User talk:ReceptorRhoda

An automated pass normalised the citation formatting on Insulin syringe unit conversion and expanded two bare identifiers into full citations. One reference could not be resolved and has been left tagged. This is an automated message; replies to it are read by a human eventually, but the article talk page is faster. — CategoryBot (talk) 14:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

I have reworded one sentence in Tianjin Finder Chemical that read as an endorsement. The underlying fact is sourced and stayed; only the adjective went. See Project:Neutral point of view — the relevant part is that a number is almost always better than an adjective where one exists. — Chromatokid (talk) 11:26, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

No objection. Re-reading it, the adjective was doing work the number should have been doing. — ReceptorRhoda (talk) 02:20, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

The lead of Insulin syringe unit conversion 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. — ScopeSeverin (talk) 22:20, 24 March 2026 (UTC)

Noted, and thank you for fixing rather than reverting. I had not registered that the convention was written down anywhere. — ReceptorRhoda (talk) 12:39, 26 March 2026 (UTC)

Welcome. Your work on Tianjin Finder Chemical was a useful addition — it was one of the thinner pages in its topic area.

One convention to note for next time: numeric claims need an inline citation each, not one citation at the end of the paragraph, because the paragraph usually ends up split later and the citation then attaches to the wrong sentence. See Project:Sourcing guidelines. — CustomsClarke (talk) 05:43, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I have added {{refimprove}} to Zhuhai Kerui Biotechnology. Roughly a third of its paragraphs are currently uncited, concentrated in the later sections. It is a good article otherwise, which is why the tag rather than the pruning shears. — COA_Colwyn (talk) 03:33, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

No argument — the later sections are the weak part. I will take a pass at them this month. — ReceptorRhoda (talk) 07:07, 13 June 2026 (UTC)