The question What medical treatment advances have cited the theory of evolution as being necessary to make the advance? has received 5 downvotes, and 4 close votes.
By contrast, Does the theory of Intelligent Design make any observable predictions? has received no downvotes and no close votes. Evidently, creationism is within the scope of Skeptics.
The request asked was reasonable: if nothing makes sense in biology without evolution, it would seem fair enough to ask for peer-reviewed medical papers that cite evolution as contributing to new medical breakviews. (It's possible that evolution is so vital to biology that papers don't even cite evolution, but that doesn't make it a deliberately unreasonable request)
The question is to the point, asks a specific question, makes a reasonable request, and is civil. Is there anything the asker should have done differently, apart from trying to rephrase the question so it sounded more pro-evolution?