Update: 

 The BNF clearly went to a bit of effort to add a long piece on all of the wonderful things they do. However, I took issue with the following: 

 1) Repetitive. It kept hammering home the same lines over and over, which made it sound suspiciously like advertising. 
 2) Biased tone. It was written as though it is completely plain and obvious to all right-thinking persons that the BNF are lovely and benevolent and everything they do is perfectly wonderful and they are impugnable champions of pure science and reason. In short, it read like an advertising piece. It was not written in an appropriate fashion for an encyclopedia article.  
 3) References. There were none. Not a one. And it had even done away with the references that were in places in the previous version.