Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Post-cycle therapy: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:33, 29 January 2009 editMastCell (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators43,155 edits →Post-cycle therapy: comment← Previous edit Latest revision as of 16:32, 2 February 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(4 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''merge and redirect''' to ]; AfD withdrawn by nominator in favor of a merge/redirect, based on discussion here. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 23:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

===]=== ===]===
{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|T}}


:{{la|Post-cycle therapy}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> :{{la|Post-cycle therapy}} (<span class="plainlinks">]}}&action=delete}} delete]</span>) – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude>
Line 7: Line 14:
*If there are no reference than it should be deleted. ie not verifiable.--] (] · ] · ]) 19:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC) *If there are no reference than it should be deleted. ie not verifiable.--] (] · ] · ]) 19:29, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


*'''Redirect'''. I have redirected the similar, but shorter, articles ] and ] to sections of ]. Those topics lack sufficient sources for detailed articles. Unlike these two concepts, which are well-known in the medical literature, even if not so well studied, post-cycle therapy is barely mentioned in medical literature. PMID 11929356 mentions the use of hCG post-cycle, but only as anectodal evidence from one of ]'s books. Basically, I agree with MastCell that there's very little scientific literature on this, and the little there is can be said at ]. I'm not sure why we need a long discussion to decide this... Furthermore, minimization of side-effect of AAS in general (not just post-cycle) is a poorly studied issue. Despite this, the FA-class article on AAS has a large section on ]. I've tagged it as ] for reasons explained at ]. ] (]) 20:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC) *'''Redirect'''. I have redirected the similar, but shorter, articles ] and ] to sections of ]. Those topics lack sufficient sources for detailed articles. Unlike these two concepts, which are well-known in the medical literature, even if not so well studied, post-cycle therapy is barely mentioned in medical literature. {{PMID|11929356}} mentions the use of hCG post-cycle, but only as anectodal evidence from one of ]'s books. Basically, I agree with MastCell that there's very little scientific literature on this, and the little there is can be said at ]. I'm not sure why we need a long discussion to decide this... Furthermore, minimization of side-effect of AAS in general (not just post-cycle) is a poorly studied issue. Despite this, the FA-class article on AAS has a large section on ]. I've tagged it as ] for reasons explained at ]. ] (]) 20:05, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
**I'd be fine with merging and redirecting, assuming there's no objection. I brought it to AfD because I wasn't able to find any good sources on this subject, and thus there was nothing to merge - but I could be happy with either solution. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 20:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC) **I'd be fine with merging and redirecting, assuming there's no objection. I brought it to AfD because I wasn't able to find any good sources on this subject, and thus there was nothing to merge - but I could be happy with either solution. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 20:16, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
*** I've written the little that is known about this at ] after you removed the massive ] over there. Although I've not used any of the text in the article up for deletion, redirect seems the best option given that someone might search for this (there are some 50 hits per day on this little page). ] (]) 22:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC) *** I've written the little that is known about this at ] after you removed the massive ] over there. Although I've not used any of the text in the article up for deletion, redirect seems the best option given that someone might search for this (there are some 50 hits per day on this little page). ] (]) 22:19, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Line 17: Line 24:


* '''Comment''': If there's no objection, I propose (as the nominator) that we close this AfD and redirect ] to ]. The discussion can always be re-opened, or restarted, but a redirect seems appropriate given that there is now a somewhat better-sourced section at the main article. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 22:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC) * '''Comment''': If there's no objection, I propose (as the nominator) that we close this AfD and redirect ] to ]. The discussion can always be re-opened, or restarted, but a redirect seems appropriate given that there is now a somewhat better-sourced section at the main article. ''']'''&nbsp;<sup>]</sup> 22:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

::Go ahead. ] (]) 23:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
*'''Keep or Redirect''' Wether or not the practice is "unapproved" or "potentially dangerous" (one editors opinion) is not really relevant (and that sort of POV should be kept out of AFD nominations by the way). That fact is post cycle therapy has been done since at least the 1970's and is still being done by bodybuilders and athletes everywhere. As part of overall steroid use it ''is'' notable. Plus, there is numerous literature on this subject, see this article and it's references , not to mention a plethora of back issues of ] and ], plus it's covered in numerous books including those written by ], Ben Johnson's former coach ] and training partner ], the book "Steroid Nation" by ESPN writer Shaun Assael; numerous issues of ''The Anabolic Reference Update'' published by ] and ''Anabolics 2009'' by William Llewellyn of which there are 150,000 copies sold - and that only scratches the surface. I think at minimum this should be merged to ]. By the way guys, there's more to establishing notability than just running a few keywords through Google. Doesn't anyone visit a library anymore?--] (]) 23:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 16:32, 2 February 2022

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge and redirect to ergogenic use of anabolic steroids; AfD withdrawn by nominator in favor of a merge/redirect, based on discussion here. MastCell  23:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Post-cycle therapy

Post-cycle therapy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Unreferenced for quite some time. Article refers to unapproved use of various medicines to "minimize" the side effects of anabolic steroid abuse. There are no reliable medical sources on this practice on PubMed that I could find, and Google search returns various bodybuilding forums and magazines with no reliable sources. This article actively promotes an unapproved and potentially dangerous practice; it is the #1 hit on Google; and it cannot be rewritten because I can't find any reliable, independent sources. I feel strongly that deletion is the best option at this point. MastCell  17:49, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep or Redirect Wether or not the practice is "unapproved" or "potentially dangerous" (one editors opinion) is not really relevant (and that sort of POV should be kept out of AFD nominations by the way). That fact is post cycle therapy has been done since at least the 1970's and is still being done by bodybuilders and athletes everywhere. As part of overall steroid use it is notable. Plus, there is numerous literature on this subject, see this article and it's references , not to mention a plethora of back issues of Muscular Development and Muscle Media, plus it's covered in numerous books including those written by Flex Wheeler, Ben Johnson's former coach Charlie Francis and training partner Angella Issajenko, the book "Steroid Nation" by ESPN writer Shaun Assael; numerous issues of The Anabolic Reference Update published by Bill Phillips (author) and Anabolics 2009 by William Llewellyn of which there are 150,000 copies sold - and that only scratches the surface. I think at minimum this should be merged to Ergogenic use of anabolic steroids#Steroid cycle. By the way guys, there's more to establishing notability than just running a few keywords through Google. Doesn't anyone visit a library anymore?--Yankees76 (talk) 23:42, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Post-cycle therapy: Difference between revisions Add topic