Regnerus Study: Criticism 

Previous versions of this article unnecessarily multiplied references to criticism of the New Family Structures Study. 

First of all, this article is ostensibly about the Witherspoon Institute, not the New Family Structures Study, and it does not make sense to devote so much space to one study in what is otherwise a small article about an organization that has done many other things, as mentioned in the earlier paragraphs. 

Further, there is already a reference to the fact that the Study received criticism, down toward the end of the article. That same sentence also refers to the fact that many scholars also voiced praise for the Study, and thereby gives much more balance than the earlier discussion of criticism.

The fact remains that the Study was published by a peer-reviewed journal and was conducted at a major research university that has not condemned it. Some people voiced concerns to the same university that the study had not been conducted properly and the university found that the concerns did not merit further scrutiny. This Study has received the same vetting that countless other academic studies have received, including ones that came to very different conclusions.

In short, previous representations of criticism in this article about this Study were unnecessarily long, presented the Study in a very biased light, and made this article into a forum for voicing opinions that is properly handled in the academy through the methods of peer review and institutional review that the Study already passed. By ignoring those very processes of review such discussion does a disservice to Wikipedia's readers and suggests that the critics have a problem with the academic review processes as such, not the New Family Structures Study itself.