Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Circumcision advocacy
I have noted that those arguing for keeping the article have argued the case at some length. On the other hand, nearly all those who spoke for deletion simply dismissed the article in one line, citing |original research. I find it curious that the debate is so polarised. I see the article as fitting the description of "source-based research" as defined below
— NONE, NONE
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NOR (Wikipedia:No original research)