Talk:Novartis/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Gerber Foods
Gerber Foods has been sold to Nestlé few days ago.
http://www.foodproductiondaily-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=75670-nestle-gerber-acquisition-baby-food
I don't speak, and also write, english so well, so could somebody do the modification.
216.99.39.31 16:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:NOVARTISLOGO.png
Image:NOVARTISLOGO.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Huntingdon Life Sciences
Hello, I would like to add a section about Novartis and Huntingdon Life Sciences and the animal rights campaign, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. Here is what I have so far: "Novartis has come under lots of fire because they are one of Huntingdon Life Science's biggest customers. Since 1999, Novartis offices have been vandalized and even firebombed. In addition, there have been lots of home pickets at Novartis executive’s homes, which still continue today." Carniv (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Name
where the name Novartis come from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.181.102.108 (talk) 17:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The Name comes from NOVA ARTE and means New Art refering to the new ways to produce pharmaka.
I didn't know how to responde so i just put it in here.
Bion
Add Bion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acibenzolar-S-methyl) to list of products? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.149.97 (talk) 11:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Corporate conscience
Time, 9 March 2009, has an article discussing Novartis making Coartem. Novartis does not make a profit, in fact it makes a loss when it makes this drug. It is a drug that suits poor countries and people because it cures malaria instead of preventing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.45.7 (talk) 03:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Criticism
The impending outcome of the novartis court action in India has not been mentioned. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6358721.stm A court challenge to India's patent laws by the pharmaceutical giant Novartis.89.100.250.181 09:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed the POV dispute since the outcome of the court decision has since been added to the article. Koifishkid (talk) 00:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Sandoz
This article says that Sandoz produces generics. I thought Sandoz became Novartis. SO Sandoz is still around under the name Sandoz? Jaberwocky6669 July 1, 2005 03:19 (UTC)
No, some time after the merger, Novartis relaunched their generics under the brandname "Sandoz". The Sandoz company before the merger and the Novartis Sandoz brand have totaly differend product ranges. (the generics from both merger companies) 81.221.97.181 03:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
1986 Chemical Spill?
The page List of Environmental Disasters points to the Novartis page in reference to the Sandoz chemical spill into the Rhine River in 1986. However, there is merely a passing reference to the incident, with no details. If someone is able to add a summary of the incident that briefly describes the environmental and human health effects, it would make the link from the aforementioned page much more valuable. (I will see if I can find the time to do so, but if someone else has done the research already, a one-paragraph summary would be great.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.72.52 (talk) 18:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Sandoz participation in MKULTRA illegal CIA program
Suggesting including this in the criticism section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.29.2.50 (talk) 00:54, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
General
The meaning of the following two sentences are unclear to me (I would edit them but am unsure what the intent is or facts are): 1-"Renamed to Novartis following an acquisition by Ciba-Geigy, it owns Sandoz, a large manufacturer of generic drugs. " (who/which company is "it" referring to? Should this sentence read: "Renamed to Novartis following ITS acquisition by Ciba-Geigy, NOVARTIS ALSO owns Sandoz, a large manufacturer of generic drugs." ?) 2-"In 1996 this company merged with Sandoz, with the pharmaceutical divisions of both staying together to form Novartis, other Ciba-Geigy businesses being spun off as independent companies." (the latter part)Blue cannonball splash (talk) 20:09, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Done Jytdog (talk) 11:36, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Ciba Geigy
This page redirects from Ciba-Geigy. This seems wrong to me, as the Ciba-Geigy / Sandoz merger led to:
- Novartis being created by merging the pharma divisions.
- Syngenta being created out of Ciba Ag division.
- Ciba Specialty Chemicals being created out of Additives (and Polymers?)
- Ciba SC was recently acquired by BASF.
