Talk:Human growth hormone

Content was integrated into growth hormone. For a variety of reasons explained near the end of growth hormone treatment, "human growth hormone" is no longer the preferred name in a physiological or medical context.Alteripse 23:29, 16 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Why use the term "nonsense?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.12.201.88 (talk • contribs)

Because much of the "information" you can find about things "labeled" HGH on the net is nonsense: lies, misinformation, fraud, ignorant misunderstandings, etc. We had an article spelling out the details until another editor who defends health fraud and dishonesty as just another respectable POV forced its removal. alteripse 23:48, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The word "nonsense" is not NPOV, see Wikipedia:NPOV#Pseudoscience. I changed the phrase from "nonsense promulgated by the internet" to "lacking approval by the medical community" to conform with policy in the way the policy page suggested. The editor that removed details from another page did not act properly according to the policy, the controversy should be explained, not hidden. hateless 18:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fraud is an objectively definable and supportable term; so is nonsense. Many of the HGH "information" and products meet all criteria to be described as such. Accuracy is the preferred POV of an encyclopedia; go elsewhere if you want to write from a different POV. alteripse 23:11, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You need to calm down, alteripse. Nonsense is not an objective term, "making sense" is an individual feat and thus subjective. Fraud has an objective measure, and that's why its kept. And on a personal level, I would agree with you that it all qualifies as garbage, but I know my opinions have nothing to do with this encyclopedia. Let me note that one man's "accuracy" is another man's "subjective opinion". It leads to edit wars, it does not work for a collaborative encyclopedia. And please don't tell me to go elsewhere when you're the one who disagrees with one of the three core principals of Wikipedia. hateless 05:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conversion to redirect[edit]

The page in its existing form was not a real disambiguation page, but more of an index to articles pertaining to a common topic. All of the articles were already linked at the top of growth hormone, except for HGH controversies which was linked in the growth hormone treatment article that was linked at the top of the main GH article.

All of the pages linking to HGH were pertaining to growth hormone itself, which the GH article describes. Since the destination is obvious, disambiguation is unneccessary, and I've converted the page to a redirect. Riotgear 09:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Except you made it so it takes 2 steps instead of one for someone to find what they want; not an improvement with all that jazz and all how can we become superstarts ??

. alteripse 13:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It does not take 2 steps. In the case of GH itself, which is the most likely situation, it takes 1 less step, in any other case, it takes the same number of steps because the links are already right on the top of the GH page. In the case of HGH controversies ONLY, it takes an additional step. ALL of the links to the human growth hormone page are in reference to growth hormone, so it makes no sense for a disambiguation page to be in here when it is NOT ambiguous what people are looking for, it just gives them one MORE link to click. Riotgear 04:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to have to agree with Riotgear, this isn't a dab page. Dab pages are for a set of articles with the same name, not to list out articles related to the subject. Either this needs to be expanded into into an article with these links or redirected. Also, HGH is a dab page that directs to this page, which is bad as well, a dab page should never link to another dab page. --Holderca1^talk 15:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]