Talk:Nisbet, Scottish Borders

Move?

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Aervanath (talk) 00:50, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nisbet, Roxburghshire → Nisbet, Scottish Borders –

per naming convention for Scotland. There is only one article on a "Nisbet" in Scottish Borders: the other article listed at Nisbet, Scottish Borders (disambiguation) is for Nisbet House. It is doubtful there should even be that disambiguation page, as this could be dealt with more appropriately by hatnotes, especially as there is already a disambiguation page at Nisbet. Skinsmoke (talk) 01:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
But "Nisbet, Roxburghshire" is more precise and will make it easier for a reader to find the place on a map. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The naming convention for Scotland is to disambiguate by council area, not by former county, as these were abolished in 1975. Most modern maps do not even show Roxburghshire. If there were two places named Nisbet in Scottish Borders, then an alternative method of disambiguation would need to be found, but there aren't. The only other place in the council area with Nisbet in its title is Nisbet House, which is named after the Nisbet family, not after a place. We would not, for example, insist on re-disambiguating the article on Woodley, Berkshire merely because there happened to be a building in Reading, Berkshire named Woodley House. Skinsmoke (talk) 21:40, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If recent maps do not show Roxburghshire, then the name should be moved so its easier for readers to find this page, and find it on a map.Beefcake6412 (talk) 22:21, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support per standard naming rules - a hatnote on Nisbet, Scottish Borders will suffice for Nisbet House. 81.142.107.230 (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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. No further edits should be made to this section.