Ciba Geigy was not simply renamed "Novartis" after a merger with Sandoz - I believe the above divisions were *never* part of the combined Novartis, and there may be more to the above than I have listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.5.24.11 (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
Done Jytdog (talk) 11:54, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Sandoz
This article says that Sandoz produces generics. I thought Sandoz became Novartis. SO Sandoz is still around under the name Sandoz? Jaberwocky6669 July 1, 2005 03:19 (UTC)
No, some time after the merger, Novartis relaunched their generics under the brandname "Sandoz". The Sandoz company before the merger and the Novartis Sandoz brand have totaly differend product ranges. (the generics from both merger companies) 81.221.97.181 03:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
1986 Chemical Spill?
The page List of Environmental Disasters points to the Novartis page in reference to the Sandoz chemical spill into the Rhine River in 1986. However, there is merely a passing reference to the incident, with no details. If someone is able to add a summary of the incident that briefly describes the environmental and human health effects, it would make the link from the aforementioned page much more valuable. (I will see if I can find the time to do so, but if someone else has done the research already, a one-paragraph summary would be great.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.27.72.52 (talk) 18:12, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
BBC documentary
This company was mentioned regarding indian drug trials as part of a BBC documentary broadcast today. Could someone more familar with wikipedia write something about this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4932188.stm
Cheers,
JHJPDJKDKHI! 20:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- There is also http://www.msf.org/petition_india/international.html from Médecins Sans Frontières --Jerome Potts 06:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Done this is already covered in the article. Jytdog (talk) 11:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Gerber Foods
Gerber Foods has been sold to Nestlé few days ago.
http://www.foodproductiondaily-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=75670-nestle-gerber-acquisition-baby-food
I don't speak, and also write, english so well, so could somebody do the modification.
216.99.39.31 16:51, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Criticism
The impending outcome of the novartis court action in India has not been mentioned. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6358721.stm A court challenge to India's patent laws by the pharmaceutical giant Novartis.89.100.250.181 09:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
I removed the POV dispute since the outcome of the court decision has since been added to the article. Koifishkid (talk) 00:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:NOVARTISLOGO.png
Image:NOVARTISLOGO.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Huntingdon Life Sciences
Hello, I would like to add a section about Novartis and Huntingdon Life Sciences and the animal rights campaign, Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty. Here is what I have so far: "Novartis has come under lots of fire because they are one of Huntingdon Life Science's biggest customers. Since 1999, Novartis offices have been vandalized and even firebombed. In addition, there have been lots of home pickets at Novartis executive’s homes, which still continue today." Carniv (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Name
where the name Novartis come from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.181.102.108 (talk) 17:47, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
The Name comes from NOVA ARTE and means New Art refering to the new ways to produce pharmaka.
I didn't know how to responde so i just put it in here.
Bion
Add Bion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acibenzolar-S-methyl) to list of products? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.149.97 (talk) 11:29, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Corporate conscience
Time, 9 March 2009, has an article discussing Novartis making Coartem. Novartis does not make a profit, in fact it makes a loss when it makes this drug. It is a drug that suits poor countries and people because it cures malaria instead of preventing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.45.7 (talk) 03:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Order of ownership
Ref the statement: "Renamed to Novartis following an acquisition by Ciba-Geigy, it owns Sandoz, a large manufacturer of generic drugs. "
What was "renamed" to Novartis following an acquisition? You do not rename a non-existing entity, unless there was a differently named body that Ciba-Geigy acquired and then renamed it "Novartis".
I wish to suggest that the facts are actually different. According to Edgar Schein, who was a consultant to Ciba-Geigy for almost 10 years, Ciba-Geigy merged with a former competitor called Sandoz and the resulting company was later renamed Novartis. (cf. Schein, E.H. (2010) Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass. p.44) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agboifo (talk • contribs) 17:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Done Jytdog (talk) 11:04, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
edits by Meaghanvegan
Hi User: Meaghanvegan you appear to be upset about the court action in India and perhaps other controversial actions by Novartis. The changes you made were a) moving the controversies section to the top of the article and b) changes to the section on court challenges in India, specifically changing the section header from "Challenge to India's patent laws" to "Preventing Indian citizens from access to cheaper generic medicines" and c) making the Doctors Without Borders source into a "main". I discuss each of these below, separated out so we can talk about them one by one. Jytdog (talk) 09:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
