Talk:Brexiteer

RFV discussion: January–April 2017
[Discussion moved from Tea Room]

I question whether the second definition, "Holder of any of the Cabinet posts ... etc.", is truly a separate sense. It seems to me that these people are just Brexiteers who happen to be in the cabinet. The addition of this sense may have been influenced by the term "the Three Brexiteers", which might (depending on whether it is viewed as dictionary material) have a separate entry, but does not, in my view, create a separate meaning of "Brexiteer" itself. Mihia (talk) 03:36, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I think that it is OK but needs the definition trimming to "Holder of any of the Cabinet posts tasked with negotiating Brexit". SemperBlotto (talk) 06:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you provide any usage examples that clearly show how this is a separate sense, i.e. where "holder of the cabinet post" is understood simply from the word "Brexiteer", without this being directly stated or stated through context, and without specific reference to the "Thee Brexiteers"? Of the three existing examples, the first two are references to the "Three Brexiteers", and the last is simply "cabinet" plus definition #1. Mihia (talk) 10:16, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * This quote seems a pretty clear example:
 * Patel has always been a sense 1 Brexiteer - what's changed is that she is now being included in the list of ministers whose remits cover Brexit. The quote only makes sense in light of definition 2. Smurrayinchester (talk) 14:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned, this is IMO a reference to "the Three Brexiteers". It's a bit like "the eleventh commandment", for example; it doesn't really create a new sense of "Brexiteer", but only works in reference to the set phrase. Mihia (talk) 04:27, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, we already have an entry for "Commandment" ("one of the Ten Commandments"). Smurrayinchester (talk) 11:12, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps that wasn't the best example then, but hopefully the general gist of what I am arguing is clear enough. Mihia (talk) 23:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Perhaps that wasn't the best example then, but hopefully the general gist of what I am arguing is clear enough. Mihia (talk) 23:17, 31 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Based on the evidence and the three cites provided, I think that this sense is distinct and RFV passed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:07, 14 April 2017 (UTC)