Talk:Rip Van Fish

Cheep-Cheep or not? -- Sir Grodus

It would appear to at least be a relative, as would the Piscatory Petes. Then again, it could be a coincidence, all three being googly-eyed fish that just HAPPEN to look alike. 17:00, 22 May 2007 (EDT)

Er, where was it ever confirmed that the fish in Yoshi's Island are Rip Van Fishes? Vent (talk) 00:27, 17 December 2012 (EST)

Sprite
Is the sprite on the page from SMW, SMA+, or SMA? Jdrawer 10:41, 20 February 2012 (EST)

Yoshi Series
Since when did these appear in Yoshi's Island/Yoshi's Island DS? Similarly to the Clam issue, I can't find any sprite rips or screenshots of them, I've never encountered them, and I can't even find references to this claim anywhere else,. Binarystep (talk) 04:10, 5 April 2015 (EDT)
 * So, I did some research, and I found the claim of their appearing in YIDS (but not Yoshi's Island) was added in 2006 by a user who's been inactive since 2009. In 2007, a comparison between Rip van Fish and Piscatory Pete from SMW2 was added, which was changed later to say they appeared in SMW2 with no explanation. Thoughts? Binarystep (talk) 22:36, 4 May 2015 (EDT)

Relation to Cheep Cheeps
While Porcupuffer at least looks like a Cheep Cheep, and Blurp and Piscatory Pete have Japanese names indicating their relations, these don't really seem to have anything indicating that they're a Cheep Cheep. Granted, Cheep Cheep in Super Mario World was the first in a string of awfully off-model Cheeps, and it was a lot more flexible than most depictions, as seen by the flopping sprites, but still, there really isn't anything definitively pointing to them being Cheep Cheeps. Even Spray Fish seems more viable, it at least has the mohawk going for it. (Also, why can't I make that picture I'm using to show how hideous the SMW Cheep was any bigger?) Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:32, 28 December 2017 (EST)
 * They do look like Cheep Cheeps (not the in-game sprite), but i don't think there is enough evidence that they are Cheep Cheeps. What does the Japanese encyclopedia says about it? -- 05:49, April 8, 2019 (EDT)
 * They don't particularly look like Cheep Cheeps in the art either... Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 05:58, April 8, 2019 (EDT)
 * Yeah, I don't think these are Cheep Cheeps. Mario series fish all look kinda similar, doesn't mean they're related. Who has lost his tail? 07:19, April 8, 2019 (EDT)
 * And it is not the only fish that is not a Cheep Cheep derivative. Yet, i wonder what can Mister Wu tell us about the encyclopedia. -- 10:47, April 8, 2019 (EDT)
 * At least one book implies a relation with Cheep Cheeps. -- 02:52, April 21, 2019 (EDT)
 * What book? 02:57, April 21, 2019 (EDT)
 * The Perfect Edition of the Great Mario Character Encyclopedia. -- 03:03, April 21, 2019 (EDT)
 * This can be seen here courtesy of Mister Wu. Also, I know it's a different game, but if this thing can be derived from Cheep Cheep, then so can Rip Van Fish. LinkTheLefty (talk) 10:05, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * The Spike Bass was because its Japanese name comes from the Cheep Cheep's Japanese name. -- 10:13, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * And it acts like a previously-established Cheep Cheep, the Boss Bass, just without the eating. Amps were included in the same "group" as Chain Chomps and Fire Chomps in the NSMB Player's Guide, but it doesn't mean they're related. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:33, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * Also the “Cheep Cheep” in SMW is actually not a cheep cheep! & at 3:03 they are called blurps!  12:47, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * Blurp is a confirmed relative. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 12:49, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * Yes, I'm unsure what those references are supposed to prove, especially since the latter directly refers to the goggle-wearing fish as Blurps. Mario Mania does accidentally swap the two when listing the enemies, but that isn't relevant to this discussion. Anyway, my point was really more on the visual disparity used as evidence considering Rip Van Fish is much closer than Spike Bass, which seems to be a tadpole. Given the one Japanese reference, we should at least put Cheep Cheep and Rip Van Fish in the "related" parameter. LinkTheLefty (talk) 12:59, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * That would make a lot more sense to me, personally, until we uncover more definite proof. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 13:08, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * On another note, it would also be fair to do the same to Porcupuffer, since there's arguably even less that connects it to Cheep Cheep (besides sometimes being a stand-in for Big Cheep Cheep). Although, that requires a proposal to override it. LinkTheLefty (talk) 13:30, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * Porcupuffer is at least shaped like a Cheep Cheep, and was used as a large counterpart in 3D Land/World. So I'd say there's a direct connection on that one. Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 15:02, April 22, 2019 (EDT)
 * I'd agree to demote Porcupuffer as a derivative of Cheep Cheep, even though it slightly resembles a Cheep Cheep. -- 08:23, April 26, 2019 (EDT)
 * According to Mister Wu, only one early guide (out of at least six) directly refers to Porcupuffer as a type of Cheep Cheep, with later references dropping the connection. It isn't worth making a new proposal over it, but it's something to keep in mind since there is similarly one source that connects Rip Van Fish to Cheep Cheep. LinkTheLefty (talk) 20:55, May 22, 2019 (EDT)

Given the major agreement, should we demote it as a derivative? -- 05:37, May 5, 2019 (EDT)
 * Which? Doc von Schmeltwick (talk) 23:41, May 5, 2019 (EDT)
 * The Rip Van Fish. -- 08:48, May 6, 2019 (EDT)