Talk:GW Pharmaceuticals

Indiscriminate list of patents
Why do you think some of this patents indiscriminate ?? explain yourself before mass deleting. Vjiced (talk) 20:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * See WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Encyclopedia articles are not indiscriminate collections of information. We do not need to have a listing of every single patent that a company holds; if we did that for larger companies... well, this one is already absurdly long. --Aurochs (Talk | Block) 21:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, in general, the fact that a company holds a patent is not in itself notable enough to include in an article. Lots of companies have patents. Further, the long list of patents makes the article significantly less readable. It's simply not a good thing to have for too many reasons. --Aurochs (Talk | Block) 21:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Products in Development
Currently GW pharmacuticals are researching products for Cancer Pain

Products in development redux
This needs to be toned down (saying that unapproved drugs "will be used to treat X" is promotional) and sourced to independent sources, as opposed to the company's website or conference abstracts (which are generally from the company for drugs in this stage of development)  We also use generic names, not company brand names. We also look for secondary sources (conference abstracts are very primary sources)

In 2015 GW Pharmaceutical was developing Epidiolex, an investigational cannabidiol liquid drug for epileptic children. It will be used to treat two orphan conditions, Dravet and Lennox-Gastaut syndromes. Phase 3 clinical trials for Epidiolex were conducted in 2015.
 * Epidiolex

-- Jytdog (talk) 03:41, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for toning down the PROMO but if you cannot find independent sources for this content please do not re-add it; and please don't re-add the primary sources from the company. We really hard to avoid that sort of thing in medical-related articles.  I'd be happy to look but don't have time now.   Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 04:00, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * i fixed it. Jytdog (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Smile.png – S. Rich (talk) 04:16, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Claim of permission from Dutch government
The comment below was added to the article by an anonymous editor today.

Re: "grew and developed specialized strains of cannabis with permission from the Dutch government"

This claim is as false and fraudulent as it was when GW claimed Hortipharm had a licence from the dutch government. Hortipharm aka D Watson aka Sam the skunkman illegally produced seed for the home grown illegal cannabis market for the majority of the dutch cannabis seed companies and falsely claimed to have a licence for ten years between 1985 to 19 95 when the dutch government stated that NO LICENCE was ever grated to or held by Hortipharm NL or its directors. Permission would be a licence! Please supply verification of the licence number and the department who issued it, or the 'permission', because to date no verification has been supplied and no verification has been possible (or ever will be).

-- Wire723 (talk) 11:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)


 * No comments received, so I removed the disputed sentence about Hortapharm. Wire723 (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2022 (UTC)