Talk:Rabbit Fire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Stand alone article?[edit]

Is this really suitable for an article on its own? Would it not be better suited to entry on a list of Elmer Fudd cartoons? Thryduulf 12:37, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

No, because it's actually primarily a Bugs Bunny cartoon (Bugs is the short's lead character). Also, this is the first of the "Duck Season! Rabbit Season!" trilogy, and a short widely considered among Chuck Jones' best works. However, this article needed an expansion, and I have provided it with such.--FuriousFreddy 19:38, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Link to Golden Collection?[edit]

Shouldn't there be a link indicating that this cartoon is in the Looney Tunes golden collection volume 1? Jbluez27 21:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


This article's synopsis of the cartoon includes a rather lengthy quote of the transcript. I get the feeling it goes beyond fair use and into copyright violation with the quantity and the context. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable on copyright could have a look and edit it?

Also, the synopsis needs more detail on the scenes beyond the whole "rabbit season/duck season" part. Dazcha 00:10, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:RabbitFireTitle.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:RabbitFireTitle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

This isn't TVTropes, guise![edit]

Section 5 in the main article sounds like and reads like it's an article pulled from the TVTropes wiki. I think it needs to be removed. Any objections? Raekuul 01:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't say. But this was an oft-used gag by Bugs Bunny. This kind of thing should really be in the Bugs Bunny article, not focused on this one cartoon as if it were special. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:02, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Section five is "Uses in Modern Media", effectively. Raekuul 02:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raekuul (talkcontribs)
Yes. What I'm saying is that their citing of this particular cartoon is questionable, as Bugsy did it on a number of occasions. But if you can determine that it's taken directly from some other source, feel free to zap it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:19, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Never mind, then. I checked the possible source. Section 5 reads like it was written by a troper, but it's not taken directly from any source, and TVT is missing the Married with Children example. But not for long ;) Raekuul, bringer of Tropes (talk) 03:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


I know this is considered to be one of the best LT shorts (it's one of my personal favorites) but we cannot simply quote out the majority of the dialog of the short in the plot summary - that's far and above beyond what would be appropriate for any work, much less a 6 minute short. One quoted segment that shows Bugs' adaptness at wordplay - yes, that's reasonable, and part of why this short is memorable, but not all of them. You can add more quotes, but these should go to WikiQuote, not here. Once you take out the quotes, the plot is simple to describe and needs to be nowhere as long as it was. --MASEM (t) 13:13, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Influences in other Media[edit]

I've gone ahead and cut this section. Bugs uses the reverse-argument trick in a number of his appearances, and this wasn't the earliest one either. If the references were to this particular use of it then it would be relevant, but I don't see any indication of that. Incidentally, is there a proper name for the trick? Theoretically we could have an article about it, but I don't know what we would call it. Imyourfoot (talk) 03:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

  • I believe the term you're fumbling for is "reverse psychology." Abbott and Costello come to mind, as does King Solomon. "Rabbit Fire" is referenced in the "reverse pyschology" wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:25, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
    • It's definitely reverse psychology, but I was looking for a word for the more specific variation where the person employing reverse psychology actually switches their position in the middle of the argument, rather than simply claiming the opposite position from the beginning as is more common. I suppose it's a moot point, since even if there is a specific term for that it would probably be best as a section on the reverse psychology page rather than its own article. Imyourfoot (talk) 21:08, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Perfect image for this article[edit]

Rabbit or Duck?

teehee ;) -- œ 04:20, 1 March 2014 (UTC)