I was more pointing out that the article contained that information already, and was more accurate, so didn't think that the Wikipedia link added anything.
I think it added the information to the thread. I live in the UK and had never heard of Booths despite having travelled around. At first, I thought the article was wrong and meant the Boots drugstore chain instead. Knowing that it's a local, small chain would have helped clarify it.
And yes, reading the article would do that as well but I usually read the comments first before I decide if I want to waste time on the actual thing.
I can understand that. But from my viewpoint it felt like you were telling me something you thought I wasn't aware of, even though I had read the article before making my comment, or perhaps you thought the number in the article was wrong while the one from Wikipedia was correct.
I'm saying the person you were responding to has added to this thread, at least for me. You were questioning the value of their comment, and I'm saying this is it.