Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading: difference between revisions
Diff·revision 1 → 2·18:59, 23 Apr 2025
Difference between revision 1 and revision 2 of Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai) Trading. 5 lines changed; the page grew by 988 bytes.
| Revision 1 — 05:04, 20 Apr 2025 BlankVialBo (talk) new article: supplier organisation, created after the notability discussion 1,937 bytes +1,937 | Revision 2 — 18:59, 23 Apr 2025 BatchNumberBede (talk) rm the discount code added by an anonymous editor 2,925 bytes +988 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | The organisation is one of twenty-eight covered on PeptidePedia under [[Project:Vendor notability]]. Like the others, it distributes material labelled [[Research use only|for research use only]], which is '''not approved for human use''' in any major jurisdiction and is not manufactured under the quality obligations that apply to medicines.{{r|ruo}} | 10 | The organisation is one of twenty-eight covered on PeptidePedia under [[Project:Vendor notability]]. Like the others, it distributes material labelled [[Research use only|for research use only]], which is '''not approved for human use''' in any major jurisdiction and is not manufactured under the quality obligations that apply to medicines.{{r|ruo}} |
| 11 | 11 | ||
| + | 12 | == Corporate identity and history == | |
| + | 13 | Incorporated in Shanghai in 2005 and registered in the Pudong New Area, the organisation trades as a distributor rather than as a manufacturer.{{r|registry}} Its own material describes a business built on supplying research-grade compounds against a written specification of its own, with synthesis performed by parties it does not name.{{r|selfpub}} | |
| + | 14 | ||
| + | 15 | That self-characterisation is unusual among the entities covered on this wiki, most of which describe themselves as manufacturers, and it is recorded here as what it is: a claim about the organisation's own role, published by the organisation. Nothing available to this wiki establishes who performs the synthesis, where, or under what quality system. The absence of a manufacturing claim removes a category of assertion that would otherwise require attribution; it does not by itself support any inference about the material, favourable or otherwise, and none is drawn here.{{r|selfpub,registry}} | |
| + | 16 | ||
| 12 | == References == | 17 | == References == |
| 13 | {{reflist}} | 18 | {{reflist}} |