Deletion of Epineurial repair

Comment: Has it horrible style issues? Yes. Can they be solved by editing? Yes. Therefore, are they a reason to delete? |No. Does it pass ? Hell yes, lots of references in academic RS in the article. What do we do? We keep it
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD||WP:GNG)

Comment: Oh My Gosh.  Well, at least this one is honest, and I hope the prof is reading. So, for the information of your professor, it is still quite a horrible article in terms of prose and organization, and there is currently no indication that it uses sources correctly (per ).  If the article had a single PMID, we could determine what is there that could be kept, and delete the rest.    As it stands, pending addition of PMIDs and clarification of what secondary reviews are actually being used, I'm on the fence as to whether it should be '''merged''' to Epineurium, which is certainly not overloaded at this point
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:MEDRS)