Talk:The London Clinic

Editing their own page: neutrality concern
See page history from 5/23/16 and 5/26/16, also discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rathfelder#The_London_Clinic. I tend to agree with Rathfelder but I am not much of a Wikipedia editor, so I don't know the protocols. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.189.157 (talk) 04:19, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Discussion at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Rathfelder#The_London_Clinic reproduced below for completeness:

Hi Rathfelder, I saw that The London Clinic's wiki page mentions a 2 star rating from the Food Standards Agency, I wanted to remove this as it is now out of date content. (The London Clinic has now been awarded 5 stars)

Do you see any issue with removing the 2 star sentence and only mention the most recent 5 star rating? Thanks, Alastair — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLondonClinic (talk • contribs) 14:26, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I think we should leave it. It's, among other things, evidence of improvement.  And if you are part of the clinic you shouldn't be editing this article.Rathfelder (talk) 16:36, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


 * I have again removed extensive material taken from the clinic's website and press releases. Dormskirk (talk) 18:59, 31 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I have removed even more today. Interestingly I have searched the London Clinic's website for its own conflict of interest policy - the website does not seem to mention one - perhaps that's not surprising given their apparent lack of observance of wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline. Dormskirk (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

The Clinic
The article mentions The Clinic (newspaper) in the "See also" section - but that's a Chilean newspaper. Was that the name of a publication of the outfit? —  Ark25  (talk) 01:46, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Now removed. Dormskirk (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2019 (UTC)