Talk:List of bioinformatics companies

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of bioinformatics companies article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Molecular Biology: COMPBIO

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Computational Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Red links

"The primary purpose of this list is to serve as a holding place for the identities of Bioinformatics companies, particularly those for which articles have not yet been created." I don't believe this is appropriate. If a company is not notable enough for an article, there is no reason for it to be included in a Wikipedia list.

For how things are done elsewhere, see the List of search engines. The editors there are enforcing a rule that no search engine can be in the list unless it has a Wikipedia article. In my opinion, all the entries presently included in List of bioinformatics companies that lack articles ought to be removed. Of course, nothing prevents someone from writing a properly-sourced article on a bioinformatics company. If that were done, then its inclusion would be justified. EdJohnston (talk) 15:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, at the very least, the introduction needs to be re-written. Wikipedia doesn't do "holding places", and lists of pages-to-create are metadata which belong on a talk or project page, not a live entry. Joe D (t) 17:59, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-written the lead to eliminate all meta-references. --RL0919 (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting

Would not make sense to sort this list alphabetically? Is there an automatic way of doing this in Wikipedia? --Oleginger (talk) 15:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of these so-called 'free' software companies are not free, e.g. CLC 193.190.172.82 (talk) 17:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List is now sorted. This isn't automatic, but not hard to do either. Of course the big problem is that many of the entries are from single-purpose accounts that aren't very familiar with editing. --RL0919 (talk) 17:48, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add a link to Genostar

I would like to add a link to Genostar company which is one of the most well-known bioinformatic company. My contribution has been deleted sevral time, and some users suggest to open a discussion on this page. So here it is. Here is what I would like to add :

 *Genostar provides streamlined bioinformatics solutions: sequence assembly, mapping, annotation transfer and identification of protein domains, comparative genomics, structural searches, metabolic pathway analysis, modeling and simulation of biological networks

I think that it is as relevant as other link (Genomatix, DNAStar, ...etc) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pierocielo (talk • contribs) 11:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a collection of links. If you think this company should be included in this list you need to show notability though sound citations. Signed by Mootros (talk) 11:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC) through placing ~~~~ after a comment.[reply]

Edit request from Colinsanford, 8 November 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Please add DNAnexus to your list; DNAnexus launched its commercial cloud-based bioinformatics solution in April 2010 (www.DNAnexus.com). Entry text (between CLCbio and DNAStar:

DNAnexus is a cloud-based solution that enables sequencing centers and scientists to perform analyses, visualize results and manage next-generation DNA sequencing data – all from any web browser.

sanot 19:42, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Not done: Entries should have an article written about them before they are added to the list to demostrate notabilty. Do you have third-party sources on DNAnexus to demostrate notability? Thanks, Stickee (talk) 22:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--sanot 22:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC) Here are a number of links to articles that should qualify:

Next-Gen Sequencing Software: The Present and the Future Bio-IT World, September 28, 2010[1]

DNAnexus Seeks to Capitalize on Data Pile-Up, as Leader in Genomic Analysis Software Xconomy, July 7, 2010 [2]

Next-generation sequencing: adjusting to data overload Nature Methods, July 1, 2010[3]

DNAnexus Debuts Cloud Computing Resource for Next-Gen Sequence Data at Bio-IT World Expo Bio-IT World, May 18, 2010 [4]

DNAnexus Aims to Alleviate Next-Gen Sequence Analysis Headache with Cloud-based Service GenomeWeb, April 20, 2010 [5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colinsanford (talk • contribs) 22:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add a link to DNAnexus

Just want to reopen consideration for adding DNAnexus to this list, a notable firm worth including. Links above should support the case. Thanks in advance. --67.86.220.116 (talk) 15:22, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Biotechp, 2 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please add the following companies Gene Logic, and Ocimum Biosolutions to this list. Gene Logic www.genelogic.com - Creators of BioExpress, ToxExpress and Ascenta ( Proprietary Gene Expression databases and Toxicogenomics database called ToxExpress) Ocimum Biosolutions www.ocimumbio.com - Provides several bioinformatics software products like Genowiz, Genchek, Optgene, iRNAchek, Oligostar and offers Bioinformatics consulting services (http://www.ocimumbio.com/bioit/)

Biotechp (talk) 05:24, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Only one of those companies currently has an article here and that article seems to fail the criteria for inclusion. Please provide reliable sources that verify the notability of these companies. The most appropriate criteria is likely Wikipedia:CORP. Shell ^babelfish 07:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from MadraghRua, 15 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please add the following to this page:

Invitrogen provides Vector NTI a desktop bioinformatics suite supporting data record handling and curation, data discovery, reagent design and experimental validation tool sets.

The pages are present within Wikipedia, however you can also use the following link for information about Vector NTI if you would like an external reference for the software: http://www.invitrogen.com/site/us/en/home/LINNEA-Online-Guides/LINNEA-Communities/Vector-NTI-Community/vector-nti-software/what-is-vector-NTI.html

Please contact me if you have any questions.

MadraghRua (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Seems good to me, so added. I used the wikilink, as the company link wouldn't really be appropriate here per the guidelines on external links. Thanks! Qwyrxian (talk) 01:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from Amoghb, 19 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Medha Innovation and Development Apticraft Systems

Amoghb (talk) 09:35, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: this is a list of articles on the wiki. Neither Medha nor Apticraft currently have articles. — Bility (talk) 03:07, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 213.231.192.5, 1 April 2011

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would be add our company DCAD Data Analysis Center

213.231.192.5 (talk) 11:08, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does your company have an article on wikipedia? Syrthiss (talk) 11:10, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: we have no way of knowing if the company passes our notability guidelines; if you feel it does, please add reliable sources to this page to support this and re-activate the template as described above. Thanks. -- gtdp ^(T)/_(C) 10:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bloody mess

I'm I the only one that thinks this list is a ridiculous mess of redlinks? There is nothing on this page that indicates the redlinks are notable. Seriously, I could just invent 100 fake names and put them in as redlinks and no one would be the wiser. This tells me that the redlinks likely need to go, and I'm very tempted to just get WP:BOLD and trim the fat, which would be most of the list. Dennis Brown (talk) 23:25, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was bold for you. The 'current' version was marked up by a new editor, who greatly expanded the list with redlinks with no real indication where they were getting it from. I reverted back to the prior version. Syrthiss (talk) 11:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good job. I wanted to give a little time on the off chance someone was in the middle of a major expansion, or there was some reason I just hadn't thought of why a list of redlinks would be a good thing... Much better now, thanks for the effort. Dennis Brown (talk) 20:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

VALDO is not a bioinformatics company at all. If we go to the webpage, you can see nothing else than advertising... I highly suggest to delete the link from this page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.216.111.34 (talk) 18:14, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've stripped all the spam out of the listings. We don't need a bloody breakdown of everything the company does, the article can cover that, we just need a single sentence that defines them in the most general way. Dennis 13:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trim descriptions

This thing was looking like a Google click add. The list isn't for providing all info, it is just to list the companies. I think I've been generous in leaving the superfluous text that I left, mainly being specific product names so they would show up in a search here. Being a list, it should only provide extra info if it is adding actual meaning. It should NOT be describing the company's mission, that is what the article is for. All this market speak needs to stay out. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 14:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]