This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Didn't they change there name from "Boots Group" to "Reckitt Benckiser"?
Ansett 14:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Boots Healthcare International (which makes products like Hibitane and Strepsils) were sold off by BTC. BHI is now a part of the ReckittBenckiser Group.
ReckittBenckiser is a company formed after the merger of Reckitt Colman (a British company) and Benckiser (a Dutch company), for a full history (and their products) see their website: http://www.reckittbenckiser.com JHvW ( talk) 11:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Reckitt Benckiser bought out Boots Healthcare International and now make all the OTC, Over the counter Products Boots sells, Boots Group is an encorporation of Boots the Chemist and Boots Stores Ltd as far as i am concerned The Former Boots group, Now Alliance Boots is an encorporation of Alliance Unichem, Boots Group, Which is split into Alliance Unichem, Boots the Chemist and Boots stores Ltd.
77.101.229.144 ( talk) 21:00, 13 April 2012 (UTC) Perhaps the image should be changed to a larger version of the logo. This is, after all what a person looking for a store will be actually looking for.
Isn't "Boots the Chemists" just the name of the pharmacy side of Boots? This article looks at the company in a wider context, so surely this article should be moved to Boots Group? [1] violet/riga (t) 11:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone know? I assumed is was the founder's first name, but that seems to be John. Perhaps it should be explained? -- talkie_tim 16:31, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
A great book about the History of Boots entitled: 'Jesse Boot of Nottingham' by Christopher Weir is available. ISBN 1-873116-01-2
John Boot, Jesse's father opened the British and American Botanic Establishment in around 1849 -supplying herbal remedies of the time to the community.
-- 217.155.134.5 09:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
There are many errors in the disussion of the history of the Boots Group. John Morag Boot founded the company in 1849 with his wife, it´s humble beginning being a shop that sold herbal remedies. But his son Jesse bought his fathers share when John died in 1856. Jesse came up with the idea that people were willing to pay cash for their products if they were cheap. A novel idea at the time. His first stores were known as Boot's the Cash Chemists (later Boots the Chemists or BTC).
Jesse also quickly realised the promise of patented medicine, thus being one of the first chemists to employ pharmacists.
Jesse was an astute businessman. Under his governance Boots (as it became known) grew to hundreds of stores in the UK. Jesse did not rate his son John very highly and sold the company to American investors in 1920. John managed to regain a controlling interest though and expanded the company. JHvW ( talk) 11:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
In consequent discussions there a few facts that deserve mentioning: Probably for tax reasons the original Boot´s company was split up in entities specializing in their specific area of expertise, these were:
But not forgetting Boots the Opticiens and other Boots subsidiairies like the Boots real estate branch.
Boots PLC was also owner of chains like Halfords and Do-it-All.
Although the Alliance Boots company is called a merger it is technically a take-over. Boots has effectively bought Alliance. The discussion therefore should be about the origins of both companies, warranting seperate entries in the Wikipedia.
What should also be mentioned is that Boots was a public listed company ( PLC). AllianceBoots was taken over by KKR in 2007. It is now effectively a private company.
JHvW ( talk) 19:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC) (formerly a store manager for Boots and Boots historian)
Anyone know more about this?
Have a look here: [3] Wikiwoohoo 16:40, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Am I the only one who images the CEO as a tabby cat wearing a suit? Named... (wait for it)... ..."Mittens", just out of irony? -- 71.133.137.41 02:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I was thinking that perhaps this article could be possibly renamed and sections transferred to the Alliance Boots article now that Boots Group Plc has been Alliance Boots since Monday 30th of July 2006. This article could now become Boots the Chemist or something similar, now that the company is no longer Boots Group. What do other people think? Wikiwoohoo 19:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
As the main author/ editor of the new Alliance Boots article, I agree with Wikiwoohoo about re-naming 'Boots Group' either 'The Boots Company' or 'Boots the Chemists' as the Boots Group PLC no longer exists.
However, I would not merge Boots Group or Alliance UniChem completely into Alliance Boots as it would mean losing information and facts, or readers not being able to find what they are looking for. With previous mergers, such as the Morrisons buyout of Safeway, or NTL's takeover of Telewest and Virgin Mobile UK, their respective pages have been maintained.