- The first change is arguably WP:Tendentious - instead of there being an NPOV description of the company's history, its business model, its products, and then controversies, as there is with most company articles, you moved the controversies high into the article, just below the history section. It should stay where it was, as per the standard style. Would you please explain how it complies with WP:NPOV and normal company article style, to move the controversies high into the article? Jytdog (talk) 09:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
- The second change, to the section header, changed a more or less NPOV header "Challenge to India's patent laws" to a clearly POV "Preventing Indian citizens from access to cheaper generic medicines". India's patent law is new, and was structured in such a way that it was not possible for companies to obtain patents in India that they have been able to obtain elsewhere. From the perspective of the companies, this was not optimal, and - being free as anyone else to use the court system - they did so. The header "Challenge to India's patent laws" describes that (it is a bit overly broad, as Novartis did not challenge the entire body of law, but rather some provisions) but is still relatively NPOV. Your change to "Preventing Indian citizens from access to cheaper generic medicines" makes it appear that their goal was actually to harm Indian citizens which is a) not accurate and b) POV. I do understand that if Novartis had won, Indian citizens would have been prevented from access to some generic drugs - but certainly not all. Your change also makes it appear that this was their goal - to remove access to all generics. So I reverted this too. Please explain how to your change to the section header is a) accurate and b) complies with NPOV.Jytdog (talk) 09:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
- Your use of the {{subst:main}} template is not correct. That template is used to refer to another Wikipedia article, not to a source. Sources are used to support content, and end up in footnotes. If there was an especially key publication about an issue, the publication itself could be discussed in the article content - but you would need a second source then, to show the importance of the first source. I also want to note that the source you put there is not an NPOV, reliable source, but instead was the website of a campaign run by Doctors without Borders, opposed to Novartis. This source is not a NPOV, reliable source, right? If you would like to create NPOV content about MsF campaign, that is fine, but that content needs to be backed up with reliable sources from third parties, showing that the campaign was notable in its own right. Jytdog (talk) 09:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hope that makes sense. Happy to discuss. Jytdog (talk) 09:46, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Meaghanvegan: Hi Jytdog. I will ensure all changes in future are NPOV. I image I removed myself already? Some of the changes are for greater explanation, not necessary NPOV. I will have to add the other court cases but ensure they not inflammatory Meaghanvegan (talk) 03:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi - thanks for talking!! I really appreciate it that you are willing to talk, so thanks for that alone. Thanks too for adding content and sources for the April 2013 off-labeling marketing lawsuits. The sources are very good - the content you created needed some work however, so I cleaned that up. Also, this is the exact same kind of thing that was described a couple of sections above - it was all about off-label marketing. It is useful for the reader to see that just 3 years ago Novartis settled a big investigation into the same kind of thing -- that fact was cited in the sources you brought for the 2013 actions, and is also reason that prosecutors are seeking treble damages - they are saying that Novartis knowingly did it this time, as they were under an agreement with the DoJ to be squeaky clean as part of the 2010 settlement. Thanks again for bringing this new content to WIkipedia! If you care to, please have a look at this, which teaches editors how to cite references. Jytdog (talk) 13:00, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi thanks, I appreciate it. In my opinion - if Novartis don't want their page to look NPOV they shouldn't keep doing these things. Even neutral reporting paints them in a less than ideal light. I'm currently undergoing a lawsuit with Novartis that's pretty similar to the sex discrimination class action as it involves the same concepts: sex harassment; sex discrimination; victimisation; cover up by HR; cover up by the complaints division; throwing money into the hands of the perpetrators to legally stifle & bully me for a further (so far) year. I'll read the Help Wiki - just haven't had a chance yet. They've threatened me with a possible contempt of court hearing that threatens jail, in a week. All I'm trying to do is get Novartis AG to intervene above the perpetrators so the bullying will stop & I'll get a fair hearing! They haven't learned a anything! Meaghanvegan (talk) 01:00, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi User:Meaghanvegan - I have no idea what Novartis wants - I have been working on this article with you, based on WIkipedia's policies. I am very sorry for what you are going through - sounds terrible! I am also sorry to tell you this, but you have a personal and financial conflict of interest with respect to Novartis and you should not edit this article. Please see WP:COI. Again I am very sorry for what you are going through but you are using Wikipedia the wrong way. Please also see WP:NOT. Jytdog (talk) 02:46, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Pipeline
The article had a section for Novartis' pipeline that had one product in it. This is kind of silly. I don't have the desire to create content on Novartis' pipeline -- something that changes so much it is probably not worth the effort, except maybe for products in Phase II and higher. If somebody wants to do that, great! Jytdog (talk) 01:25, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Drug naming conventions
