Talk:British Council

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Academic Journals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Academic Journals 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.Academic JournalsWikipedia:WikiProject Academic JournalsTemplate:WikiProject Academic JournalsAcademic Journal articles
See WikiProject Academic Journals' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

International relations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.

Organizations

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Radio

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Radio, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Radio-related subjects 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.RadioWikipedia:WikiProject RadioTemplate:WikiProject RadioRadio articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Create: Missing years and articles in radio, National Association of Radio Distress-Signalling and Infocommunications (Hungary)
Assess : Unassessed Radio articles; Unknown-importance Radio articles
Cleanup : Radio articles needing attention
Expand : Midweek Politics Bob Crane
Maintain : Portal:Radio
Stubs : Expand: Radio stubs
Verify : Unreferenced BLPs
Other : Collaboration of the Week:
Requests for Radio peer review:

Physical Library to Online Library in Mumbai

In Feb 2010, the physical library transitioned to a virtual library titled 'MyLibrary' where anybody can still borrow books and the books will be delivered to their doorstep. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.117.233 (talk) 05:26, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On references

Please, use the references tools properly!!!!!!!!!! One of the persons editing this article has terrible skills and should first learn how to use the tools.

Status

The British Council is incorrectly categorised as a department of the UK government. Note that it is a charity, and the Charity Commission gives as a "Key Legal Principle" that "Charities must be independent of government and other funders" http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/supportingcharities/polstat.asp . Clearly the British Council, as a legal charity, must by definition be independent of government, and so cannot be a department of the UK government. It is also true that the British Council receives government funding - £186.2 million in the current year. Its status is therefore anomalous.

I'm not sure it is, many charities in the UK have their single biggest funding source as the UK government in one form or another. Alci12 15:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed - it is a non-departmental public body. I have changed the category. MuddyDave 13:57, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why then is the BC in China based in the British Embassy? Which other charities are at home in Embassies? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.172.54.170 (talk) 04:46, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is becoming a mess

Want an example of the failure of the Wikipedia method over a standard encyclopedia? Look no further than this page. This article could easily be used by critics as an example of how Wikipedia isn't working very well. I find it sad that this article is such a mess and reads more like a rant than serving the purpose of providing useful information. I have been keeping an eye on the page for a couple of years now (years!) and it just seems to be getting worse. I am a teacher of the British Council and so cannot do anything myself, but it is clearly a biased (I would say twisted) look at an organisation that (in the opinion of a lot of people) does a lot of good work.Bcgstanley 13:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can bring specific issues, other than your own rant for fixing. Does a certain paragraph need more references? Is one section not impartial enough, if so, where can we get the other point of view? Help good-faith editors better the article. From Selma to Fresno (talk) 18:25, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is becoming a mess, with claims and counterclaims, text apparently written by British Council representatives, text commenting on other parts of the article, etc. It needs to be reviewed in depth be disinterested editors. — Grstain | Talk 19:52, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The interference with this site by British Council's propaganda team is evident from both the History log and from the cackhanded used of first person in large sections of this entry. This is positively Orwellian. It is unhelpful, however, for so-called 'disinterested parties' to help them out in this blatant PR exercise by removing inconvenient Hansard references and other authoritative and well-documented sources available on the internet. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.242.107 (talk • contribs) .

If you want to add criticism, source it from reliable published sources like newspapers. Don't use what is probably your blog. That senior managers 'admitted' to having 1,809 teachers out of 7,925 staff doesn't seem like a big deal; the questioning MPs don't pick up on it.--Nydas^(Talk) 20:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know this guy Nydas but I can assure her/him that I perhaps know a bit more about the topic under discussion than contributors who believe all newspapers are 'reliable published sources'. Some are, some aren't. S/He also makes the incorrect assumption that any information being added by those who dispute The British Council and Nydas's versions of 'the truth' "use what is probably your blog". As I have no 'blog', this is equally wide of the mark.

This (wo)man Nydas has according to the history page removed what I can independently verify is an authoritative public commentary on British Council matters by an informed source - who is meticulous in providing references. Removal of such references remains as unhelpful as the attempts by The British Council's own Information Services unit to use Wikipedia for their own advertising. It is also clearly a misreading of Hansard for Nydas to assert that "MPs don't pick up on" the relative numbers of British Council staff in front-line work. Not only do they "pick up on" it, they even asked that question! I suggest that Nydas shift attention to areas in which s/he has some expertise instead. Like punctuation? Or is s/he a former diplomat? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.242.107 (talk • contribs) .

Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Newspapers, even bad ones, have editors and people responsible for fact checking. Blogs are self-published and are very rarely reliable.--Nydas^(Talk) 08:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Facts are chiels that winna ding. The sourced material Nydas objects to are factually based references. Wikipedia guidelines referred to [on blogs] are pretty clear that qualified references to such sites are perfectly OK where this is an acknowledged expert in the field. That is the case here I suggest. The guidelines are very clear as well that advertising is strictly forbidden. This Wikipedia entry has been repeatedly edited by British Council managers.

In respect of the British Council's staff weblog, that gives an insider view that is clearly relevant in assessing whether the additions to the Wikipedia entry by British Council Information Service (representing managers) bears a relation to the everyday experience of this strange organisation which takes reprisals against staff who criticise it publicly or online. British Council is a propaganda organisation, that was busted for not paying taxes in Russia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.241.234 (talk • contribs) .

This article is becoming useless. Half of it is pro British Council propaganda - written by marketing people in the British Council who don't even bother to hide their identity. It's completely unreferenced - there are no links to any external sites - there might as well just be one link to your own website. The sad thing is the British Council does a good job in many countries - but your input is so obviously corporate and partial I no longer care!

Even worse though, the criticism section seems to be written by people with an real axe to grind. It is so vitriolic and lacking in any objectivity that your average reader would ignore it anyway. It sounds very similar in content to an equally one sided blog that bangs away against the British Council. Why don't we just delete everything and have one link to the British Council Corporate site and another to an anti British Council blog? Cm17 00:30, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems strange that so many people have so many axes to grind about the British Council... I find myself, as an impartial observer, asking "Why"?... If, as suggested, British Council staff are taking part in an edit war, then it seems quite sad that these people, perhaps under instruction, or for other personal reasons, deem it fit to add bias to what should be an impartial source of information. "Just what is the British Council?", I find myself asking - a propaganda machine or what?...

Edit war

Please stop edit warring. Discuss here to achieve consensus and instead of expressing unsubstantiated opinions, forbidden by WP:TPG, provide verifiable reliable sources per guide below on referencing. Also sign posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ~ . Thank you. Tyrenius 19:40, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please take the disputed material out of the article, copy it onto this talk page, and discuss it with regard to references and achieving a balanced article per WP:NPOV. Tyrenius 23:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tidied up the article, and tagged elements which, in my view need to be cited. — Grstain | Talk 13:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not surprising that the article is a mess because the BC itself is a mess; a true chameleon. The article doesn't deal with the BC relationship to the private sector which is very ambiguous indeed. Does Wikipaedia want the PC version of the BC (from the BC) or something more worthwhile about how it is actually seen in practice by those who have the misfortune to have to deal with it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.172.54.170 (talk) 04:51, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Guide to referencing

Click on "show" to open contents.

Using references (citations)

I thought you might find it useful to have some information about references (refs) on wikipedia. These are important to validate your writing and inform the reader. Any editor can removed unreferenced material; and unsubstantiated articles may end up getting deleted, so when you add something to an article, it's highly advisable to also include a reference to say where it came from. Referencing may look daunting, but it's easy enough to do. Here's a guide to getting started.

Good references

A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text. To validate "Mike Brown climbed Everest", it's no good linking to a page about Everest, if Mike Brown isn't mentioned, nor to one on Mike Brown, if it doesn't say that he climbed Everest. You have to link to a source that proves his achievement is true. You must use Reliable sources, such as published books, mainstream press, authorised web sites, and official documents. Blogs, Myspace, Youtube, fan sites and extreme minority texts are not usually acceptable, nor is Original research, e.g. your own unpublished, or self-published, essay or research.

Simple referencing

The first thing you have to do is to create a "Notes and references" section. This goes towards the bottom of the page, below the "See also" section and above the "External links" section. Enter this code:

==Notes and references==

The next step is to put a reference in the text. Here is the code to do that. It goes at the end of the relevant term, phrase, sentence, or paragraph to which the note refers, and after punctuation such as a full stop, without a space (to prevent separation through line wrap):

Whatever text you put in between these two tags will become visible in the "Notes and references" section as your reference.

Test it out

Copy the following text, open the edit box for this page, paste it at the bottom (inserting your own text) and save the page:

==Reference test==

This is the text which you are going to reference.<ref> Substitute your own text in this space </ref>

==Notes and references==

(End of text to copy and paste.)

