Talk:Abbey College, Malvern

	Worcestershire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Worcestershire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Worcestershire-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WorcestershireWikipedia:WikiProject WorcestershireTemplate:WikiProject WorcestershireWorcestershire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Schools Low‑importance

	Schools portal This article is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.SchoolsWikipedia:WikiProject SchoolsTemplate:WikiProject Schoolsschool articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

217.34.107.225 (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article.

Removed content

@John Lewis as per your edit summary can you explain why you have removed well referenced passage:

(content removed) [removed content re. ticket:2014032510009565 -- John F. Lewis (talk) 00:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC)][reply]

form this article? 86.4.25.180 (talk) 19:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It has been removed as being a piece of libel text bluntly. The OTRS ticket shows a log of communication regarding the discussion and in the discussion official documents were exchanged backing up the references to be one-sided and inaccurate. The user on the other end has filed requests for redaction to The Daily Mail and the Telegraph regarding both sources. The Telegraph have agreed to comply and The Daily Mail are entering legal discussions. I ask for respect regarding the removal and that it was done in good faith and I have used my full judgement in the topic. John F. Lewis (talk) 19:11, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how the report of a court case can be classed as libel?86.4.25.180 (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are more than welcome to open a discussion, but as I said before - I ask you respect the decision I came to using information you do not have access to. I have provided a rationale for my actions which is sufficient. Currently it does not add much to the article so a discussion instead of useless revert war will suffice. John F. Lewis (talk) 20:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

I am confused as to why John F. Lewis has deleted a well referenced item from this page citing a 'lack of consensus'.

The only person who appears to be objecting (in various guises) is blatantly connected to the subject matter and has a commercial interest in removing unfavorable facts from the page. Their claims of slander are plainly laughable given the reputable sources quoted including a judge and the Daily Telegraph. I have to admit to a suspicion in the absence of any real reason given for the item's deletion that we are seeing something like this [[1]] in reverse. Lampshade Dog (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello? is there anyone there? In particular someone who wants to put a coherent reason as to why this well referenced passage about this institution should not be in the article? Lampshade Dog (talk) 18:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the section literally above this one. Also removed content per above too. John F. Lewis (talk) 18:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

user:John F. Lewis was indefinitely globally blocked and banned by the WMF in August 2018. Note that this article as a long history of COI/UPE. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:51, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Abbey College, Malvern. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:25, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]