Talk:Norman Lamont

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

Norman Lamont → Norman Lamont (disambiguation) — The modern politician should be the primary topic — AndrewHowse (talk) 13:51, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Norman Lamont (1942) → Norman Lamont

• Primary topic — AndrewHowse (talk) 13:51, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Revise to Sussexonian's solution. The modern-day Lamont is far more frequently mentioned and meets the bar set at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The Scots MP could simply have been hatnoted, but if we are to have a dab page then it should be at Norman Lamont (disambiguation). --AndrewHowse (talk) 21:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Nuetral: As the one who moved the page to the disputed locations, I have no argument against the revert. I was just trying to help.--TParis00ap (talk) 19:38, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse, but... I have seen minimal disambiguation pages like this slated for deletion. From what I have seen, the canonical solution would be this:

Norman Lamont (1942) renamed to Norman Lamont, Baron Lamont of Lerwick to comply with common practice for titled persons

Norman Lamont to redirect to that entry

A hatnote on that entry to the effect "This article is about the former Chancellor Lord Lamont. For the MP for Bute 1905-1910, see Sir Norman Lamont, 2nd Baronet" Sussexonian (talk) 20:52, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral. I would support Sussexonian's solution - Norman Lamont as a redirect to Norman Lamont, Baron Lamont of Lerwick, which would become the title of that article, and the addition of a hatnote about the Edwardian MP to that article. With only two articles to disambiguate, a full dab page isn't required. Tevildo (talk) 21:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Revise per Sussexonian - the Dab police will certainly delete a page with only two entries. My only caveat is the title, "Norman Lamont, Baron Lamont of Lerwick" which strikes me as absurd although I have no reason to doubt it meets the said common practice. The only remaining question would be whether to link Tammie Norrie to his page or to Atlantic Puffin. Ben MacDui 08:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC) (PS This last remark is what is known to non-wikipedians as a "joke" and may be safely ignored by those unfamiliar with the Shetland islands.)[reply]
• I agree with Tevildo, the page "Norman Lamont" should be on the ex-Chancellor with a hatnote to the Scottish MP.--Britannicus (talk) 09:50, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]