Talk:CureVac

Request edit on 8 May 2018
I would like to request the following change: CureVac has entered into a collaboration with Eli Lilly and Company in October 2017. This could be included in the list of partners at the beginning of the entry as well as in the history part. Neutral sources are e.g. https://endpts.com/eli-lilly-is-making-a-1-8b-leap-into-the-mrna-field-targeting-next-gen-cancer-vaccines/ and https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/lilly-curevac-pen-1-8b-mrna-cancer-vaccine-deal Thank you for reviewing, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply 08-MAY-2018
When ready to proceed with your response to point No. 1 above, kindly change the request edit template to read from ans=yes to ans=no. Thank you! .   spintendo ⋅ ⋅ )  13:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) "Entering into collaboration" is a vague assertion which leaves out salient details like the purpose for the collaboration, and why. The text may be placed within the article without clarification, however, a vague inline template would be added along with it. Please advise if this is acceptable.
 * 2) Text within the article was found to be insufficiently paraphrased from the source material, and has been removed, per: WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE. A listing of the text may be found here.
 * 3) Additional text was found to be insuffciently paraphrased from the source material. This text was integral to the lead section and the beginning of the main body of text, so it was not removed. A listing of that text may be found here. in lieu of this removal, the close paraphrasing maintenance template was appended to the article.


 * Dear Spintendo,
 * Thank you for working on the article. Since other collaborations are now no longer included in the history part, Eli Lilly does not have to be included there either. However, it would still make sense in the list of partners at the beginning - would you then still need further details or add the vague inline template if it is just listed? I could provide them, if necessary.
 * How can I help to improve the article in order to discard the close paraphrasing and verification templates if I am not allowed to work in the article because of my COI? I would be grateful for advice.
 * --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 14:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You can post specific suggestions here. If you want to add content, propose it here, formatted exactly like you would if you were editing directly in the article, with citations appropriately formatted, etc.  It is like submitting a manuscript to a journal - it just happens all in public here on the talk page, instead of through email or the internet.  Jytdog (talk) 14:46, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you, so I suggest to change
 * CureVac has entered into various collaborations with multinational corporations and organizations, including agreements with Boehringer Ingelheim...
 * to
 * CureVac has entered into various collaborations with multinational corporations and organizations, including agreements with Eli Lilly and Company, Boehringer Ingelheim...
 * --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 15:26, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

✅ The Lilly information was added to where you indicated, along with the reference. .   spintendo ⋅ ⋅ )  18:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you! --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 17 May 2018
I request the following edit: Please change

In September 2015, CureVac announced it would be opening a United States hub in Cambridge, Massachusetts.[18]

to

In September 2015, CureVac announced it would be opening a United States hub in Cambridge, Massachusetts[18] which moved to Boston later the same year.

--VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 12:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

✅ .   spintendo ⋅ ⋅ )  17:17, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 18 May 2018
I request the following edit: Please change

In 2016 CureVac will start the construction of an industrial scale production facility with a capacity of 30 million doses per year.[7]

to

In 2016, CureVac has started the construction of an industrial scale production facility with a capacity of 30 million doses per year.

Thank you in advance, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 09:01, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅ It was not made clear what the "30 million doses" were of, so that part was omitted. If you clarify what this was, I can add it to the article. .   spintendo ⋅ ⋅ )  15:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Those are 30 million doses of (RNA-based) medicines. Thanks, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 11:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 18 May 2018
I request the following edit: Please change

Since inception, CureVac had received approximately $330 million (€300 million) in equity investments.[3]

to

Since inception, CureVac had received approximately $360 million (€300 million) in equity investments and has a valuation of $1.65 billion (status October 2017) and thus is classified as a Unicorn (finance).

