PeptidePedia The community reference

User talk:GlossaryGleb

Editor talk page·5 messages

This is the talk page for the editor GlossaryGleb. Messages left here are public and are signed. Please add new messages at the bottom, and sign with four tildes.

Lead length across your recent edits

Several of the leads you have worked on lately, Batch number included, have grown past four paragraphs. The convention is that the lead summarises and the body extends. I mention it as a pattern rather than a complaint about any one article. — PurityClaimPia (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Fair as a pattern. I have trimmed the worst of them and moved the surplus into sections. — GlossaryGleb (talk) 04:55, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Consistency across Reference standard and Satiety signalling

Reference standard and Satiety signalling now use the same units, the same date format and the same abbreviations at first use, which they did not a fortnight ago. That kind of work is invisible unless somebody reads the two articles together, which is exactly what readers here do. — DiluentDiya (talk) 06:12, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Kind of you. Most of it was mechanical, which is why nobody had done it. — GlossaryGleb (talk) 13:14, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Consistency across Mass spectrometry and SURMOUNT trial programme

Mass spectrometry and SURMOUNT trial programme now use the same units, the same date format and the same abbreviations at first use, which they did not a fortnight ago. That kind of work is invisible unless somebody reads the two articles together, which is exactly what readers here do. — ShortageShona (talk) 08:01, 24 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. If the date format I settled on is not the house one, say so and I will redo it. — GlossaryGleb (talk) 08:59, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

Nice work across Analytical method validation and Reference standard

Your run of edits through Analytical method validation and Reference standard tidied up an inconsistency that had been bothering me for a while: the two articles were quoting the same figure under different definitions. Thank you for reconciling them rather than just picking one. — KarlFischerKit (talk) 04:34, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

That is kind. The two definitions were genuinely different and neither article was wrong on its own terms — the pair was. — GlossaryGleb (talk) 16:35, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

A barnstar for you

For sustained, careful work on Mass spectrometry 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. — NAION_Noel (talk) 22:48, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. If you want the tedious version of the method I am happy to write it up on the sourcing guideline talk page. — GlossaryGleb (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2026 (UTC)