(edit conflict) 
 Beejaypii logic seems flawless Jake and extremely difficult to argue with.  We must employ logic and common sense to weight notability.  Coppertwig is impressed with your argument but accepts it on flawed reasoning ie "I think a significant percentage of people coming to read this page are probably doing so with the WHO recommendations or HIV prevention in mind." Why?  I highly doubt it.  I also highly doubt that those who are circumcised feel safe to have sex with infected HIV persons, at least I hope they do not.  What exactly are we trying to accomplish here?  Yes circumcision slightly reduces transmission rates of infectious disease because of the tougher skin.  Overall this is meaningless unless you refuse to practice safe sex.  When it comes to HIV WHO wants to roll the dice and hope you don't crap out. (note the pun was intentional) Sorry I want full proof methods when it comes to do or die. What WHO is essentially saying is humans are too stupid to practice safe sex so circumcision will reduce transmission rates.  Because of scientific research this should be documented in the article.  Does it belong in the lead as something that makes circumcision notable?  I think not.