Why don't you, Wikiwoohoo carry out this task?
Many thanks, Bannister Ventures
Yes do
Would anyone be opposed to the addition of an external link to Boots Manufacturing's website? Just to clarify, BM is a wholey own subsidiary of the group, the same as Boots The Chemist, which there is a link for.
Thanks & regards
How it is 00:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I, myself am an employee of the Alliance Boots Group, and as result of the merger Boots has been Forced to close several of its branchs, thankfully this has not affected my branch but employees i know from another store are very Irate that they were not kept informed of theie possible redundency and that no attempt has been made to move them to other local branches when GSM's (group store managers) and GPM's (group pharmacy managers)said this would be happen. I feel that i like the company i work for but i agree that more could be done for employee, employer relations. --
Gocartsforelephants 22:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Nothing about them testing on animals? This is one of the most cruel acts imaginable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RDMio ( talk • contribs) 03:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC).
Boots are retailers: they no longer make stuff. And I can think of vastly crueller things than testing pharmaceuticals on animals: 90% of human children dying before the age of five, or a slow pain-racked death from cancer without modern painkillers to name but two... 77.101.229.144 ( talk) 21:18, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Boots don't test on animals. "No animal testing of any kind is undertaken or commissioned by Boots or its subsidiary businesses. We would like to see an end to all animal tests and we give financial and technical support to the development and introduction of alternative forms of safety testing." Source: http://www.boots-uk.com/App_Portals/BootsUK/Media/PDFs/CSR%202010/Animal-Testing-Policy-Statement-Jan08nosig2.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.185.240.121 ( talk) 11:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
== Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd. [1953] 1 Q.B. 401; [1953] 1 All E.R. 482
==
Shouldn't the article make reference to this case? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Society_of_Great_Britain_v._Boots_Cash_Chemists_%28Southern%29_Ltd. This was a key decision on contract law affecting retail all around the world. Logically any article about boots has to cite the way they opperated their business, shaped the pharmaceutical business so much to how it is today?-- Kbbbb 13:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
This article should be moved to The Boots Company Plc.
Following merger with Alliance Unichem Plc, the Boots Group Plc (formerly The Boots Company Plc) is now known as Alliance Boots Limited.
163.167.129.124 15:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, is anyone prepared to move this page to "The Boots Company"? I would do it, but there's a good change I'll screw it up...
How it is (
talk) 01:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
This section should be expanded. It is now quite cryptic what "D6" or "D10" stand for. LHOON ( talk) 22:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
D6 and D10 are actually the names of the buildings themselves. They were designed by Sir E Owen Williams for the Boots Company.
D6 [1] [2] [3] is part of the Boots buildings in Beeston in Nottingham, it is a Grade I listed building. D10 [4] [5] [6] was originally the headquarters of Boots Contract Manufacturing in Beeston. It is now a Grade I listed building (probably the largest in the UK). It is still in use by Boots.
D31, D34 [7] and D90 are other buildings but are rated grade II, buildings of special interest, warranting every effort to preserve them. JHvW ( talk) 07:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Would be interesting to have something about the claims against Boots made by UK Uncut http://www.ukuncut.org.uk/targets/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.5.227.196 ( talk) 22:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. See below for further information. |
Hi.
I'm employed by RLM Finsbury, a communications company. I'm using my Wikipedia account to contribute to the Wikipedia community.
I intend to suggest improvements to articles regarding my client, Alliance Boots. This will include noting any inaccurate information.
Please contact me on my Talk Page if you have any questions.
Thanks.
Side Bar Please could you update the Side Bar section to:
Richard Bradley, Pharmacy Director at Boots UK
SOURCE: http://www.p3pharmacy.co.uk/boots-targets-teenage-boys-with-hpv-service
SourcingABC (
talk) 11:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. See below for further information. |
Hi there, the issue is that it currently states 'Richard Bradley, managing director, Boots Ireland' which changed last year to 'Richard Bradley, Pharmacy Director at Boots UK'. So in short, it's a different job role. Hopefully that makes sense. Thank you in advance.