The article currently uses a messy mixture of generic and proprietary drug names. The proprietary names may have been introduced by American editors, who seem culturally biased towards such names, or COI edits by Novartis people. Whatever, we need a cleanup by an expert editor with pharmacology skills. --Ef80 (talk) 19:31, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
- accusations about COI editing are unproductive and unfortunate and other than making that comment, i am ignoring them. i just glanced quickly through the article, and it seems that in most places both names are given. can you please point out specific sections? btw this does not take an expert in pharmacology, just some basic googling skills to fix. Jytdog (talk) 23:50, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Edits by conflicted editor: "U.S. government's second civil fraud lawsuit against Novartis AG in four days"
Today in this dif I again removed this section. In mid-October an editor, User:Meaghanvegan started adding a lot of negative stuff to this article. In discussion on Talk (please see above) she revealed that she is in litigation with Novartis. I pointed out that she had a COI and she stopped adding material. I went through and used what I could of what she added and did some other work improving the article. With respect to this section, which she had added in her mid-October run; I read the sources she provided, and others, and created content and used the sources in the section Novartis#Off-label_marketing_and_other_marketing_violations, in these difs. I did not notice that subsequently Meaghanvegan edit-warred, and put this section back in as she had originally written it in this dif], without saying what she was doing, until the section was edited further today by User:Aichik in these difs. So today I deleted the section; the content in that section is already covered in the article in a NPOV, well sourced way. Happy to discuss. Jytdog (talk) 13:23, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Add Signifor to products listing
The Novartis product SIGNIFOR (pasireotide diaspartate) injection was approved for marketing in Europe and the US in 2012, indicated for the treatment of adult patients with Cushing's disease for whom pituitary surgery is not an option or has not been curative. There is a Wikipedia article on pesireotide, but the product is not in the list of Novartis products in the Novartis article. Thanks, Kmrawlings (talk) 18:03, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Ciba Geigy's Illegal Dumping
Perhaps the illegal dumping case in New Jersey should be expanded on? All the article says is that the corporation payed a fine. As a resident of the area where the dumping occurred, I find this to be somewhat of an under-exaggeration. It seems relevant to mention that this illegal dumping has been linked to dozens of cancers, nervous disorders, and deaths in my town. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.39.29.183 (talk) 23:20, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
- thanks for your note. I appreciate you just writing a note here instead of adding content to the article about this, as it sounds like you have a conflict of interest on this issue. What would be really great, is if you are able to provide links to reliable sources with information about this (sources like the NY Times, the Wall Street Journal - high quality, not blogs or activist websites. I would be happy to use them to create content, if you like. Sorry that you live in a place that got dumped on. Bad news. Jytdog (talk) 23:47, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Polish patients as guinea pigs
I have added a new subsection: Illegal testing of flu vaccine in Poland, based on this article. Has it been censored here?
It was big news in Poland (and known to specialists worldwide), and it still affects vaccination efforts there. Please elaborate or edit.
- You've provide references that a private clinic in Poland is being proscecuted for violating informed consent laws and conducting an illegal trial. There is no mention of Novartis being charged, let alone convicted in any of these sources as near as I can tell. For this to be notable you need to provide sources at least stating that Novartis has been officially charged as complicit in this activity. Formerly 98 (talk) 22:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
They are in the references I gave. Here you are, translation of one of them:
Grudziądz / Torun. They tested the vaccine on the homeless, stood before the court in ... wigs and dark glasses Added: April 6, 2009, 9:36 Grudziądz /Toruń. Doctors and nurses from the private clinic "Good Medical Practice" ("Dobra Praktyka Lekarska”) in Grudziadz, who are responsible for testing of avian influenza vaccines on unsuspecting homeless, stood before the court in Toruń. [[dead link] Archived source, given as reference] Zezen (talk) 22:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC) I can provide many more. Please do not censor this news, but discuss it here. Zezen (talk) 22:33, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
- I don't see the word "Novartis" in any of those quotes. Please provide. Also, please provide a reference for charges being filed against Novartis by competetent legal authorities. Its been 6 years since these events. Formerly 98 (talk) 22:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
- Zezen please do not edit war. Please follow WP:BRD. Finish discussing here, and if there is conensus to add something, we will do that! Can you please tell us, what has been going on for the past 5 years? The most recent news I could find was 2009, after the defendant's motion to dismiss was rejected and the trial moved forward. Has there been a verdict? If so, what was it? Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 22:47, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Here is another article by Gazeta Wyborcza, the largest Polish daily, a newspaper of record, about them being charged, doubly archived:
There are more, which I quoted (update note: I converted the refs to URLs here, as they looked ugly)
- Indictment for the illegal testing of vaccines (Akt oskarżenia za nielegalne testowanie szczepionek)
It was also extensively covered by Rzeczpospolita, Wprost, and other major Polish magazines.