Information to include

You need to include the information to enable the reader to find your source. For a book it might look like this:

<ref> Smith, Timothy: "A Guide to Planets", page 29. Solar Publishing, 2001 </ref>

An online newspaper source would be:

<ref> Plunkett, John. [http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1601858,00.html "Sorrell accuses Murdoch of panic buying"], ''[[The Guardian]]'', [[2005-10-27]]. Retrieved on [[2005-10-27]]. </ref>

Note the square brackets around the URL. The format is [URL Title] with a space between the URL and the Title. If you do this the URL is hidden and the Title shows as the link. Use double apostrophes for the article title, and two single quote marks either side of the name of the paper (to generate italics).

The date after The Guardian is the date of the newspaper, and the date after "Retrieved on" is the date you accessed the site – useful for searching the web archive in case the link goes dead. Wikilinks (double square brackets which create an internal link to a wikipedia article) function inside the ref tags. Dates are wikilinked so that they work with user preference settings.

Citation templates

You may prefer to use a citation template to compile details of the source. The template goes between the ref tags and you fill out the fields you wish to. Basic templates can be found here: Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference

Same ref used twice or more

The first time a reference appears in the article, you can give it a simple name in the <ref> code:

<ref name=smith> DETAILS OF REF </ref>

The second time you use the same reference in the article, you need only to create a short cut instead of typing it all out again:

You can then use the short cut as many times as you want. Don't forget the /, or it will blank the rest of the article! A short cut will only pick up from higher up the page, so make sure the first ref is the full one. Some symbols don't work in the ref name, but you'll find out if you use them.

Example

You can see refs in action in the article William Bowyer (artist). There are 3 sources and they are each referenced 3 times. Each statement in the article has a footnote to show what its source is.

Next step

When you become familiar with the process, the next step is to have one section, "Footnotes", with links embedded in the text, and another, "References", which lists all of your references alphabetically with full details, e.g. for a book:

Lincoln, Abraham; Grant, U. S.; & Davis, Jefferson (1861). Resolving Family Differences Peacefully (3rd ed.). Gettysburg: Printing Press. ISBN 0-12-345678-9.

If you're ready to go into it further, these pages have detailed information:

I hope this helps. If you need any assistance, let me know. As a British Council employee I have to sday that it is run by a bunch of no-hopers. Morons the lot of 'em.

Tyrenius 19:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not an innocent actor in IR

The BC is an arm of the British government and may serve as cover for espionage. This article needs to address such charges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.194.63.129 (talk) 00:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Charges made by whom? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.122.161.195 (talk) 06:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody aparantly. Anything could be a cover for espionage...Larklight (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Information

Have added a section to this website regarding the IAESTE programme administered by the British Council in the UK. Only 1 reference really needed.

IAESTENI (talk) 11:43, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:IELTSlogo.jpg

The image File:IELTSlogo.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:38, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Historical anecdotes needed?

Is there any need for such an extensive 'historical anecdotes' section? Doesn't seem highly useful or noteworthy. Ankur Banerjee (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues tag removed

I have removed the multiple issues tag [1]. This tag has been in place for over a year with a large amount of editing to the article and little discussion on the talkpage. It is obvious to me that the tag does not reflect issues throughout the whole of this large article. It would be more constructive therefore if anyone with specific issues can tag those specific sections or sentences so that they can be dealt with. Polargeo (talk) 11:41, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Body language

The article starts:

The British Council is an arm's length body. . . .

Is this a grotesquely mixed metaphor that actually means something, and if so, what? Or is it merely nonsensical? -- Hoary (talk) 06:51, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian Literature Festival Went Ahead Eventually As Planned in 2011; in 2009 it was the British CONSUL not The British Council that 'stepped in'

Somebody - presumably linked to British Council ? - keeps trying to suggest that the Palestinian Literature Festival which Israel tried and failed to disrupt earlier this year somehow only went ahead because British Council relocated it to their premises. But this appears to be completely false: there is a video showing clearly that the event went ahead after some delay in the Occupied Territories as planned. The video footage speaks for itself. Here it is on You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADhr2ododX4&feature=channel_video_title The video clip attached to the Wikipedia entry for British Council appears to relate to an incident in 2009 not 2011. This features the British HM Consul-General in East Jerusalem 'stepping in' not British Council even though the proposed solution announced by HMCG on camera after reading the Israeli Court order pinned to the door of the original venue involved a switch to 'British Council premises'. This was however an intervention by HM Consulate General (ie The British Government) not The British Council - and no British Council officials are featured in the video evidence at all. The British Council office in East Jerusalem is in a converted cinema building above a kebab shop close by. In 2011, the Palestinian Literature Festival website features video evidence showing how Festival participants and local organisers defied an Israeli tear-gas attack to ensure that the Closing Event went ahead as planned despite Israeli harrassment. But again it is hard to see why this incident is featured on a Wikipedia entry for British Council which was after all only one of several sponsors of the annual Festival (along with The Open Society) which is organised by Palestinians. Trying to suggest that British Council 'stepped in' to save the day in 2009 is also misleading - the video footage shows it was the British Consulate that 'stepped in' rather than British Council (sic) and it thus seems strange to 'big-up' the BC role?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.3.231.118 (talk) 00:38, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BC activity across UK