We have sections for history up to 2000, and after 2000. The contents are mixed up, and there's no apparent reason for the split. Can I suggest the sections are merged? -- Olires ( talk) 08:40, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
My contribution pointing out a cultural reference to Boots was expunged by an editor paid by Boots. GenacGenac ( talk) 17:04, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Regardless, I restored my In Popular Culture section, this time impeccably cited with wiki and external references. Is there some standard suggesting cultural reference have no value with respect to commercial enterprise documentation? Evidently so, since again I find the pop culture section expunged. [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by GenacGenac ( talk • contribs) 19:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
There has been discussion about adding a reference to this orchestra here but it's longish with some unpleasantness and IMO many misunderstandings.
The question is simply, can we source the connection of Boots to this group?
One point I must make here is that this is about sources, but not about notability. This seems to have been a problem in previous discussions. A topic needs to be notable to have its own article, but non-notable topics can be mentioned in articles on other (notable) topics. It is perhaps a subtle point but IMO important.
Or to put it another way, just because something is mentioned in sourced, relevant material in an article, that doesn't automatically mean that it qualifies for an article of its own. The bar is much higher for notability.
Of course what we want is reliable secondary sources. The Orchestra website is a primary source and not all that helpful. Andrewa ( talk) 18:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Here's one possible source... the British and International Music Yearbook 2009 [5] seems to have had a writeup. But we can only use that to source the things it says of course, here's what it says in part... Formed in 1951 and supported by Boots company....
Sources do not need to be online, they just need to be available. I'd suggest that someone in Nottingham pay a visit to a library and/or local newspaper. Surely there have been articles published on this Orchestra, locally?
The other thing is we need to avoid giving the orchestra undue weight. The article is about Boots UK. Do they support other similar causes and groups? If so we need to cover all of these, not just this one Orchestra. Andrewa ( talk) 02:26, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
A tertiary source can be found using Google Books: an entry in The British and International Music Yearbook - 2009
Secondary source No. 1 - Ruddington Parish Council's web site independently displays an advert for a concert given for charity by The Boots Orchestra at St Peter's Church in Ruddington on 14 November 2015.
Secondary source No. 2 - Southwell.Anglican Organisation's website independently provides information about the summer concert given for charity by The Boots Orchestra on Saturday 18th June 2016 at St Andrews Church, Langar, Nottinghamshire. Anameisbutaname Talk 21:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Primary source No. 1 - Sherwood United Reformed Church's web site advertising a concert given for charity by The Boots Orchestra which was held there on 16 November 2013.
Primary source No. 2 - A DVD held in the Reference Library at Hucknall Public Library in Nottinghamshire.
Sources relating to the key issue mentioned in the section headed "Boots Orchestra" on this Talk page:
"The article is about Boots UK. Do they support other similar causes and groups?"
If / when I can find enough details (author, publisher, ISBN number, etc.) of any other reliable secondary sources I will add them to this list. Anameisbutaname Talk 03:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
The See also section probably isn't the right place, see MOS:ALSO. Andrewa ( talk) 01:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
This has turned out to be a learning curve for me too.
Our policies and guidelines are IMO not quite consistent. (No surprise I'm afraid. But we're here to write the best possible encyclopedia, not a perfect rulebook.)
On the one hand, the letter of the law says Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source [6] and Wikipedia's content policies require an inline citation to a reliable source for... Any statement that has been challenged (e.g., by being removed, questioned on the talk page, or tagged with citation needed, or any similar tag...). [7]
On the other hand, these statements are qualified and to some extent contradicted by adjacent statements, and the spirit of the law is that material that is easily verified does not need references at all. They're a good idea, but not required. Andrewa ( talk) 19:16, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Moved as proposed. BD2412 T 05:19, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Boots UK → Boots (company) – The current title is a poor choice IMHO. This company is almost always referred to as "Boots", and this should be the name of the article, with the added (company) for disambiguation. "Boots UK" is very awkward. Moreover, Companies House lists the company as THE BOOTS COMPANY PLC, so "Boots UK" is not even the registered name. Elshad ( talk) 19:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
This was originally a draft section, here on this Talk page, that is now posted on the main page for Boots UK just after the Section headed "The Boots Charitable Trust". Anameisbutaname Talk 16:06, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Didn't they change there name from "Boots Group" to "Reckitt Benckiser"?
