User talk:NPOV_Nadia

Thanks for expanding Thermo Fisher Scientific (China). I have tagged two of the figures with {{cn}} — not because I doubt them, but because a reader cannot check them, and per Project:Verifiability that is the test. If the source is the review already cited further up, reusing that citation on the specific sentence is enough. — GroupBuyGalen (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Fair. Two of those figures come from the review already cited above, so reusing that reference on the sentences closes most of it. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 06:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

The reception section of Chinese Peptide Company 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. — AnalyticalAnnie (talk) 14:31, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. I have used identical wording at each point so a reader recognises it as the same caveat rather than three different ones. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 22:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

The diagram you added to Medutest 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. — SecondarySrc_Seb (talk) 11:08, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Kind of you. Labelling is the part that takes the time and it is the part that makes the difference. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 11:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

★ For sustained, careful work on International nonproprietary name 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. — OralSemaOswin (talk) 20:06, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Much appreciated. About one figure in twenty turns out to have drifted, which is enough to justify the other nineteen. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 11:39, 21 May 2025 (UTC)

The filter control on Peptide stability table changes state without announcing it, so a reader using a screen reader gets no confirmation that anything happened. A label tied to the control would fix it. I have not edited the page because the interactive parts are yours. — Chromatokid (talk) 02:11, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

You are right, and I have done the same for the sort control, which had the same problem. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 09:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Adding a worked example that matches the default inputs on Reconstitution calculator was a good idea — it lets a reader check that they are using the tool correctly before they trust it with their own numbers. — CoI_Corin (talk) 03:11, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. It also caught a rounding difference between the example and the calculator, which is now fixed. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 20:53, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

The calculator on Reconstitution calculator appears to round before dividing rather than after, which shifts the doses-per-vial figure by one at some vial strengths. Is that deliberate — a conservative reading — or an artefact? — SchemaSorcha (talk) 13:15, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

An artefact, not a policy. Corrected — it now divides first and rounds the displayed value only. — NPOV_Nadia (talk) 18:16, 19 June 2026 (UTC)