Talk:Flemish Giant rabbit

Need a better picture
This article needs a better picture: something next to the rabbit that gives a sense of scale. e.g. a person holding a rabbit, or something like that. — Steven G. Johnson (talk) 06:44, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I added a picture showing a Flemish next to a human child. Lithonius (talk) 19:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Attribution for lifespan
There should be attribution and citation for lifespan:

"can live for up to five years or more, with many living into their late teens."

Larger rabbits tend to have slightly shorter lives than smaller non-dwarf breeds, and in my experience 12 years would be an interesting outlier on the long side for a large breed. "many living into their late teens" defies the experience of many rabbit owners, unless contributors can demonstrate otherwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.202.191 (talk) 03:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Red tea in diet: false information
I was surfing along reading bits on tea and discovered this wiki article with false information concerning "red tea" stating it's not "true" tea. The person who wrote this article is making a mistake, since there are two red teas: one is true tea, the other is commercially called red tea but is from another plant, rooibos.

Commonly, red tea refers more to the "true" red tea, and comes from the same camellia sinensis plant as white, green and black (color differentiation is only due to aging, fermentation and drying conditions). Some consider red tea is intermediate (in terms of oxidation-fermentation) between green and black teas, while others just call black tea "red tea" in their country.

If rabbits can have green, black or white, they can have red tea too, but I have no clue about rooibos. Just replace "red tea" in the diet article with rooibos and remove the part saying red tea isn't true (camellia sinensis) to avoid ridicule. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.240.163.245 (talk) 22:14, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

References needed; question on weasel words
I've edited the diet section and I think it takes out a great deal of the 'how to' aspect. I am still looking for references to the top size of Flemish Giants - the article says 50 kilos and that can't be right (120 pounds?!?!) Also - if someone could clarify where weasel words occur so they can be addressed, (if not done so already) that would be great. Kerani (talk) 15:02, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Not sure where I can find better documented references on size. All of my house rabbit books assume you're keeping a more reasonably-sized breed like a Rex or a Polish. I have, however, owned four Flemish Giant house rabbits myself - the heaviest of which appears in the picture at the top of the page. Emily was a spayed (rabbits tend to put on some weight once you spay/neuter them) doe, and at her peak she weighed about twenty pounds and measured almost three feet from the tips of her front paws to the end of her back feet when fully elongated - a common resting position for rabbits of this size and temperment. The other three Flemish Giants (two does and a buck) were smaller and topped out in the 17-18 pound range.

I know breeders who show their Flemish frequently have rabbits that weigh more, but it's uncommon to them to get heavier than 22-23 pounds unless you feed them an unhealthy diet. Like many other pet animals, rabbits will eat junk food (I even heard of one rabbit that became fond of Fig Newtons!) if provided by their owners and it affects them pretty much the same way it does us. Lithonius (talk) 14:10, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested moves

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the pages, except no consensus in the case of Peppin Merino, per comments pertinent to the proposed moves in the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 22:47, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

– Original names are too naturally ambiguous and will be interpreted by many readers as references to people (descriptions or personal names). New names will be consistent with Continental Giant rabbit, etc. See recently concluded requested move of West African Dwarf -> West African Dwarf goat, and many other similar cases of natural ambiguity, e.g. White Park cattle, San Clemente Island goat, Black Pied Dairy cattle, Australian Game fowl, Plymouth Rock chicken, Continental Giant rabbit, Gulf Coast Native sheep, Nigerian Dwarf goat, Australian Draught horse. Note that the added species common name at the end ("cattle", "rabbit", etc.) is not capitalized, because it's not part of the formal name of the breed; the species is capitalized only in the few cases when it is invariably part of the name, as in American Quarter Horse, Norwegian Forest Cat, Bernese Mountain Dog. Disambiguation is non-parenthetic, per WP:NATURAL policy, and per the vast majority of animal breed article names. (I'm going on the assumption that we want to capitalize breed names at all, as we're mostly presently doing. If some object to this, I would suggest that this RM is not the place for that discussion, so please don't cloud the RM by injecting arguments relating to that other topic.)  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  13:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC) Additional rationale for Peppin Merino sheep: "Merino" is also a type of guinea pig (cavy), e.g. English Merino cavy. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Flemish Giant → Flemish Giant rabbit
 * Netherland Dwarf → Netherland Dwarf rabbit
 * Checkered Giant → Checkered Giant rabbit
 * Galician Blond → Galician Blond cattle
 * Murray Grey → Murray Grey cattle
 * Peppin Merino → Peppin Merino sheep


