Jump to content

Talk:Alex Neil (politician)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


RENAME[edit]

he is known as Alex Neil MSP so i moved to that http://local.stv.tv/airdrie/news/18662-alex-neil-msp-calls-for-improvements-to-airdrie-roads/ http://www.carricktoday.co.uk/news/local-headlines/back_on_track_1_1641978 http://www.inverclydenow.com/index.php/news/local/4755-clune-park-plan-prepared-for-government

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


– per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Neil was promoted from a junior ministerial position to a Cabinet-level post in May 2011. The only other Alex Neil on Wikipedia is a minor footballer playing in one of the lower leagues. As a cabinet minister Neil is a very high profile public figure, while the other person will only be known to a particular fanbase. Mais oui! (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So, if Peterborough's left back happened to be called Michael Gove, then Wikipedia would have to disambiguate the cabinet minister's article to Michael Gove (politician)??? Puhrleeeese. --Mais oui! (talk) 15:11, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No but its relatively clear to me that Alex Neil the politician isnt significantly more notable than the other to be considered a primary topic, and would be better as it is until he or someone else clearly is. Is there some rule that a politician is automatically more notable and would be the primary topic in all situations because thats what you are giving off with your Puhrleeeese comment. Michael Grove is a lot more notable than Alex Neil is at the present time. Blethering Scot 19:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note The disam page Alex Neil was declined as a DB-G6 speedy delete which had request reason: to allow Move, per wp:primary. This was declined with the following comment: decline GSD G6 - not clear what the primary topic would be, and no RM discussion can be found.[1].Blethering Scot 19:03, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]