User talk:UnitsUrsula

A sentence in Beyond-use date instructs rather than describes. This wiki documents what is done and by whom; it does not tell a reader what to do, and on this subject in particular the difference is the whole of the medical disclaimer. I have rephrased it in the descriptive voice. — A1c_Alder (talk) 22:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I have added the disclaimer cross-link at the top of the section as well. — UnitsUrsula (talk) 04:58, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

An automated pass normalised the citation formatting on Sharps disposal 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. — StubSorterBot (talk) 08:40, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

The sentence you added to GLP-1 receptor draws a human conclusion from an animal study. That is the specific case Project:No original research is aimed at. Describing the study, its model and the absence of human data is both permitted and, I would argue, more informative than the inference. — DPP4_Dagmar (talk) 06:33, 7 March 2026 (UTC)

Fair. The step from the animal result to the general claim is mine and not the paper’s. — UnitsUrsula (talk) 13:13, 8 March 2026 (UTC)

A sentence in Bacteriostatic water instructs rather than describes. This wiki documents what is done and by whom; it does not tell a reader what to do, and on this subject in particular the difference is the whole of the medical disclaimer. I have rephrased it in the descriptive voice. — StabilityStig (talk) 06:09, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, and thank you for rephrasing rather than deleting. The descriptive voice loses nothing here. — UnitsUrsula (talk) 09:46, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

Your run of edits through Asymchem Laboratories and SURPASS trial programme 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. — SemaglutideSasha (talk) 01:46, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Appreciated. I have left a note on both talk pages recording which definition each figure is under, so it does not drift back. — UnitsUrsula (talk) 23:48, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

★ For sustained, careful work on Asymchem Laboratories 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. — COA_Colwyn (talk) 19:55, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. I will say that copying a number between articles is the single commonest way an error propagates here. — UnitsUrsula (talk) 20:54, 13 June 2026 (UTC)