English Post-Finasteride Syndrome Wiki Artical is online!!!

General Discussion Media & Awareness
#21

I believe it is already there

#22

no no it´s not. Because I can not edit the Fin entry. Guys, get a Wiki account and help with the discussion. And please, sign your comments. Otherwise you IP will be added by wiki
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Brainbug666

#23

2500 members here and only two wrote something in the discussion. Come on guys! The wiki entry is very very important for us. If you realy what to do something. Get a account and help me with the discussion, avoid to write something unsigned.

I do not understand, why only two help. Next time you go to your doc, no one can say anymore you are crasy, you can say its in wiki, this will also raise the media awareness, more peole will notice this!

The are 1000 things, why the english wiki entry is important for us, so if you guys realy want to do something help please. :exclamation:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: … e_Syndrome

#24

Wow, I sometimes wonder, how stupid some people are.

This treat can be only seen my memebers… now this was edited to the discussion:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia: … e_Syndrome

[i]If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia’s content, and consensus is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts or canvassed users may be tagged using: [/i]

done by Phil Bridger en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Phil_Bridger

Thanks, Phil to show us that you read here and that you are so stupid. We know that its not a vote.
Silly silly

#25

And it’s the same two people who have been doing all the work. Meanwhile, some idiot in the theories section just wrote a long, incoherent post about pathogens, wasting his and our valuable time.

#26

Somebody’s gotta do for the sheep what the sheep can’t do themselves. Too bad I’m not a sheep.

#27

It’s a lot easier to rant incoherently about fungus than actually do something productive. Brainbug’s hardwork is about to be for nothing if people don’t chime in and persuade the Wikipedia editors to keep the article. Yet, that’s too much work for everyone but a few people.

#28

A mass email should go out to everyone about the wikipedia article. Mew can you do this?

#29

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.

#30

Seriously everyone should throw out a line or two to KEEP THIS ARTICLE UP!

#31

but please just use real arguments and not only say merck want this and that, that are no arguments for the article.

#32

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.

#33

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.

#34

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.

#35

It’s been up awhile man, pay attention people are trying to argue against us to have it taken down.

#36

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.

#37

  1. 7 days to reach consensus.

  2. 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

  3. 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.

#38

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?

#39

I am also having trouble finding how to post a comment

#40

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.