I have not followed it since, but based on less reputable reports I gather that the court case is still ongoing, while the doctors (whose names were published in the article cited above) had to requalify.
Instead of section blanking, please review these materials and reedit. Zezen (talk) 23:00, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
- It is very clear from sources you already brought, that the people running the clinic, not Novartis, were charged with a crime and that the trial started. If -- IF - the court case shows that Novartis did something wrong, it might be appropriate for this article. As it stands, no source says that Novartis did anything wrong. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I have been busy and will be in the days to come.
You are right that the case is against the doctors, and not Novartis. Yet it is Novartis who failed to oversee the clinics, so vicarious liability may apply.
Please note that e.g. that in the case of "Valsartan data scandal" in Japan, an accepted subsection of the article, the court case has not even started, pacem Wikipedia itself, while in Poland it has been ongoing for years, with many court sessions, despite legal attempts to derail the process (see the articles I quoted).
For the record I found even more English articles about the case:
- Bloomberg: Poland Charges Doctors for Misleading Patients in Drug Test
- Ceepharma: Novartis clinical trials illegal?
etc.
The latter merits quoting it here, as it calls a spade a spade, that is "Novartis clinical trials":
Novartis clinical trials illegal? [...] The “Dobra Praktyka Lekarska” clinic in Grudziadz was one of the 16 Polish centres engaged in the third phase of clinical trails of the Fluad-H5N1 bird flu vaccine, produced by Novartis. It was a part of a clinical trial covering 4,400 participants in Poland, the Czech Republic and Lithuania. [...] The case is under investigation, but the Office for the Registration of Medicinal Products, Medical Devices and Biocides (URPL), which is responsible for monitoring such cases, claims that the situation may be repeated in the future, as the office has only one inspector controlling clinical trails, and no money to create more posts.
As I wrote, I won't have time to contribute more for now, so I will be happy if other Wikipedians pursued it on my behalf.
Zezen (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
- It was clear already before you posted this wall of text, that there is a court case going on in Poland concerning a clinical trial of a Novartis drug. There have been no convictions; we have no idea if anything illegal was done by Novartis or even by the clinic, until the facts come out and there is a verdict. Jytdog (talk) 17:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
question
can i get comtrex cold tablet in lithuania — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.222.145.8 (talk) 07:09, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
- We don't give that sort of advice in Wikipedia. But good luck. Jytdog (talk) 06:44, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
archiving
Thanks 76.14.87.120 for somehow finding those old, date-driven archives. I just consolidated the contents of each of them into archive 1 and speedy deleted them. And reverted back to the former style of having the search box in the header. How did you find those? I wonder if there are more. Jytdog (talk) 05:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
GSK drug swapover?
With the divestment of the vaccines division to GSK, and Novartis acquiring the oncology division from GSK in turn in 2015, do we wait until market authorisation transfer is complete to update the products table? Or can it be updated right now? Kumorifox (talk) 10:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Novartis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.novartis.com/about-novartis/company-history/index.shtml
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230203847/http://www.novartis.com/about-novartis/company-history/index.shtml to http://www.novartis.com/about-novartis/company-history/index.shtml
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/01/13/novartis-cut-almost-2000-us-jobs-year.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/13/us-novartis-idUSTRE80C0EB20120113
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.novartis.com/investors/product-sales.shtml
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120112-715529.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2008/ucm1048118.htm
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/24/us-novartis-britain-idUSBRE83N0GM20120424
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Novartis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://archive.is/20080916100937/http://www.efpia.eu/content/default.asp?PageID=559&DocID=4883 to http://www.efpia.eu/content/default.asp?PageID=559&DocID=4883
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131022065700/http://www.niir.org/books/book/isbn-HandbookonTextileAuxiliaries%2CDyesandDyeIntermediatesTechnology/zb%2C%2C16c%2Ca%2C0%2C0%2Ca/index.html to http://www.niir.org/books/book/isbn-HandbookonTextileAuxiliaries%2CDyesandDyeIntermediatesTechnology/zb%2C%2C16c%2Ca%2C0%2C0%2Ca/index.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0%2C9171%2C860898%2C00.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages%2Fmedicines%2Fhuman%2Forphans%2F2009%2F11%2Fhuman_orphan_000677.jsp
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2008/ucm1048118.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
History
The acquisition of GSK's oncology products is covered, but the sale of Novartis Animal Health to Lilly, which generated the cash for that acquisition is not mentioned. 71.91.249.130 (talk) 16:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
I tried to look up information about Hannah Rhind's mentioned "false stalking allegations" against Shumsheer Ghumman but could not find any. Instead what I found is that Shumsheer Ghumman was convicted to 9 years in prison for... hiring a hitman to kill Hannah Rhind's father, and when the hitman pulled out he tried to kill him himself. Roughly the same entry has been added in Hoffmann-La_Roche's wikipedia page (writing "harassed" instead of "stalked", yet linking to the same sources that mention nothing about the allegations being false) about the time Hannah Rhind worked at Roche, also under the section "Notable Alumni".
