User talk:DataTableDunja
Editor talk page·2 messages
I think we disagree about Flourishglobal Peptide Biotech
We have now reverted each other twice on Flourishglobal Peptide Biotech, which is a sign that the disagreement is substantive rather than accidental. My reading is that the source supports the weaker of the two claims. Rather than continue in edit summaries, shall we put it on the article talk page and let someone else weigh in? — BatchNumberBede (talk) 09:51, 9 March 2026 (UTC)
Agreed, and I would rather be argued out of it than keep reverting. I have opened a section. — DataTableDunja (talk) 20:12, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
Wording in Incretin effect
I have reworded one sentence in Incretin effect that read as an endorsement. The underlying fact is sourced and stayed; only the adjective went. See Project:Neutral point of view — the relevant part is that a number is almost always better than an adjective where one exists. — FormularyFrida (talk) 22:03, 26 April 2026 (UTC)
No objection. Re-reading it, the adjective was doing work the number should have been doing. — DataTableDunja (talk) 19:23, 27 April 2026 (UTC)