 * comment, SMcCandlish ☺ again I Support some kind of change but thought it would be worth raising the issue of capitalisation again. Sorry to, ahem, "rabbit on".
 * I wondered whether the following might be appropriate: Flemish Giant Rabbit, Netherland Dwarf Rabbit, Checkered Giant Rabbit, as per majority of results from "Flemish Giant rabbit", "Netherland Dwarf rabbit", "Checkered Giant rabbit". The capitalisation of the herd animals was a mixed bag with "Murray Grey Cattle" being typically capitalised.  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  12:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. And I don't understand the basis (web page titles?) for Gregkaye's suggestion of capitalizing the animal type that is not part of the breed name (I don't really understand why we capitalize breed names for that matter, but that's a bigger argument, not being raised here).  Dicklyon (talk) 05:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It's because it's just a confusing, geeky issue. Breed-focused editors pretty much uniformly insist that breed names "must" be capitalized, but that they do not include the species name after the unique part of the breed name, which is only used for disambiguation clarity. Except in rare cases like American Paint Horse and Norwegian Forest Cat when it "is" part of the "official" breed name and therefore "must" be capitalized.  None of these are that sort of case.  Personally I think there are serious WP:SSF and selective source cherrypicking going on, but whatever. Whether American Paint Horse and Norwegian Forest Cat really are special exceptions is a case-by-case analysis for possible RMs at those individual articles' talk pages.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:23, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Support not about giant people, dwarf people, blond people of myth or population -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 06:29, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose: SMC, you do well know the reactions to your unreflected moves. Take Talk:Teeswater_sheep as a reminder. The Names of the Breeds are well citated from different breeding associations and some national governmental organisations, that are repoting to the FAO, who is using this names as well. And again, there is a difference between a Flamish Giant rabbit (as in any Giant rabbit of Flamish origin or any Flamish rabbit of a Giant breed) and a Flamish Giant, that is the name of the breed. --PigeonIP (talk) 19:22, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * You're not presenting an argument that is relevant in any way to this RM, just a fallacy ad hominem and other distractions.

You're also confusing a status quo ante discussion at Talk:Teeswater sheep (a discussion about whether to revert undiscussed moves in the interim before discussing the merits of the moves) with a discussion of the merits of the moves; they're unrelated. You're also evidencing serious difficulty with English spelling and capitalization, and getting proper names correct; I don't mean that in a snide way, it's just a matter of WP:COMPETENCE, as this is a nuanced discussion about spelling, proper naming, and capitalization in particular. And finally, you're sorely confusing, well, everything, as you did in earlier discussions. Flemish Giant is the breed name. No one contests this. For reasons already covered at a previous near-identical RM, this name doesn't work here, and needs to be Flemish Giant rabbit for disambiguation and recognizability reasons. That does not at all imply any of the confused ideas you suggested, which would be implied by Flemish giant rabbit. Finally, your concern that the breed name itself is being misrepresented isn't correct either, which would be the case with Flemish Giant Rabbit. Oh, the case you didn't mention here but did in all the other discussions: No, it shouldn't be Flemish Giant (rabbit), per WP:NATURAL policy.


 * — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:50, 21 September 2014 (UTC)::  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:50, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Presenting an argument: Recognised (pet/fancy) Breeds shall not be moved to titles like . It shall be possible to distinguish them with   or   (if "Rabbit" is part of the recognised name) from wild and feral animals as well as from groups of animals, that are named similar, because of similar characteristics. A more detailed scheme is provided on Talk:Strasser pigeon. I am commenting here on every rabbit-RM done on September, 15th on Talk:Anglo-Nubian, American Sable and Corsican Cattle
 * Flemish Giant: is ok, it is the name of in fact two breeds: Flemish American and Flemish BRC (according to AUS), a Flemish Giant rabbit are both
 * Netherland Dwarf: Netherland Dwarf is the name of the breed: AUS, ARBA, US, BRC
 * Checkered Giant is the name of the breed: US
 * from: Anglo Nubian
 * Florida White Florida White is the name of the recognised breed
 * from Corsican
 * Altex Rabbit shall be moved to Altex (rabbit), the name of the breed (to distinguish it from Altex, a company)
 * Enderby Island Rabbit → Enderby Island rabbit, that requested move is ok, Enderbys are feral rabbits
 * Liptov Baldspotted Rabbit: dont move, name of the breed
 * from American Sable
 * American Sable: don't move, name of the breed (US)
 * Silver Marten: don't move, name of the breed (US)
 * --PigeonIP (talk) 10:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment, in parallel with comments on similar RMs. Flemish Giant, Netherland Dwarf and Checkered Giant are mythical creatures;  Galician Blond and Murray Grey are hair dye colours and Peppin Merino is a spicy or minty food additive, at least, that is, without necessary clarification.  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪
 * so, if there are articles about this mythical creatures, the articles have to be distinguished with  and   (according to WP:NATURAL). --PigeonIP (talk) 10:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose as proposed. Fundamentally flawed proposal, ill thought out and based on false premises. A few points:
 * There is already a mass move request regarding animal breed articles, the outcome of which would affect any decision here, at Talk:Teeswater sheep, as the nominator well knows, since it involves the reversal of some hundreds of undiscussed page moves made by him
 * The nominator has, without reference to relevant WikiProjects or other interested editors, how he wants domestic animal breed articles to be named, and is apparently on a one-man crusade to impose that decision on the community; other moves proposed (with copy-pasted move rationale) by the same editor are at:
 * Talk:Anglo-Nubian (16 rabbit, goat and cattle breeds)
 * Talk:Corsican Cattle (21 cattle, sheep, goat and rabbit breeds)
 * Talk:Canadian Speckle Park (2 cattle breeds)
 * Talk:Dutch Landrace (8 goat and pig breeds)
 * Talk:American Sable (3 rabbit and goat breeds)
 * Talk:Russian Black Pied (4 cattle breeds)
 * Talk:Black Hereford (hybrid) (one cattle breed, one hybrid)
 * Talk:Blue Grey (2 cattle breeds, 1 cattle hybrid, 1 goat)
 * Talk:Harz Red mountain cattle (one breed)
 * Talk:Asturian Mountain (6 cattle, sheep and pig breeds)
 * Talk:Romeldale/CVM (one sheep breed)
 * White Park cattle, cited above as an example for consistency, was to its present title by the nominator, and will be reverted if that move proceeds
 * Nigerian Dwarf goat, cited above as an example for consistency, was to its present title by the nominator, and will be reverted if that move proceeds
 * Black Pied Dairy cattle, cited above as an example for consistency, has been moved six times in just over three years
 * Wikipedia just doesn't care what really, really silly people might think the title of an article means, as those people will soon discover their error when they look at the page; thus we do not need or want disambiguation for Checkered Giant or Flemish Giant any more than we do for Green Giant or Gentle Giant; we don't need or want disambiguation for Murray Grey any more than we do for Agnes Grey or Cadet Grey or Lady Jane Grey or Earl Grey (please,, tell me you don't think that's a hair-dye too?)
 * The present titles perfectly satisfy the five WP:CRITERIA of recognisability, naturalness, precision, conciseness and consistency; there's no reason to change them
 * Of course, if there is Wikipedia-wide consensus to disambiguate all and any article titles that are even remotely open to misinterpretation (for example, all these pages because they might otherwise be mistakenly thought to be kinds of hair-dye, or paint colours or butterflies or ethnicities or qualities of marble, then these pages should conform to it; but that doesn't seem very probable
 * P.S. Why is it proposed that Peppin Merino be moved and Merino not?
 * Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't find your "hair dye" comment to be either recognisable or natural. As far as I could tell it was just about as unspecific talk about Flemish Giants (when not talking about Flemish Giants that is).  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  21:47, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * add: Justlettersandnumbers, Sorry not to have replied more fully: Agnes Grey is a novel written about someone called "Agnes Grey". It is possible to discern that the subject relates to a human female through the presence of "Agnes" while "Grey" can indicate at least one shade of surname.  Cadet Grey is a colour as indicated by the word "Grey" and which, to some extent, is clarified by the word "cadet", a rank of personnel not widely known for wearing pink, yellow or orange.  Lady Jane Grey is the common name for a noble woman, a lady, named "Jane" who was the eldest daughter of "Henry Grey".   The current Earl Grey is Philip Kent Grey, 7th Earl Grey as disambiguated from Earl Grey tea which was named after the second Earl Grey.  I still find "Murray Grey" to be comparatively unintelligible although, for all I might have known, it could referred to a Scottish fetishist, a colour related to Clan Murray or a breed of fish, whelk of seal that may have been well known in the Moray Firth.  How could I have known that it was an Australian Cow.  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  14:08, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'd answered this, ; it looks as if my reply got smeared in McCandlish's edit conflict (I didn't get one). I don't remember exactly what I wrote, but it was essentially this: by looking at the article. The purpose of disambiguation is not to make all titles blindingly obvious, but to distinguish between topics that share similar or identical names. There isn't anything else in Wikipedia called Murray Grey, so it doesn't need to be disambiguated. What do you think Giant Haystacks is about? Is it obvious from the title? (not to me). Does it matter? No, not at all; no other article is a candidate for that title. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:17, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.” ― Albert Einstein
 * There are some quite astounding names of people. See: Top Celebrity Baby Names; The top 10 weirdest names (deed poll changes).
 * My guess is that, if you asked people (who didn't know the meaning) to define "Giant Haystacks", it may not take many people long to guess pseudonym of a person or even pseudonym of a professional wrestler.
 * This is the world we live in. We become accustomed to this kind of thing with people. It doesn't mean that we won't benefit from clarification with rabbits.  Gregkaye  ✍ ♪  02:14, 4 October 2014 (UTC)