So is it safe to assume that this a false entry? And if so entered by whom and for what purpose? Unless someone has information to the contrary I would like to remove the entry from both pages. Remove rather than edit, since I don't believe the case is in any way relevant to Novartis' or Roche's business. Sahstar (talk) 09:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
Updates to Finance and Market Segment section for 2018
 | Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented. [See below] |
Hello Wikipedia editors, due to declared COI, I would request Wikipedia editors to perform the following update.
Extended content
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Reason to update: The earning report for Novartis has been updated for fiscal year 2018. The current information on the page is out of date as it refers to 2017 earnings. The referenced source shows the updated information. What to update: In the Finance section, kindly update the text and table to reflect 2018 updates. Here is the new text to replace the existing text. FinanceFor the fiscal year 2018, Novartis reported earnings of US$12.6 billion, with an annual revenue of US$53.2 billion, an increase of 6.05% over the previous fiscal cycle. Novartis shares traded at over $91 per share, and its market capitalization was valued at over US$209.7B billion in February 2019.[1]
Market SegmentAlcon
After the line "At that time, Novartis stated that it believed the two companies could generate some $200 million of potential annual pre-tax cost synergies." , please add the following text: Novartis announced the spinoff of its eye care division, into a separately-traded standalone company in June of 2018.[2] [3]
This announcement has been made. An additional update will be requested when the spin-off is completed.
Sandoz
After the line "Sandoz' biosimilars leads its field, getting the first biosimilar approvals in the EU." , please add the following text: In 2018, Sandoz reported USD $9.9 billion in net sales and contributed 19% to Novartis' total net sales. [4] [5]
This updates reflects the latest market segment information.
Consumer
After the line "Vaccine revenue was $1.4 billion in 2012 and has been forecast to more than double to $3.14 billion by 2018."[16]." , please add the following text: In March 2018, Novartis agreed to sell its consumer healthcare joint venture vaccines division to GlaxoSmithKline PLC for USD13.0 billion.[6] [7]. The sale was completed in June 2018. [8] [9]
This update reflects the current position in the vaccine market segment. References
|
Thank you for your feedback regarding these proposed edits Rusoke365 (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Reply 1-MAR-2019
Unable to review
- The requesting editor has not made the required disclosures.[a] Please make these disclosures at your earliest convenience, and when ready to proceed, kindly change the
{{request edit}}template's answer parameter to read from|ans=yesto|ans=no. Thank you!
Regards, Spintendo 22:46, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Notes
- ^ The only item disclosed is that there may be
"a potential COI"
. Arguments for potentiality notwithstanding, the editor in question has not disclosed who is paying for the edits, which is required.
Reply 10-MAR-2019
Unable to implement
- Thank you for making the required disclosures, it's much appreciated.