Thank you, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 09:26, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅ I am working on rewriting the text which needs to be paraphrased, so that the maintenance template may be removed. Expect that shortly. .   spintendo ⋅ ⋅ )  15:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The problematic, insufficiently paraphrased sentences have been addressed (a description of these is in the edit summary) and the Close paraphrase maintenance template has been removed.  .  spinten do    02:35, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much for rewriting the text and removing the template. Unfortunately, the sentence is now a bit misleading (it had already been ambiguous before): What we develop are prophylactic vaccines in the area of infectious diseases (e.g. vaccines against rabies) as well as therapeutic vaccines in the areas oncology (Cancer immunotherapy) and rare diseases (e.g. Ornithine transcarbamylase deficiency). I suggest to change the sentence as follows:


 * The company's focus is on developing prophylactic treatment for diseases of infection, primarily through the use of vaccines, as well as therapeutic treatment for cancer and rare diseases.


 * Since rare diseases have not yet been part of our research when the named source was published in 2012, this article could be added as source: https://www.thepharmaletter.com/article/new-mrna-partnership-in-rare-diseases


 * Thank you for reviewing, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 23 May 2018
Since the link of source no. 18 ("Sequence Engineered mRNA Without Chemical Nucleoside Modifications...") does not work any more, I suggest to replace it with the current link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4817881/ Thanks, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 11:33, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 23 May 2018
Since the source of the sentence "In 2006, CureVac successfully established the first GMP facility worldwide for the manufacturing of mRNA for medical purposes" actually does not account for this information, I suggest to change it to the following: https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/projects/curevac-gmp-iv-production-facility-tubingen/ This source, however, does not verify that it was the "first worldwide", so this part probably should be deleted from the sentence. Thanks, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 12:29, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply 23-MAY-2018

 * The requested edits above have been implemented in the areas where the changes were deemed acceptable. In other instances, material that was no longer referenced was either omitted or updated. Please see the article itself for these changes.
 * The use of the term "doses" by itself without an accompanying drug can be confusing to a reader. The claim of manufacture for a specific amount of doses every month requires that the facility be open for an acceptable amount of time before forcasts like that may be reliably made. The forcasting of specific numbers of doses depends on issues such as access to raw product, maintenance issues, staffing etc. At this point, there has not been time enough to generate even a base figure of production to use in these calculations. Thus the reliability of any hard and certain claims as to how many "doses" will be manufactured is to be cautiously avoided for the time being. In any event, it speaks to future events, which are generally not allowed. If there is current information on current production rates, please advise.
 * When making edit requests, please ensure that all your request go under a single level 2 heading along with a single instance of the template. Please do not modify older templates that have been resolved unless specifically asked to by a reviewer. Reactivating older templates when other, newer templates are closed after it, makes it difficult to follow along with the flow of requests. Thank you!  .  spinten do    17:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 24 May 2018
Thank you for reviewing and the feedback which makes perfectly sense as well as for the directions concerning the editing process.

I have one more request concerning the refimprove template: As far as I can see, all details in the article now have citations from reliable sources; the only source that does not quite verify the content of the article is source no. 16: Since the technology section of the article now only consists of one sentence which, moreover, does not include up-to-date facts and figues (numbers outdated, trial finished, at the same time several other trials in progress), I would suggest to delete this parapraph. Afterwards, I ask to remove the refimprove template and to reconsider the stub grading of the article. If there are other concerns regarding the article, please let me know and I will do my best to help improving it.

Is it okay if I set links to other articles myself (e.g. change vaccines to vaccines, Nature Biotechnology to Nature Biotechnology...)?

