Talk:Octopus

WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing

High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia There is a request, submitted by Catfurball (talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.
The rationale behind the request is: Important.

---

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 100 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

At the start of the "Defence" topic the first sentence excludes humans, only to mention humans anyway in it's following list:

"Aside from humans, octopuses are prey for fishes, seabirds, sea otters, pinnipeds, cetaceans, other cephalopods, and humans."

Could this be changed to either removing the first part or omitting humans from the list? 158.37.136.131 (talk) 10:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

"In 2005, Adopus aculeatus and veined octopus (Amphioctopus marginatus ) were found to walk on two arms, while at the same time mimicking plant matter. This form of locomotion allows these octopuses to move quickly away from a potential predator without being recognised."

There is more information on this now, (bipedal locomotion). Could I edit the statement above with more in depth information explaining how octopuses conduct it and such? I already have a few citations for it as well. Please let me know :) Jugglerball (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2025 (UTC) [reply ]

The introduction contains the line "Octopuses appear in Japanese shunga erotic art." This should be moved to the "Cultural significance" significance section, as the minor role octopi played in japanese erotic art, is not significant or relevant enough to warrent its inclusion in the introduction. Hemmit (talk) 08:56, 13 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

Not done. It already is in that section, and the lead's job is to summarize the main content of the article, which this is doing, by including it in a list of culturally significant aspects of the octopus. That being said, yeah, it would probably be fine either way, but I'd rather see a consensus for removal before acting on this. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:20, 13 February 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

It should be noted that in modern American language, (a.k.a. slang, common speak, etc.), that octopi is used almost always in place of octopuses, and that octopuses would be considered bad grammar by most people. YellowMan777770 (talk) 22:41, 30 April 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

It should only "be noted" (that is, in the article) if it can be reliably sourced. I feel the current etymology discussion is already very detailed. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 05:51, 1 May 2026 (UTC) [reply ]

I found one source: https://qz.com/1446229/let-us-finally-resolve-the-octopuses-v-octopi-debate. Also, Merriam Webster lists Octopi as an acceptable alternative: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/octopus. Anyway, I found plenty more saying that octopuses is correct, but octopi is used more often in common English. YellowMan777770 (talk) 12:17, 1 May 2026 (UTC) [reply ]