Retapedia:WikiProject Peptides

Scope

The project's scope covers:

• Individual peptide compounds with sufficient published research or regulatory documentation to support an encyclopedic entry.
• Topic articles on the concepts, mechanisms, regulatory bodies, and anti-doping policy relevant to peptide use in sport and medicine.
• Category and tag pages organising the catalogue.

Article structure

Peptide articles follow a consistent template:

1. Lead — one-sentence definition, alternative names, and verdict.
2. Infobox — identification, administration routes, regulatory status, article meta.
3. Overview — extended description.
4. Mechanism of action — receptor, signalling pathway, downstream effects.
5. Reported effects — documented benefits in literature and preclinical models.
6. Dosage and administration — grouped by route, with safety disclaimer.
7. Natty status — WADA classification and federation positions.
8. Research — bibliography highlights.
9. Related compounds, External links, References.

Catalogue status

Contributing

Retapedia is maintained as an open-source project. Contributions and corrections are welcomed — contact the maintainers to get involved.

Adding a new peptide

To add a new peptide:

1. Create a markdown file under src/content/peptides/ named with the canonical slug (e.g. my-peptide.md).
2. Include all required frontmatter fields per the schema in src/content/config.ts.
3. Add the slug to CURRENT_PEPTIDE_FILES in src/constants/peptides.ts.
4. Tag the entry with one or more values from PEPTIDE_TAGS; tag pages and category pages will populate automatically.

Adding a new topic

To add a new topic article:

1. Create a markdown file under src/content/topics/ with frontmatter matching the topic schema in src/content/config.ts.
2. Cross-reference other topics via related_topics and tag values via related_tags.
3. The route at /topic/[slug] renders automatically.

Editorial standards

• Encyclopedic tone. Articles are written in third-person summary style. Recommendations, exhortations, and marketing copy are out of scope.
• Cite primary sources. Prefer peer-reviewed literature, regulatory documents, and federation rulebooks over commentary.
• No medical advice. See the medical disclaimer.
• Verifiable claims only. The natty/not-natty verdict must be supportable from the cited regulatory documents.