This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Education in the United Kingdom, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Education in the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Education in the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Education in the United KingdomEducation in the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I believe the content, though sourced, gives undue weight to an reported event and should be removed unless more sourcing is found. Don't knw which version I protected, but let's thrash this out here, shall we? -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
Ejaz Ashraf Chowdary is not a director and share holder for this company and no reference has been provided. Can we please remove his name from this article. 2A02:C7D:D805:FC00:E581:13C5:7A61:1417 (talk) 14:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Done due to good-faith challenge to uncited contentious BLP material. I would not object to re-adding the removed material if it is accompanied by a source. —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Under History the name Ejaz Ashraf Chowdary should be taken out as he is not the director. The next sentence would be an automatic exclusion. 2A02:C7D:D805:FC00:B94C:68F9:8072:6EB0 (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
I have instead reverted to an older revision of the article, as there were multiple violations of the biographies of living people policy which I believe was the reason for protection. —KuyaBriBriTalk 18:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)Reply
Done due to good-faith challenge to uncited contentious BLP material. I would not object to re-adding the removed material if it is accompanied by a source. —KuyaBriBriTalk 16:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)