Talk:Ziegler's water rat

Shouldn't this be Ziegler's water rat: - if it is a type of water rat:? SemperBlotto 22:11, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Well this started because I saw this on a list of requested articles on wikipedia and I created it, and it was written in all caps there, when I did my research, the only source I found which was the IUCN red list was in all caps, so I figured since it was in all caps everywhere I encountered it I would leave it all caps. As far as it being a water rat, I'm not entirely sure if that is even a class of rats, I just assumed it was. So whatever you think is best, but I could not tell for sure and it is a very very little known/rare creature. So maybe an e-mail to the discoverers?Lucifer 23:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * We've discussed this before with reference to the names of certain birds, and the names of certain dog breeds. Sometimes the capitalised form is far more common. Equinox ◑ 23:15, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Je ne se pasLucifer 04:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I moved it before reading this page. The normal form is Ziegler's water rat. Capitals are often used when referring to the species (rather than to individuals), but this is a general rule that capitals may be used in such a case, a rule similar to the use of capitals at the beginning of a sentence. Lmaltier 19:57, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It seems that all caps is a grammatically correct possibility but I honestly don't care.Lucifer 21:47, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is what I explain just above. And writng Yes is correct, but we don't include it