Talk:Orley Farm School

Concerning the head's dismissal
I have copyedited the text to be more encyclopaedic, removed the actual text of the insult, which can be read in the source and is UNDUE in the article (i.e. unnecessary and serving only to disparage the person concerned), and reduced the sources to ONE good, reliable source, The Telegraph. Adding 12 references for one piece of information is not "well-referenced", it's known as "stacking" and is often used to force unsavoury or non-neutral points-of-view into an article, and is, quite frankly, ridiculous in this case. Is the editor in question actually aware of Wikipedia:Reliable Sources? Because generally the Mirror, Sun, Standard and Daily Mail are very tabloidish and not considered reliable on a lot of subjects, and several of the other ones looked like trash just from their URLs, and indeed Allovernews, NewsHour 24 and Top News Today are just news aggregator websites, so there is no editorial process, and, indeed, they were all picking up the story from the mailonline, so completely pointless.  Captain Screebo Parley! 03:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Controversy section removed
I noticed that the same user who added the very promotional-sounding information on the new buildings also removed the whole "controversy" section in this edit. I'm not sure personally whether it should be restored or not, but it was sourced, and it seems like the motive for its removal was more reputational than encyclopedic... 80.2.240.75 (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

What is the etymology of “Orley”?
Should be byworded. 2A00:23C7:2B13:9001:D026:DB22:D58:636D (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2023 (UTC)