I shall ignore your stupid personal insults. My mention of "only 15 years" was not in any way to defend any such policy, but merely to point out how different that is from the impression you initially gave, with your "long history" introduction and no mention of 1945, that this policy had been there for centuries and might still be in force. Without looking any further, this impression is obviously disproven by the fact that Ayer himself was at Eton, which is why I pointed that out. Of course I am aware that he was there long before 1945. I have never doubted that there was antisemitic feeling at Eton, as was generally the case among some or all of the English upper classes, and I said so at the outset, and that is reflected in the revised opening that I have put on the paragraph, "In the past, Eton has been guilty of antisemitism, like English society generally". This sets the matter properly in context. The bald assertion in the Tablet article  "Eton (....) required that its students' fathers be British by birth, so as to keep out the Jews"  on which you based your initial intervention, proves to be without justification, as I said all along, and as you now seem to be admitting. And yes, I do think you should amend the article to make it clear that any anti-Jewish policy applied only to King's Scholars. It's not that that makes it any better (I never said any of this was good), just that it is misleading not to include that qualification. As for the idea that Eton is precious to me, anyone who knows my personal views about the English class system and private education will find that extremely hilarious. You should not make such silly assumptions. I already said that I hold no brief for Eton. I am simply concerned that the article be accurate. My personal opinions (which happen to be leftwing and pro-Jewish) have nothing to do with it. It is a requirement for editing Wikipedia that one leaves one's own point of view at the door.