Deletion of Chiropractic care: Research and Criticism

Comment: This is by definition a .  I agree with QG and Hyperbole that the idea to break off a section of chiropractic and expand it in another article would be great (and therefore shorten the chiropractic article), but it too has to be NPOV.  This article appears to be an attempt to avoid NPOV.  How many different ways can we say "there is research, some people think it is great, others think it is crap, blah, blah, blah..."  Unless you have something more important to add, a POV FORK is not the way to make your point. It just makes for a bigger battlefield. What next, add chiropractic to all the articles that concern symptoms? Let's not go there
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Content forking (WP:POVFORK)