Ansett 14:43, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Boots Healthcare International (which makes products like Hibitane and Strepsils) were sold off by BTC. BHI is now a part of the ReckittBenckiser Group.
ReckittBenckiser is a company formed after the merger of Reckitt Colman (a British company) and Benckiser (a Dutch company), for a full history (and their products) see their website: http://www.reckittbenckiser.com JHvW ( talk) 11:47, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Reckitt Benckiser bought out Boots Healthcare International and now make all the OTC, Over the counter Products Boots sells, Boots Group is an encorporation of Boots the Chemist and Boots Stores Ltd as far as i am concerned The Former Boots group, Now Alliance Boots is an encorporation of Alliance Unichem, Boots Group, Which is split into Alliance Unichem, Boots the Chemist and Boots stores Ltd.
77.101.229.144 ( talk) 21:00, 13 April 2012 (UTC) Perhaps the image should be changed to a larger version of the logo. This is, after all what a person looking for a store will be actually looking for.
Isn't "Boots the Chemists" just the name of the pharmacy side of Boots? This article looks at the company in a wider context, so surely this article should be moved to Boots Group? [1] violet/riga (t) 11:54, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Does anyone know? I assumed is was the founder's first name, but that seems to be John. Perhaps it should be explained? -- talkie_tim 16:31, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
A great book about the History of Boots entitled: 'Jesse Boot of Nottingham' by Christopher Weir is available. ISBN 1-873116-01-2
John Boot, Jesse's father opened the British and American Botanic Establishment in around 1849 -supplying herbal remedies of the time to the community.
-- 217.155.134.5 09:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
There are many errors in the disussion of the history of the Boots Group. John Morag Boot founded the company in 1849 with his wife, it´s humble beginning being a shop that sold herbal remedies. But his son Jesse bought his fathers share when John died in 1856. Jesse came up with the idea that people were willing to pay cash for their products if they were cheap. A novel idea at the time. His first stores were known as Boot's the Cash Chemists (later Boots the Chemists or BTC).
Jesse also quickly realised the promise of patented medicine, thus being one of the first chemists to employ pharmacists.
Jesse was an astute businessman. Under his governance Boots (as it became known) grew to hundreds of stores in the UK. Jesse did not rate his son John very highly and sold the company to American investors in 1920. John managed to regain a controlling interest though and expanded the company. JHvW ( talk) 11:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
In consequent discussions there a few facts that deserve mentioning: Probably for tax reasons the original Boot´s company was split up in entities specializing in their specific area of expertise, these were:
But not forgetting Boots the Opticiens and other Boots subsidiairies like the Boots real estate branch.
Boots PLC was also owner of chains like Halfords and Do-it-All.
Although the Alliance Boots company is called a merger it is technically a take-over. Boots has effectively bought Alliance. The discussion therefore should be about the origins of both companies, warranting seperate entries in the Wikipedia.
What should also be mentioned is that Boots was a public listed company ( PLC). AllianceBoots was taken over by KKR in 2007. It is now effectively a private company.
JHvW ( talk) 19:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC) (formerly a store manager for Boots and Boots historian)
Anyone know more about this?
Have a look here: [3] Wikiwoohoo 16:40, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Am I the only one who images the CEO as a tabby cat wearing a suit? Named... (wait for it)... ..."Mittens", just out of irony? -- 71.133.137.41 02:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
I was thinking that perhaps this article could be possibly renamed and sections transferred to the Alliance Boots article now that Boots Group Plc has been Alliance Boots since Monday 30th of July 2006. This article could now become Boots the Chemist or something similar, now that the company is no longer Boots Group. What do other people think? Wikiwoohoo 19:23, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
As the main author/ editor of the new Alliance Boots article, I agree with Wikiwoohoo about re-naming 'Boots Group' either 'The Boots Company' or 'Boots the Chemists' as the Boots Group PLC no longer exists.
However, I would not merge Boots Group or Alliance UniChem completely into Alliance Boots as it would mean losing information and facts, or readers not being able to find what they are looking for. With previous mergers, such as the Morrisons buyout of Safeway, or NTL's takeover of Telewest and Virgin Mobile UK, their respective pages have been maintained.