This site has details of BC activity across UK, is it possible in use it in the article, as it seems quite important? http://activitymap.britishcouncil.org/ (79.190.69.142 (talk) 15:15, 12 June 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Involvement with Jeremy Hunt !

Jeremy Hunt - Health Minister - any connection with the British Council? His declared interests notes he receives £1000 a month for 2 hours work with them via his company Hot Courses - should this be added as a contemporary topic?212.139.100.203 (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)twl212.139.100.203 (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Funding

I know it's registered on the UK Charity Commission's website and is considered a charity but shouldn't there be at least a few sentences if not a section on how the British Council is funded? If it's something that can be summed up quickly then it can go into intro or into the history section, especially if it's been funded the same way since it's creation or there have been funding changes it. Cat-five t c ---- 04:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Food for thinkings softly speaking

Because file robots.txt forbids seek Japanese branch of the British Council. About: robots.txt. - 176.15.238.52 (talk) 22:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Article improvement

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard.

Hello, I’m in a Communications role here at the British Council and have joined Wikipedia as the article page has become pretty confusing and doesn’t appear to meet various Wikipedia standards. Given that I am an employee of the organisation, I am not able to make any edits to the article myself but would like to ask for the community’s help to see if there are any ways to make the article much better for a reader.

As a starter, I think it could be helpful if the article had information based around the three broad themes of the British Council’s work across the world (Arts, English and Exams, Education and Society)? Or, perhaps, it might be useful to include information about the British Council’s most up-to-date programmes and initiatives, which do not appear to be included in the article page as it is quite out-of-date in parts, for e.g., the Prime Minister’s Global Fellowship programme.

It would be great to know what the community thinks and if these sound like sensible suggestions to improve the article’s usefulness. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alis1716 (talk • contribs)

If you could write up exactly what you'd like inserted, and it is referenced/cited properly, I'd be happy to approve the edits, assuming they fall within guidelines. Wilipino (talk) 11:06, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Declining request. As Wilipino says, please provide specifics. – S. Rich (talk) 08:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on British Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:41, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on British Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:11, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on British Council. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151001083607/http://www.britishcouncil.org/new/PageFiles/6111/Industrial%20Relations.pdf to http://www.britishcouncil.org/new/PageFiles/6111/Industrial%20Relations.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Brussels Office budget and staff ?

Anybody? Brussels is the Capital of the EU. It would be interested to have an idea how much budget and staff they foresee to represent them at the EU institutions and have it compared to the budgets by other "International cultural organizations/Cultural promotion organizations" s.a. the Alliance Française, the Goethe Institut, the Instituto Cervantes, the Taalunie. Thy --SvenAERTS (talk) 21:20, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

British Council logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Modern English Academy Pattan (formerly known as Triumphant English Academy) provides best English speaking in Pattan town. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mir Zameer (talk • contribs) 13:54, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mir Zameer. This talk page is really only intended to be a place for discussing ways to improve the Wikipedia article British Council. It's not clear what "Modern English Academy Pattan" has to do with that and the content you've tried to add to the article about the school is not really appropriate for Wikipedia and has been removed. It appears that you might be misunderstanding the purpose of Wikipedia and a Wikipedia article; so, I suggest you take a look at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, particularly the part about "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion" for reference. Perhaps "Modern English Academy Pattan" is a really good English school, but that's not really relevant to the subject of this article and in general to really relevant to Wikipedia; if you want to tell everyone how great the schools, then perhaps there's an alternative that's a better place than Wikipedia where you can do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Libraries

I was quite surprised to find no mention of the libraries in this article, except in the "Cuts" section. The library is the first thing I think of when I think of the British Council. Also doesn't it seem we should at least mention that some of the branches have (or had) libraries before we talk about how they are being cut? GA-RT-22 (talk) 01:56, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

British Council Library in Colombo, Sri Lanka..jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:08, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

British Council Library in Colombo, Sri Lanka..jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:39, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]