User talk:TirzTaxonomist

A merge of Karl Fischer titration into Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry has been proposed. My own view is that they are separate subjects with separate failure modes and should stay separate, but I am not confident enough to close it. Comments welcome at the article talk page. — KarlFischerKit (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for not closing it yourself — I would have been uncomfortable with that and would probably not have said so. — TirzTaxonomist (talk) 14:56, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Melanotan II compares potency with a compound that has no published head-to-head study against it. The comparison may well be right, but assembling it from two separate trials is the case Project:No original research covers. Could the sentence be attributed to a review that makes the comparison, or removed? — INN_Ingrid (talk) 01:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

You are right. There is no head-to-head study and I have removed the comparison. — TirzTaxonomist (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I have added {{refimprove}} to Oral semaglutide. 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. — CRP_Cormac (talk) 05:17, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

You are right about the distribution — everything after the third section came in from a merge and was never checked. — TirzTaxonomist (talk) 14:33, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

The molar mass in the Glucagon infobox does not say which form it refers to. Free base and salt differ by enough that a reader reconstituting from the figure would be several per cent out. Do you know which the source gives? — ShortDescShai (talk) 04:28, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Good question and I do not know. I have marked the row as unspecified rather than leave the ambiguity unflagged. — TirzTaxonomist (talk) 11:42, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Converting the substitution lists in Retatrutide and International nonproprietary name into tables was the right call — the analogues now line up row for row and the differences are visible at a glance, which three paragraphs of prose were never going to achieve. — Peptide_Pete (talk) 12:52, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Kind of you. Getting the rows to line up meant standardising the residue numbering first, which was most of the work. — TirzTaxonomist (talk) 23:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Per Project:Manual of style the international non-proprietary name leads and the trade name follows in parentheses at first mention. International nonproprietary name has it the other way round in the lead and the right way round in the body. Not important in itself, but the articles are read side by side. — ExenatideEzra (talk) 05:55, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. The trade name is how most readers arrive, which is presumably why I wrote it first, but the convention is the convention. — TirzTaxonomist (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2026 (UTC)