Talk:Biovista

I am not sure for what reason you are labeling this page as advertising.

When the page was first labeled as such I took good notice. Being new to Wikipedia I realized that I had forgotten some useful information like sections on research projects and external links. I also looked very carefully at other companies like Pfizer and InforSense to see their general style and attempted to follow those.

I have included an entry on Biovista because I think they are active in a very important area, at a time when drug development is undergoing a transition in terms of technologies and how new treatments for disease are developed. This company happens to be doing some interesting work on a couple of fronts (e.g database design and text mining as well as predicting unwanted side effects of drugs) and therefore are potentially of interest to a significant number of Wikipedia users. It therefore has significant encyclopedic value since users can obtain a new perspective on drug development following the various scientific areas that the company is working on.

If in your opinion it is a matter of style let me know what you don't like and I will be glad to address it. Even better I'd appreciate your opinion on how the section you do not approve of should be modified.

Thanks. Xtisths (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi there Xtisths. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia! What we have here is a failure to understand Wikipedia's notability requirements. "Interesting work" and "potential interest to a significant number of Wikipedia users" are not valid reasons for establishing notability. Can you take a look at WP:CORP, which is the guideline for establishing notability for companies (a spinoff of the main notability policy)? You need to tell us how this meets WP:CORP's criteria. Unless you can do this, I'm afraid the article will be deleted. I will do a bit of research myself and see if I can find some major coverage that will help. Tan      39  15:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Here we go, there's a few. Incorporate information from the following coverage:
 * Article about missing funding (bizjournal)
 * Article on $30M investment from Gold Leaf (bnet)
 * Same article on WRAL
 * I'm not sure these articles can establish "significant coverage", but it's a start. Tan      39  15:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Changes to the article have been made to address the issue of inadequate coverage as stated above. Xtisths (talk) 14:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Biovista. 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://web.archive.org/web/20100519093333/http://www.asia-lifesciences.com:80/news-86-bva601-biovistainc-preclinicaltrial-epilepsy-news5.html to http://www.asia-lifesciences.com/news-86-bva601-biovistainc-preclinicaltrial-epilepsy-news5.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080731131000/http://www.eu-acgt.org:80/ to http://www.eu-acgt.org/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050902074209/http://webode.dia.fi.upm.es:80/sew/esperonto.html to http://webode.dia.fi.upm.es/sew/esperonto.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100715045742/http://pharmalicensing.com:80/public/companies/view/20350/biovista-inc to http://pharmalicensing.com/public/companies/view/20350/biovista-inc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)