:Let me address these in order: 
 :1) I sympathise with your desire to adopt a narrower scope for the article.  I made a similar argument in Data from Oregon court case; however, the apparent consensus was that this article can contain almost any material pertaining to laws or court cases relating to circumcision.  I believe this to be a mistake, but a greater mistake would be to apply it inconsistently in only one part of the article.  I see what you mean about the link: we can change it to CIRP's reprint here. 
 :2) I don't object to moving it to a separate paragraph. 
 :3) This seems like original research.