I am under a similar impression as Lion's Emblem.

Just maybe we should get an 'official' ruling from someone conversant with animal classification.

Knowing little about zoology, I am unable to do that.

Lamentably, I too know very little about zoology.

Marsupials like kangaroos and quokkas interest me more than do gerbils, groundhogs, hamsters, and other rodent-like creatures.

Not everybody likes rodents from what I've heard.

Only those who have an extreme phobia of them.

Possibly, but I'd imagine that anybody could be startled by them.

Quokkas, a threatened marsupial species, which only survives on Rottnest Island, were mistaken for rats by Willem De Vlamingh, a 1697 Dutch sea-captain.

Rats ought to have been a familiar sight for him, since they famously travel with ships, so why was he confused?

Scarcely anyone in de Vlamingh's time would know anything about Rottnest Island, let alone marsupials and monotremes, even if quokkas did look vaguely like giant rats.

This talk about marsupials and rodents is starting to make my head spin.

Unlike usual rats, quokkas (AKA kangaroo rats) are herbivores, have large back legs, carry their young in pouches, and, though friendly and tame, are not allowed as pets.

Very interesting to hear; are there any marsupials that are allowed as pets?

Why would anyone want a fussy eucalyptus-munching koala as a pet, when it is so difficult for ignorant amateurs to care for such an endangered animal?