Deletion of How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?

Comment: as POV fork arising from Talk:History of the race and intelligence controversy.  Creation appears to have been a tactic in the long-running content dispute related to Race and Intelligence, subject of a very large currently active ANI thread which is proposing to topic-ban quite a few of this AfD's "keep" proponents as agenda-driven single purpose accounts.  They are trying to spreadThis has the effect of spreading the drama to more venues.  I have some sympathy with Enric Naval's "weak keep" argument since the Jensen article is very widely cited.  We may be able to have an acceptable neutral article about it some day, depending on due-weight considerations raised by creating special prominence for this one topic by putting it in a separate article in a group of several closely related articles without justifying the splitting by  of existing articles.  However, wp:there is no deadline|there is no deadline and the wp:battleground|battleground issues surrounding this article make us better off without it for the moment even if it's a valid topic.  Its content can be saved to a sandbox for later re-use if that looks helpful.  Special:Contributions/69.228.170.24|69.228.170.24
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Article size (WP:SIZE)

Comment: an article on an...article?  Does not seem like there is any sound rationale being provided for how this meets .  Seems like people are confusing the the subject matter within the article with the article itself.  Not exactly the Magna Carta here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: please keep this discussion 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Civility (WP:CIVIL)

Comment: First -- so much for . As far as I'm concerned creating this article was a good faith effort to fix a problem that had tacit approval from multiple editors. Second -- the body of this article was growing into a massive paragraph at History of the race and intelligence controversy. Discussion of its content was overloading the main article. The historical discussion was getting lost while at the same time it wasn't possible to really explain what this paper said. Re: Enric Naval's comment: Race and intelligence would be the most appropriate place for a full discussion of what the contemporary views on this topic are. But I believe this paper is a lot like The Bell Curve, and an article about it could be similar situated
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Assume good faith (WP:AGF)

Comment: The contents of this article is a subject of great interest mainly to the SPA race editors (see dministrators' noticeboard/Incidents/History of the race and intelligence controversy), and the article is simply a POV fork allowing those SPA editors to yet again unduly focus on Jensen's dubious claims
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)