I don't have much intellect to declare a point or clarify others statement out here but listening to Mr. Verytas, I agree what he suggest and myself suggest to re-clarify the original content in the site as soon as possible to make it fully appreciable and factual.

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:25, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've created a sentence that I want to post on the english "antipsychotic" wikipedia site. I've posted the sentence at the talk site of this article. I would be very thankfull If you have time to proofread ☺️ Materie34 (talk) 03:39, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you ... I replied on the Talk page. Verytas (talk) 18:37, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I Made an entry at the site for fluphenazine. Don't worry its the only entry, I made since our Last discussion at the antipsychotic site. I thought my entry is an important Info for fluphenazine but If you don't think so feel free to delete it.

Have a great day, bye🥰🥰 Materie34 (talk) 22:40, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Materie34 - I've been away for a while and just saw your edit to fluphenazine, and that boghog immediately deleted it (while acknowledging that you made the edit "in good faith". I must be honest here, your edit just did not make sense. The sentence "Through its extreme potentiated ability to raise the neuroleptical potency to values the multiple as gained with the highest dose of haloperidole" just does not make sense in English. There are also a few misspellings.

As far as I can tell, you are making the point that fluphenazine is more potent when administered IM compared to oral. If that's all, then this really isn't an essential piece of information because (a) any physician who administers it will assume that is true for all antipsychotics for which IM administration is possible, and (b) we just don't use fluphenazine much anymore - it's more potent, yes, but it isn't as effective as other options and it has a high incidence of side effects. I have never prescribed the depot form of the drug (fluphenazine decanoate) because it can't be stopped when adverse effects develop, and there are more effective and safer alternatives.

Boghog removed your edit because you didn't cite any scientific literature to support your statements. Please look at the page link he provided (WP:MEDRS, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MEDRS), which advocates for the use of "secondary sources", and I agree with that. If the source is an established English language journal, you could add information from that source verbatim (as long as you cite it) and thereby avoid language problems.

Verytas (talk) 03:22, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I Just wanted to say, that I made a Long edit at the english perphenazine site Materie34 (talk) 23:06, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message, Materie34. I looked at your edit, and there are quite a few problems with the English. For example, there is no such word as "motoric". But those are small problems. The most serious problem is that there are no citations indicating the source of this information. Also, some of it is not accurate. I see that you are citing your own personal experience with this drug, but that is not scientifically valid. A few days of high dose perphenazine would not be expected to induce extrapyramidal side effects. I could cite my personal experience with hundreds of patients on perphenazine and related drugs, but even that would not be scientifically valid. Wikipedia is just not the place to cite personal experience of any kind.

Please undo your edit.

Verytas (talk) 07:11, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hei Verytas, Hope you are ok, I Hope so😊❤️ let me say this clear from the beginning: If you don't have time Just answer with 1 sentence Like: delete it! and I swear I will delete it!! If you have enough time, you can read my thoughts about this, If you want to😊❤️,However lets get into IT, No Problem my approach was to put my own experience into kontext in a way that I tried to make clear that this is from a patients view. As said bevor I am a passioned Reader regarding pharmakology and the Notion I got when reading studies regarding side effects that subjektive Feeling are somehow very appreciated in this context. But No Problem, can I have the privilege to wait for your answer? Then I swear I delete it. Also I haven't the demand expecting a Long answer from you, If you have time, one quick Sentence is enough and I delete it, I promise.

Just in case you are interessted I put this problematic View regarding my Edit into a question that I asked Chatgbt to give me a somehow Basic mathematical approach (Just the absolute Basic Shit Like: is there a premise told to be true and are the conclosions satisfying that, yeah, Basic stuff) Here is the answer: (again Just write one quick sentence as answer I will delete all)

Sentence2: As a schizophrenic patient, I find it most effective to combine my edits in Wikipedia with subjective impressions, as this is scientifically the most appropriate in my situation.

Using the logical conclusions drawn from the axiomatic system, we can say that Sentence2 fulfill the given context, as they align with the derived conclusions from the axioms. Materie34 (talk) 06:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it, No Problem, I See IT as a Chance to improve next time😁 Materie34 (talk) 06:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote an edit for benperidol, posted on the talk page, if you have time to check it, that would be cool.

Also I removed my edit on the perphenazine page like you wanted, if you didn't notice already😊 Materie34 (talk) 22:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Veritas, Im sorry, I don't have intends to Spam your profile, I Just wanted to say I made some new try for an edit considering all your critiques left on the benperidol talk page. If you would check this new try, I would thank you very much🥰♥️ Materie34 (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

hey Verytas its me Materie34, I just want to thank you, through your Work and your efforts , I was Not about to get cancelled or Blocked from my Account(my horrible english Hope its understandable😁✌️) and I don't know how I can Express that in English in German we say "war sich zu schade dafür" meaning: all the time you haven't felt yourself to superior to write feedbacks and constructive critisism, so I got the oppurtinity to learn from that. Thank you for this all😊✌️ Materie34 (talk) 15:47, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]