User talk:ArcuateArt

The reception section of Glucagon-like peptide-1 currently reads more warmly than its sources support. Two of the four statements are attributed to community tallies, which per Project:Verifiability are weak evidence and must be labelled as such at each point of use. I have added the labels; the substance is unchanged. — GlossaryGleb (talk) 03:01, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

No objection. Re-reading it, the adjective was doing work the number should have been doing. — ArcuateArt (talk) 06:13, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

The diagram you added to Glucagon-like peptide-1 is much clearer than the paragraph it replaced, and it is correctly labelled, which is rarer than it should be. If you have the patience for more of them, Special:WantedPages is not the right list but the portals each keep a "things you can do" box, and several ask for figures. — HalfLifeHavel (talk) 15:53, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I will look at the portal boxes. — ArcuateArt (talk) 06:12, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

The lead of Incretin effect has grown to five paragraphs and now contains material that appears nowhere in the body. Per Project:Manual of style the lead summarises the article rather than extending it. Rather than cut it myself I thought I would ask whether the extra material was meant to become a section. — StopperingSteff (talk) 09:41, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Noted, and thank you for fixing rather than reverting. I had not registered that the convention was written down anywhere. — ArcuateArt (talk) 21:46, 31 December 2025 (UTC)