Why don't you, Wikiwoohoo carry out this task?
Many thanks, Bannister Ventures
Yes do
Would anyone be opposed to the addition of an external link to Boots Manufacturing's website? Just to clarify, BM is a wholey own subsidiary of the group, the same as Boots The Chemist, which there is a link for.
Thanks & regards
How it is 00:47, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I, myself am an employee of the Alliance Boots Group, and as result of the merger Boots has been Forced to close several of its branchs, thankfully this has not affected my branch but employees i know from another store are very Irate that they were not kept informed of theie possible redundency and that no attempt has been made to move them to other local branches when GSM's (group store managers) and GPM's (group pharmacy managers)said this would be happen. I feel that i like the company i work for but i agree that more could be done for employee, employer relations. --
Gocartsforelephants 22:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Nothing about them testing on animals? This is one of the most cruel acts imaginable. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RDMio ( talk • contribs) 03:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC).
Boots are retailers: they no longer make stuff. And I can think of vastly crueller things than testing pharmaceuticals on animals: 90% of human children dying before the age of five, or a slow pain-racked death from cancer without modern painkillers to name but two... 77.101.229.144 ( talk) 21:18, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Boots don't test on animals. "No animal testing of any kind is undertaken or commissioned by Boots or its subsidiary businesses. We would like to see an end to all animal tests and we give financial and technical support to the development and introduction of alternative forms of safety testing." Source: http://www.boots-uk.com/App_Portals/BootsUK/Media/PDFs/CSR%202010/Animal-Testing-Policy-Statement-Jan08nosig2.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.185.240.121 ( talk) 11:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
== Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd. [1953] 1 Q.B. 401; [1953] 1 All E.R. 482
==
Shouldn't the article make reference to this case? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharmaceutical_Society_of_Great_Britain_v._Boots_Cash_Chemists_%28Southern%29_Ltd. This was a key decision on contract law affecting retail all around the world. Logically any article about boots has to cite the way they opperated their business, shaped the pharmaceutical business so much to how it is today?-- Kbbbb 13:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
This article should be moved to The Boots Company Plc.
Following merger with Alliance Unichem Plc, the Boots Group Plc (formerly The Boots Company Plc) is now known as Alliance Boots Limited.
163.167.129.124 15:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, is anyone prepared to move this page to "The Boots Company"? I would do it, but there's a good change I'll screw it up...
How it is (
talk) 01:34, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
This section should be expanded. It is now quite cryptic what "D6" or "D10" stand for. LHOON ( talk) 22:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
D6 and D10 are actually the names of the buildings themselves. They were designed by Sir E Owen Williams for the Boots Company.
D6 [1] [2] [3] is part of the Boots buildings in Beeston in Nottingham, it is a Grade I listed building. D10 [4] [5] [6] was originally the headquarters of Boots Contract Manufacturing in Beeston. It is now a Grade I listed building (probably the largest in the UK). It is still in use by Boots.
D31, D34 [7] and D90 are other buildings but are rated grade II, buildings of special interest, warranting every effort to preserve them. JHvW ( talk) 07:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Would be interesting to have something about the claims against Boots made by UK Uncut http://www.ukuncut.org.uk/targets/1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.5.227.196 ( talk) 22:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. See below for further information. |
Hi.
I'm employed by RLM Finsbury, a communications company. I'm using my Wikipedia account to contribute to the Wikipedia community.
I intend to suggest improvements to articles regarding my client, Alliance Boots. This will include noting any inaccurate information.
Please contact me on my Talk Page if you have any questions.
Thanks.
Side Bar Please could you update the Side Bar section to:
Richard Bradley, Pharmacy Director at Boots UK
SOURCE: http://www.p3pharmacy.co.uk/boots-targets-teenage-boys-with-hpv-service
SourcingABC (
talk) 11:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. See below for further information. |
Hi there, the issue is that it currently states 'Richard Bradley, managing director, Boots Ireland' which changed last year to 'Richard Bradley, Pharmacy Director at Boots UK'. So in short, it's a different job role. Hopefully that makes sense. Thank you in advance.
