Talk:The Retail Ombudsman (United Kingdom)

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) --Arty1966 (talk) 11:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC) The initial full article has now been completed to identify correct content.

Resignation - ref?
We need a ref for the claim that TRO has resigned from the industry body, and a ref supporting in the claim that by doing so it must stop describing itself as an ombudsman. As to the first, I can only find this, but it's mostly behind a paywall, and I don't know (and frankly rather doubt) that it would qualify as a WP:RS. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 16:55, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

This has now been clarified with a reference here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Retail_Ombudsman_(United_Kingdom)#Loss_of_Ombudsman_Status 86.168.219.59 (talk) 22:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

RfC about the section covering the Groceries Code Adjudicator
Is the section of this page covering the Groceries Code Adjudicator relevant, or should it be removed? Amisom (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging the three editors who have advocated for this material to be included:.


 * Remove—the Groceries Code Adjudicator is an entirely separate scheme and has absolutely no connection whatsoever with the Retail Ombudsman. They are both ombudsmen alongside dozens of others in the UK and have no special links at all. Whether or not the content is sourced is not the issu. This article should not include irrelevant content. See also WP:GERMANE and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Amisom (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment The revision I performed was the replacing of sourced material, hence why it was done. Thank you for opening the RfC on this as well. I'll admit this is not an area I'm familiar with, can you give any info on what connection the Adjudicator has with this organization, if any? RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:28, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's unfortunate that you reverted a well-intended edit if you're not familiar with the area and didn't have any basis for considering its rationale, expressed in the edit summary, to be incorrec. As for your question about what links the Grocery Adjudciator has to the REtail Ombudsman: It literally has none. That's why I removed the information – it's true, but then so is "The capital of Italy is Rome". But I have no idea why it was inserted into the article (the user who did so has been banned indefinitely for sockpuppetry I see) Amisom (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the explanation, and the revision was merely a formality that is all, as it appeared an edit war was on-going and this was reverted to start this discussion. Seeing as the two have no connection, other than a tangible link I support the removal of the section, as it has nothing to do with the topic at hand. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Closed RfC per consensus. Thanks. Amisom (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2017 (UTC)