Talk:BioMarin Pharmaceutical

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the BioMarin Pharmaceutical 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

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

California Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Start‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Start This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Pharmacology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

216.70.243.242 (talk · contribs)

Entry regarding Andrea Sloan

While the facts seem legit, the language and tone seem hostile toward BioMarin. I feel this should be checked by someone with greater skill than I.

Cjmartin65 (talk) 14:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

FreeRangeFrog: I think the characterization of my addition as a "coatrack" is incorrect. The page you linked in defines a "coatrack" as biased and irrelvent material.

1) Its not biased. It took no sides at all. There is not a single sentence in there that says or implies "Biomarin should have given her the drug" or that "Elizabeth Sloan was unfairly trying to jump the queue".

2) Its not tangental or undue weight. You may think that this company is about orphan drugs and that's the whole story. But to a lot of people the Sloan story is the first time they ever heard about Biomarin, and it pretty much all they know about the company. While the news coverage may have been biased and uniformed (I am not a supporter of Ms. Sloan), the fact that it was extensive makes it "notable" and thus suitable for inclusion in the article.

I do think the article could benefit from a longer discussion of the company's R&D focus, its current products, and its R&D pipeline. At this point there is not even any discussion of how the company was founded or whether it is currently profitable. If these sections were fleshed out, the discussion of Sloan would at that point be only 5% of the article, which to my POV, is about the correct amount of weight to give it.

In my opinion the best way to reduce any "undue weight" you feel that these seven sentences represent is not to delete them, but to finish the article, which in its current form is pretty much a stub. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.155.21.76 (talk) 06:33, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to note here that this edit was reverted a second time, and without any reason being given or any response to my request to engage on the this Talk page. I don't think this is productive or helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.155.21.76 (talk) 12:12, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the section on Sloan was too long, but it does belong here. I edited it down a bit and did some other re-org work. Jytdog (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you did a nice job with the edits. No objections here. 98.155.21.76 (talk) 19:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]