Unfortunately, your edit request cannot be implemented because the provided references are not formatted correctly.[a] The citation style predominantly used by the Novartis article is Citation Style 1 (CS1). The citation style used in the edit request consists of bare URL's.[b] Any requested edit of yours which may be implemented will need to resemble the current style already in use in the article – in this case, CS1. (See WP:CITEVAR.) In the extended section below titled Citation style, I have illustrated two examples: one showing how the edit request was submitted, and another showing how requests should be submitted in the future:
Citation style
|
|---|
The example shown above is similar to how your edit request was submitted, in that there are three URL's provided with the claim statements. But these URL's have not been placed using Citation Style 1, which is the style predominantly used by the Novartis article. Using CS1, the WikiFormatted text should resemble the following:
In the example above the references have been formatted according to Citation Style 1, which shows the author, the source's name, date, etc., all information which is lost when only the links are provided. As Wikipedia is a volunteer project, larger edit requests such yours are generally expected to have this formatting done before the request is submitted for review. |
Kindly rewrite your edit request so that it aligns more with the second example shown in the collapsed section above, and feel free to re-submit that edit request at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions about this formatting please don't hesitate to ask myself or another editor. Regards, Spintendo 21:11, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Notes
- ^ The fault for this formatting error may have originated with the automated prompts used by the edit request template, which asks for a COI editor to "supply the URL of any references used". While the resulting omission of information would not be the fault of the requesting COI editor, it nevertheless remains their responsibility to supply the references formatted in the style used by the article.
- ^ The use of bare URLs as references is a style which is acceptable for use in Wikipedia. However, general practice dictates that the style already in use for an article be the one that is subsequently used for all future additions unless changed by editorial consensus.[1]
References
- ^ "WP:CITEVAR - Wikipedia:Citing sources". Wikipedia. 20 October 2018. Retrieved 22 October 2018.
Guideline": "It is normal practice to defer to the style used by the first major contributor or adopted by the consensus of editors already working on the page, unless a change in consensus has been achieved. If the article you are editing is already using a particular citation style, you should follow it.
Reply 11-MAR-2019
Below you will see where proposals from your request have been quoted with reviewer decisions and feedback inserted underneath, either accepting, declining or otherwise commenting upon your proposal(s). Please read the enclosed notes within the proposal review section below for information on each request. Spintendo 17:11, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Proposal review 11-MAR-2019
|
|---|
|
- Hello @Spintendo: Thank you for reviewing the request and your feedback/recommendations. (Note_1)I have removed future event content and would submit a new request in the future. I left only current content. (Note_2)I also accept that that sources should confirm the statement, and this was not clear in the second section. (Note_3)I have added the page number to source. (Note_4)I added the text that shows the start and completion of the divestment. Rusoke365 (talk) 16:05, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
Reply 18-MAR-2019
Sandoz' 2018 net sales were added.
Spintendo 01:38, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
2020 scandal: fake doctors lectures and more
Let us add this:
NOVARTIS violated the federal False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback Statute by providing doctors with cash payments, recreational outings, lavish meals, and expensive alcohol to induce them to prescribe NOVARTIS cardiovascular and diabetes drugs reimbursed by federal healthcare programs. Specifically, the Government alleged that NOVARTIS organized tens of thousands of sham educational events at high-end restaurants and other venues, paid exorbitant speaker fees to doctors who gave no meaningful presentations, and provided expensive meals and alcohol to doctor attendees and their guests. When those doctors then prescribed NOVARTIS’s cardiovascular and diabetes drugs, federal healthcare programs paid hundreds of millions of dollars in reimbursements for these tainted prescriptions. As part of the settlement, approved today by U.S. District Judge Paul G. Gardephe, NOVARTIS will pay the United States and various States a total of $678 million. NOVARTIS also made extensive factual admissions in the settlement and agreed to strict limitations on any future speaker programs, including reductions to the amount it may spend on such programs.
From what I know it is systemic: they do it in also outside of the USA. I have no time to search other RS-es to back it up here, tho.
Zezen (talk) 04:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
Other sources here
- https://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/news/200/james-e-miller-on-the-678-million-novartis-false-claims-settlement/
- https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/it-was-his-dream-job-he-never-thought-he-d-n1232971
John Cummings (talk) 18:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Orphaned references in Novartis
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Novartis's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "who.int":
- From Squalene: Squalene-based adjuvants in vaccines, Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety, World Health Organization
- From Leprosy: "Leprosy". www.who.int. Retrieved 2019-07-23.
- From Neglected tropical diseases: "World Health Organization". World Health Organization. Archived from the original on 20 October 2017. Retrieved 5 May 2018.
- From Influenza A virus subtype H7N9: "Human infection with avian influenza A(H7N9) virus – China". World Health Organization. Retrieved 24 February 2017.
- From Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: "Diagnosis and notification of multidrug-resistant TB" (PDF). World Health Organization (WHO). Retrieved 7 December 2016.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 18:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)