We have sections for history up to 2000, and after 2000. The contents are mixed up, and there's no apparent reason for the split. Can I suggest the sections are merged? -- Olires ( talk) 08:40, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
My contribution pointing out a cultural reference to Boots was expunged by an editor paid by Boots. GenacGenac ( talk) 17:04, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
Regardless, I restored my In Popular Culture section, this time impeccably cited with wiki and external references. Is there some standard suggesting cultural reference have no value with respect to commercial enterprise documentation? Evidently so, since again I find the pop culture section expunged. [4] — Preceding unsigned comment added by GenacGenac ( talk • contribs) 19:16, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
There has been discussion about adding a reference to this orchestra here but it's longish with some unpleasantness and IMO many misunderstandings.
The question is simply, can we source the connection of Boots to this group?
One point I must make here is that this is about sources, but not about notability. This seems to have been a problem in previous discussions. A topic needs to be notable to have its own article, but non-notable topics can be mentioned in articles on other (notable) topics. It is perhaps a subtle point but IMO important.
Or to put it another way, just because something is mentioned in sourced, relevant material in an article, that doesn't automatically mean that it qualifies for an article of its own. The bar is much higher for notability.
Of course what we want is reliable secondary sources. The Orchestra website is a primary source and not all that helpful. Andrewa ( talk) 18:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Here's one possible source... the British and International Music Yearbook 2009 [5] seems to have had a writeup. But we can only use that to source the things it says of course, here's what it says in part... Formed in 1951 and supported by Boots company....
Sources do not need to be online, they just need to be available. I'd suggest that someone in Nottingham pay a visit to a library and/or local newspaper. Surely there have been articles published on this Orchestra, locally?
The other thing is we need to avoid giving the orchestra undue weight. The article is about Boots UK. Do they support other similar causes and groups? If so we need to cover all of these, not just this one Orchestra. Andrewa ( talk) 02:26, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
A tertiary source can be found using Google Books: an entry in The British and International Music Yearbook - 2009
Secondary source No. 1 - Ruddington Parish Council's web site independently displays an advert for a concert given for charity by The Boots Orchestra at St Peter's Church in Ruddington on 14 November 2015.
Secondary source No. 2 - Southwell.Anglican Organisation's website independently provides information about the summer concert given for charity by The Boots Orchestra on Saturday 18th June 2016 at St Andrews Church, Langar, Nottinghamshire. Anameisbutaname Talk 21:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Primary source No. 1 - Sherwood United Reformed Church's web site advertising a concert given for charity by The Boots Orchestra which was held there on 16 November 2013.
Primary source No. 2 - A DVD held in the Reference Library at Hucknall Public Library in Nottinghamshire.
Sources relating to the key issue mentioned in the section headed "Boots Orchestra" on this Talk page:
"The article is about Boots UK. Do they support other similar causes and groups?"
If / when I can find enough details (author, publisher, ISBN number, etc.) of any other reliable secondary sources I will add them to this list. Anameisbutaname Talk 03:05, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
The See also section probably isn't the right place, see MOS:ALSO. Andrewa ( talk) 01:20, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
This has turned out to be a learning curve for me too.
Our policies and guidelines are IMO not quite consistent. (No surprise I'm afraid. But we're here to write the best possible encyclopedia, not a perfect rulebook.)
On the one hand, the letter of the law says Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source [6] and Wikipedia's content policies require an inline citation to a reliable source for... Any statement that has been challenged (e.g., by being removed, questioned on the talk page, or tagged with citation needed, or any similar tag...). [7]
On the other hand, these statements are qualified and to some extent contradicted by adjacent statements, and the spirit of the law is that material that is easily verified does not need references at all. They're a good idea, but not required. Andrewa ( talk) 19:16, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
Moved as proposed. BD2412 T 05:19, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Boots UK → Boots (company) – The current title is a poor choice IMHO. This company is almost always referred to as "Boots", and this should be the name of the article, with the added (company) for disambiguation. "Boots UK" is very awkward. Moreover, Companies House lists the company as THE BOOTS COMPANY PLC, so "Boots UK" is not even the registered name. Elshad ( talk) 19:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
This was originally a draft section, here on this Talk page, that is now posted on the main page for Boots UK just after the Section headed "The Boots Charitable Trust". Anameisbutaname Talk 16:06, 4 May 2019 (UTC)