 * (EC) I'm going to skip Jlan's typical ad hominem stuff. The rationales for each set of moves are different.  No one cares how often something was moved in the past or by whom. The point of consolidated RMs like these is to identify article titles that share the same disambiguation or other issue, and come to a conclusion about them together, instead of party A pushing for one kind of name at article 1, party B pushing for another art article 2, and party C pushing for yet another at article 3, etc.  PS: See also Talk:Merino.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  08:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Is it deliberate irony on your part that typical ad hominem stuff is itself an ad hominem argument? If so it probably went over most heads I'm afraid, and regardless, two wrongs do not make a right. Andrewa (talk) 21:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose Peppin Merino, undecided about Murray Grey but support the rest. Merino needs no further disambiguation (see the RM at that page, which just closed as not moved) and there seems no need to disambiguate Murray Grey but can argue that one both ways in terms of being recognised. Good moves for the rest, though. Andrewa (talk) 22:40, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Potential contradiction
The Diet section mentions that "After females deliver kits, and during winter for all Flemish Giants, the rabbits must be fed as much as they can eat, and given plenty of water." However, later on, it mentions that "The House Rabbit Society recommends two cups of chopped leafy vegetables per 2.7 kilograms (6.0 lb) of body weight and no more than two tablespoons of fruit or carrots per 2.7 kilograms (6.0 lb) of body weight daily." I'm guessing that the latter sentence applies to the rest of the year and to rabbits without kits, but I can't say for sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by QuarterNotes (talk • contribs) 02:07, 27 July 2020 (UTC)