Deletion of Chiropractic care: Research and Criticism

Comment: only in the sense of do not delete), possibly under the original name Scientific inquiries into chiropractic care.  But even this title could easily have content which doesn't resemble a |fork of Chiropractic.  As an aside, if the article is deleted, the content should be merged back into Chiropractic, as a good fraction of it was removed from there.  &mdash
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:CFORK)

Comment: as this article is a legitimate subtopic, not a pov fork. |Neutrality issues with regard to the content and title of this article, if any, should be resolved editorially
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: No reasons for deletion given that satisfy . This is ''not'' automatically a POV fork, and even some of its opponents in its current form seem to say that it was not one from the start. As the POV concerns may well be valid, I suggest the following solution: Rename back to "Scientific inquiries into chiropractic care"; make sure that the article content matches its title; make sure that the article conforms to ; make sure that it is summarized and linked to as main article per . An article's being biased is not a reason to delete. It's a reason to edit. I share Hyperbole's frustration in seeing a proper spinout article go to AfD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DELETION||WP:NPOV||WP:SPINOUT)