User talk:SerialCommaSeb

In Haemoglobin A1c the reference interval is given without the assay. Since the interval is method-dependent, stating it bare makes it look more universal than it is. Do you have the method from the source, or should the interval be attributed to the laboratory that published it? — BaselineBex (talk) 22:30, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Good point. I have given both the method and the population it was derived in, since the second matters as much as the first. — SerialCommaSeb (talk) 04:26, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Haemoglobin A1c and Asymchem Laboratories 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. — AnaesthesiaAoife (talk) 14:37, 27 September 2025 (UTC)

Kind of you. Most of it was mechanical, which is why nobody had done it. — SerialCommaSeb (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Several of the leads you have worked on lately, Haemoglobin A1c 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. — ComparisonCato (talk) 08:10, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. I have gone back through the last month and shortened three leads. — SerialCommaSeb (talk) 21:07, 7 December 2025 (UTC)