Thank you in advance, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 08:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Reply 24-MAY-2018
✅
 * 1) Thank you for your question. It's very important that you not edit the article directly, except in cases where you are removing instances of obvious vandalism or correcting spelling errors. For all other changes, including the addition of WikiLinks, please use the edit request system.
 * 2) As far as the "refimprove template" you mentioned (which is actually a More citations needed template), I would normally ask that you speak with the editor who placed the template in 2013. In this case, the editor who placed that template has not been active since 2015. The issue surrounding the placement of that template, that more references needed to be found, has by 2018 been addressed. Thus the issues marked by the template being placed at that time have been corrected, and the template was removed. Regards,  .  spinten do    12:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 21 June 2018
I would like to request that a management change be incuded in the text or the box: New CEO is Daniel L. Menichella, formerly Chief Business Officer of the AG and Chief Executive Officer of the Inc. He replaces founder and former CEO Ingmar Hoerr, PhD, who is now Chairman of the Supervisory Board. You can find sources on the website (http://www.curevac.com/news/curevac-announces-new-management-structure/) or e.g. on this news site (https://www.fiercepharma.com/vaccines/news-note-sinovac-drama-sequel-flu-vaccine-and-more?utm_source=internal&utm_medium=rss).

Thank you for reviewing, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 07:46, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅   spintendo   14:37, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

PR
This page is not a clean recounting of Curevac's story which is much more complicated and  interesting than what is portrayed here with some significant ups and downs. The history of this company, founded in 2000, bizarrely starts in 2013. I have retagged the page is this is not a WP article. Jytdog (talk) 15:46, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Request edit on 9 August 2018
The number of employees has changed and is currently at about 400 (same source as before). Could somebody please adapt this change?

Thank you, --VerenaLauterbach CureVacAG (talk) 07:31, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

✅  spintendo   09:44, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

Image concern


I don't know policy on this one, but I'm personally not enthused about the use of a prominent image containing a slogan beholden to ®, universal symbol of conspicuously lawyered up. &mdash; MaxEnt 17:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of interest flag seems unnecessary
I gave this article a quick skim and I really don't see a lot of content here where one would question impartiality of a main contributor. Is this flag still required?

I made one quick change to the lead to push the aspirational rah-rah-rah sentence down to the top of the second paragraph, with improved continuity.

The only sore thumb on quick inspection was overplaying the Trumpian scuttlebutt.

On 11 March 2020, it was reported that CureVac AG's CEO Daniel Menichella was no longer the company's CEO, having been replaced by company founder Ingmar Hoerr. Menichella was reported to have met U.S. President Donald Trump on 2 March.

The paragraph continues with the core allegation that Trump offered a special deal. That part deserves entirely separate consideration. I myself have no immediate strong objection, but I can imagine another editor suggesting we nix that as well.

Those sentences read as innuendo about innuendo (my least favourite double down) and then there's the sourcing.

"Was it something he said?" passes the universal smell test for journalist fishing expeditions.

"Am I just saying?" smugs Tucker Carlson. "You be the judge." Also, could this be a legitimate, solid source? Asking for a friend.

Finally, I don't see the point in the context of this article to link sordid speculation about the timing of Menichella's replacement with the Trumpian scuttlebutt.

With this one deletion I would consider remove the conflict of interest flag at the top of the article, useless it's an ongoing concern. &mdash; MaxEnt 18:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Vague collaborations
With this edit I'm somewhat contradicting my sentiment from my previous topic.

There is something fishy about this prominent list of "collaborations" indistinguishable from ordinary business relationships.

It's the kind of thing a motivate partisan would know how to pull together, where a random 3rd party editor would never sew such a vague, nondescript quilt.

CureVac has entered into various collaborations with organizations, including agreements with Boehringer Ingelheim, Sanofi Pasteur, Johnson & Johnson, Genmab, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, and the government of Germany.


 * High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation — today's special selection from the Collaboration of the Month Club

&mdash; MaxEnt 18:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Lead section
Hi, I previously edited the second paragraph of the lead section as it appeared to be some sort of translation that wasn't very great. Upon further reading I have noticed that what is said in this paragraph is repeated in a section dedicated to COVID-19. I propose that the second paragraph of the lead section is deleted and replaced with information that is more relevant to the company and what they do.

Thanks in advance Danwordy (talk) 15:52, 17 August 2023 (UTC)