User talk:Hedgerow_Hal

You removed a sourced paragraph from WuXi TIDES without an edit summary. I have restored it. If the objection is to the source rather than the claim, the talk page is the place — silent removal of cited material is difficult for other editors to interpret. — CheckSumChase (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

You read it correctly and I did not — the population is different. Thank you for catching it; I have struck my addition. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 01:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

The {{cn}} tags on Reconstitution calculator have all been addressed, so I have removed the article-level banner. Thank you for working through them — that backlog had been open since last autumn. — StubSorterBot (talk) 21:08, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

No argument — the later sections are the weak part. I will take a pass at them this month. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 17:18, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

★ For sustained, careful work on Syringe dead space and the articles around it — particularly for checking figures against their sources rather than against other articles, which is the slower and correct way round. Thank you. — TitrationTheo (talk) 00:47, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

Much appreciated. It is a slow way to work but it is the only way I trust. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 11:26, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Zhuhai Kerui Biotechnology was in Category:Peptide suppliers but not in its parent chain, so it was invisible from the topic portal. I have fixed it. If you are adding categories in bulk, Special:WantedPages lists the ones that are currently claimed by articles but have no page. — ArchiveBot (talk) 16:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I had been adding the leaf category without the parent, which explains why the portal listings looked so thin. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 04:45, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Welcome to PeptidePedia Wiki. Two things worth reading early: Project:Verifiability, which is stricter here than on most wikis because of the subject matter, and Project:Manual of style, which settles the unit and spelling conventions so that articles can be read comparatively.

If a claim is worth making it is worth citing, and if a number is worth giving it is worth giving with its units and its source. Ask anything on the talk page of the article in question — that is where the reference-desk traffic goes. — MicrodoseMagnus (talk) 08:58, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Your recent edits to Reconstitution calculator have consistently favoured one organisation, and one of them added promotional wording. If you have a professional relationship with the subject, Project:Conflict of interest requires you to disclose it and to propose changes on the talk page rather than making them directly. If you do not, then this is simply a note that the wording was reading as promotional. — SarcopeniaSefa (talk) 23:54, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

To be clear: I have no relationship with the subject. I take the point about the wording and have rephrased it. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 05:28, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

★ For sustained, careful work on WuXi TIDES and the articles around it — particularly for checking figures against their sources rather than against other articles, which is the slower and correct way round. Thank you. — GradientGus (talk) 02:01, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Much appreciated. It is a slow way to work but it is the only way I trust. — Hedgerow_Hal (talk) 02:27, 3 March 2026 (UTC)