Talk:James Lind Alliance

The article does not promote this organisation as a service or a business, but simply informs of its existence and achievements. It is a not-for-profit venture.

Rewrites
You'd be surprised at how spammy non-profit organisations can be at times. To me, it looks fairly neutral now - looking back at the first version I can see why it was tagged. It's not easy to take a neutral view of something you're involved with. Often, it takes tagging to push the creator into doing a rewrite. (I do that sometimes - I'm quite happy if a sound rewrite happens as a result. We're not scalp-hunters. We do want to see good articles. Persistent abuse is another matter...) Peridon (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Paddington54321 (talk) 17:18, 15 February 2009 (UTC) Hi I hope the edits I've now done (including citing sound references) will ensure the article isn't speedily deleted! Any tips appreciated as I am new to this.
 * Tip from the person who placed the speedy delete tag. The reason your article was tagged as spam was the large number of external links to your organizations website. The single link at the bottom of the page would be more than sufficient. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 17:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Paddington54321 (talk) 17:26, 15 February 2009 (UTC) OK, thanks. I'll remove them. Anything else I can do to prevent the page from being deleted?
 * No, that was the one and only reason I tagged your page. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 17:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Links request
Mentioned at and linked from Iain Chalmers. Sam Weller (talk) 13:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)