I realy wonder… and we are even discussing there with the biggest idiots, who have no clue what they are talking about. So argumenting is very simple. Yes its realy sad, that only less than a handfull of people are helping with that. Other think may be, that other things are more important and wasteing time with theories.
Its very simple to read and get the rules of wiki. Guys liek that Phil Bridger pop inside, and must say that they never heard of finasteride before until today…added the thing i posted before and must say no i have nothing to do with merck. to funny, I only can say, take part of the discussion, give arguments for the articale, even to read what the idiots there write is big entertainment.
Seriously everyone should throw out a line or two to KEEP THIS ARTICLE UP!
but please just use real arguments and not only say merck want this and that, that are no arguments for the article.
wow they realy realy are crasy on the english wiki, now they let me look like someone who uses other IP´s and all comments with only a IP are written by me. omg.
If you want to help with the discussion, dont use just a IP and read the guides of wikipedia. There are many rules. Use real arguments and not… things like merck are doing that.
Ok, how much longer till they decide if they are gonna keep it or not?
Their arguments against it are pretty stupid… their best defense is “well uhh it doesn’t say “Post-Finasteride Syndrome” in all the articles.”
Thus I think there is a good chance it will stay up as there is clearly no consensus.
Was this message up before or just recently? I just noticed it.
This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia’s deletion policy.
It’s been up awhile man, pay attention people are trying to argue against us to have it taken down.
Yeah, the accusations that those who want the article taken down are just Merck drones aren’t doing us any favors, if you ask me.
I tend to agree with this; however, I’m no expert in Wiki guidelines. Anyway – great job with the article, Brainbug. I added a few comments of my own to the talk page. Let’s hope the article stays.
-
7 days to reach consensus.
-
Their arguments are likely correct. The term “post-finasteride syndrome” needs to appear in a peer-reviewed journal for the wiki artice to stay, the ‘conference article’ however is not good enough per en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MEDRS
-
And as far as consensus goes - the votes of people with few or no edits in other wiki articles do not count. And there are admins with 1000s of edits, voting against it.
ok then if the actual term “post finasteride syndrome” is not acceptable…is there any other medically recognized definition for it? i.e. persistent sexual side effects resulting from finasteride…does Wiki need an exact term?
I am also having trouble finding how to post a comment
99% of the arguments of them are bullshit. this is not a vote just arguments count. Sadly the only publ. that is there is “only” publ. in a suppl. I have knowen this before, but they did not. But anway, this doesnt realy matter… we will see.
Can you manage to get abdominal pain and bloating added to that list of sides on wiki… or do we not have a reference for that?
PS: I know your English isn’t top-notch so I went and edited a few of your grammar and spelling mistakes BB, but still doing a nice job! Keep it up!
Hey, sadly not there is no source for that. My englsih is crap, funny that one idiot wrote, everbody who is writing there is the same person, with the same writing stye and so on. Her you can see what kind of wanna be authors work on wiki. Thanks, I avoided to write the english entry so with the big help of other it was transalted. The discussion is not over.
Hello, have a look on the discussion about the deletion of the entry, this is getting more and more …
LOOK aht this:
(diff | hist) . . Post-Finasteride Syndrome; 18:24 . . (+10) . . TheRedPenOfDoom (talk | contribs) (→Symptoms: there cannot really be symptoms for a syndrome that hasnt been defined)
…a…hole
Well its a fait accomplis now, its been deleted.
The reason turned on the lack of peer-reviewed papers that mention the ‘post finasteride syndrome’. There are actually none so far, so in reality it probably was a bit early to expect a wiki article.
Hopefully there will be more stuff published that actually mentions the name ‘post finasteride syndrome’ and defines it too, so that a PFS wiki page can happen in future.
If you want to help make this happen I suggest starting an account and edit wiki articles in other topics. This is useful because it will build up your edit count to prevent accusations of being a single-purpose editor and will help in the learning of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: … guidelines.
Soon enough most likely.
Yes, sadly they checked that the suppl. is not a peer-review, my last argument was that the term is in use and this does not belong to a medical term. In germany the admins saw that the term is widly in use and this is the reason, why it was keeped. The english wiki is fully controled, I didnt want to believe that first, but now I saw it.
Anyway, what is going on the english wiki is a shame. You can read the whole thing here.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: … e_Syndrome
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brainbug666
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DangerGrouse
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: … rainbug666
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brainbug666
Awsome, what is going on there. Realy unbelievable. Enjoy!
Yes Oscar this is tue, but If the paper would have been publ. in the journal and not only in the suppl the would haven been no problem. A importnt fact is the term, hey guys, dont you wonder why a guy like the f… ceo of merck deserves his owen entry and we not? I´m a mit sad about the lack of people helping. We are more than 2000 here, image what would happen, when only 1000 apperd on this discussion and said I know this term I have this shit. This would have been a hughe media attention, they needed to keep it. but sadly ony a few here helped. Yes, the best thing, you can do an wiki is what oscar says.