User talk:2001:56A:F0E9:9B00:C90E:1955:4745:23C2

Vitamin article
Thank you for identifying some of the glaring flaws and omissions in the Vitamin article. In 2019, I posted on the Talk page that it should never have been rated a Good Article (my statement is in Archive 4). Instead of getting deep into this one, I have labored on bring the individual vitamin Articles to GA status (9 done, Vit A soon to be in review, leaves Thiamine, vitamin E and vitamin D). After that maybe come back to this one. An obvious problem is that over the years, editors add content, but don't clean-up or coordinate with existing content. What I've had to do on the vitamin articles typically involves removing 1/4 to 1/3 of the references, replacing with newer & higher quality refs, and rewriting half or more of the text. David notMD (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2022 (UTC)