Deletion of Post-Finasteride Syndrome

Comment: Does any  say this subject exists
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:MEDRS)

Comment: There are many problems with this article. It may include copyright violations: the first sentence is identical to the first sentence of http://www.pfsfoundation.org/post-finasteride-syndrome-overview/ this activist web page. Google Scholar and PubMed searches find only one use of the term (the first citation in this article, a short, poorly-written report of a small retrospective study). The article "proves" the validity of the construct by synthesising findings from primary sources, in contravention of . That is, the article as it stands fails our policies. All of this can be fixed of course, but once that's done there is nothing left but content already covered very well in  our article, Finasteride. This article adds nothing to the encyclopedia except OR and it enlists the encyclopedia in support of one side of ongoing litigation. If you want to achieve recognition of a syndrome, the first place to do it is in reviews in peer-reviewed scholarly literature, professional guidelines, and graduate-level textbooks. Once that's done, we will welcome an article on this putative syndrome, based on those sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: the |SPA sock-puppetry going on here is absolutely spectacular. We now have '''6''' different IP editors / |SPA new users all in favor of keeping an article created by (you guessed it) yet another . All with the same writing style, same inability to adhere to , same lack of |civility and same near-hysterical support for the same (and only) article. Enough for me to go and start an |SPI. Just ridiculous
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Single-purpose account (WP:SPA||WP:SPA||WP:SPA||WP:MOS||WP:CIV||WP:SPI)

Comment: No ambiguity that the term is being used in the popular press and should redirect to something. Every page on drugs has a side-effect section, and that on Finasteride says that side-effects abate on discontinuation of use. If that is disputed, a note in the finasteride article should be there, even if deemed unlikely or a minority view, simply to inform readers of what the medical consensus is, in case they are redirected. Agree that separation of a drug article from a (alleged or otherwise) side-effect article is a 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks (WP:FORK)

Comment: The essence of good Wikipedia-writing is mastery of sources. In medical article-writing that's mastery of . Until an author fully understands and applies this in their writing here, they will fail. You may write a very good article, but until it conforms to our sourcing guidelines, it's not a Wikipedia article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:MEDRS)

Comment: The sources cited in the article demonstrate that side effects of finasteride have been studied, as is the case with any modern medicine, but provide no evidence that this has been recognised as a syndrome by any -compliant sources. For the avoidance of doubt, I have no bias, not having heard of finasteride before today, and have no connection to Merck. Let's keep conspiracy theories out of this discussion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:MEDRS)