Talk:Boron

Biological role
Can you help!? Can you please review the Boron and Boron section. I edited these sections the last few days, and I wanted to make sure that my edits are proper and improved Wikipedia content. Still, I found Boron section was not formatted very well, it should have been probably split by sections, but I didn't have an idea how do to that better. Maybe you have that idea? Thank you very much in advance! --12:09, 19 October 2023 (UTC)14:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)Maxim Masiutin (talk) 14:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me! The strongest health claims are sourced to 29546541, which is a quality source (on-point review article in a reputable journal). Bon courage (talk) 02:05, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your help! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 04:59, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Chemically uncombined
The edit at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boron&diff=1180907397&oldid=1180881695 modified the meaning. It should have been "but chemically uncombined boron is not otherwise found" without commas, not "but, chemically uncombined, boron is not otherwise found". Would you please consider removing the commas as it was before!? --Maxim Masiutin (talk) 19:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Done Porg656 (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)