have no other bird-like features. 1337Yoshi
 * Whoever said they were bir... *sees Bird template* What's this doing here? *removes*
 * The name implies they're meant to be birds, and unlike Birdos they have beaks... First-impressions-wise, they seem like freakish ducks, and I think it would be more appropritate to include them in the Bird Template than to totally exclude that possibility. - 00:25, 26 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Hmm... now that I think of it, they do have "quack" in their names, but it's just a possiblity/assumption nontheless. Nothing official yet. Are mutant bird-looking creatures still birds?
 * True, but are giant, fire-breathing demons whith spiked shelles still turtles? If Nintendo's willing to make that sorta stretch for Bowser (and all the other "turtles"), they probably view Cataquaks in the same light. - 17:13, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Per Walkazo. All Birds dont fly... The Writing Guy 17:16, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
 * If Nintendo says Bowser is a turtle, we know Bowser is a turtle. If nintendo doesn't say Cataquacks are ducks... we do not know if they are ducks. End of story...

Though official sources said Birdos were birds, they're still not birds - take what they say with a grain of salt and make judgement calls when necessary; this needs a judgement call. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck (that's an old proverb, btw). Anyway I'm not saying we should go writing about how they're birds in the article, but I think they should be put back on the Template for navigation's sake. - 18:40, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
 * What "official source" ever said Birdos were Birds?


 * The TV series (in the episode, The Bird! The Bird!) - 19:00, 27 August 2008 (EDT)
 * Oh, I thought you meant a GAME as in, like, actually "official". Forget it then, Birdo's not a Bird. Garlic Man
 * While I agree the alternative media shouldn't be held on the same level as the games, the current policies say otherwise (I didn't cite Canonicity because it still needs to be updated and is a subject of much debate, whereas Chronology reflects the up-to-date standards). But that's off-topic, we're talking about Cataquacks here, not my Birdo analogy. - 20:10, 27 August 2008 (EDT)

Revisiting Wiggler Connection
It occurs to me that while "hana" in their and Plungelos' JP names may refer to "nose," it more likely refers to Hanachan, being Wiggler, which itself is likely double for "nose" and "flower." Aside from closely resembling their segments and Plungelo having a bud, all three are found heavily in Gelato Beach, Plungelos seem to "work" for the Boss Wiggler, and no "normal" Wigglers are in this game - unlike the other enemies with a "Boss" variant specified by their JP name here (Piranha Plant, Blooper, Boo), which all have said enemy have a heavy presence in their area. Basically, there's definitely a design connection on some level, though I don't know whether list them as a full derivative/variant or merely a relative. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 20:47, March 16, 2020 (EDT)
 * They could definitely count as a related species, now that you mention it. Unfortunately, due to their sparse appearances, it's hard to really classify, especially when you consider in Super Mario Galaxy that they didn't do much to keep the designs of Cataquacks similar to Wigglers. MarioComix (talk) 21:09, March 16, 2020 (EDT)
 * In Super Mario Galaxy, the design of Cataquack was slightly updated so their sides look more like actual eyes (compare Sunshine with Galaxy, where you can see more of a rim), and with Wiggler segment spots being rearranged, their modern appearances aren't as close as they were in Super Mario Sunshine. It's worth noting that Plungelo's color scheme seems to have been given to angry Wiggler, as I think the outer circle was a different color in Super Mario World. Also, on pages 64 and 65 of the Super Mario Sunshine BradyGAMES guide, the Wiggler is named Boss Hana, and with the guide referring to Cataquack as Paihana and Red Cataquack and Plungelo as Chuhana, it appears to imply a connection between them. I'd say there is a good chance they may have been intended as variants, but with the designs diverging, it may be better to consider them (and Popoi) related. LinkTheLefty (talk) 21:47, March 26, 2020 (EDT)
 * Thing with the Wiggler spot arrangement is that the "perfectly spaced down the sides of each segment" thing itself was atypical as far as artwork went (and 2D graphics just reuse tiles); the SMW art showed them more like their modern appearances. Also yes, angry Wiggler spots looked more like normal Wiggler spots originally. On the subject of Plungelo, its spot in its artwork seems to have some amount of 3-dimensionality, if the fact that the orange ring has a lighter right inside that appears to touch the yellow spot on one side is anything to go by. In fact, in the SMS Wiggler's artwork, the yellow spots seem to actually protrude a bit, given the shading. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 21:59, March 26, 2020 (EDT)
 * I think that's an optical trick since inspecting the in-game models shows all their bodies to be fairly rounded in Super Mario Sunshine, whereas in Super Mario Galaxy, only the Wiggler segments are pretty smooth while Cataquack has the new protrusions. Another thing to note is that the limbs of Cataquack definitely resemble Sunshine ' s Wiggler boss, but not so much the traditional Wiggler, and the Galaxy Cataquack has stiffer legs as opposed to the original bended knees that look more like Wiggler and Plungelo. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:16, March 27, 2020 (EDT)
 * I think it's less likely an "optical trick" and more "something that was reduced out of necessity for the game due to wanting to minimize hardware space issues." But I digress. I do think that this also calls into question a few ways we list variants in other cases, notably with Thwomps and things like Whomp, Bomp, and Rhomp, which while clearly related and derived from them, are hardly a "subtype." Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:05, March 27, 2020 (EDT)