This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Naked DNA redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Naked DNA page were merged into DNA on October 2017 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
This article is unnecessary and any worthwhile information should be merged with DNA. -- September 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.119.202.254 ( talk) 21:45, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Article was listed on
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion June 30th to July 6th 2004, consensus was to keep. Discussion:
Merge with DNA and delete. Neutrality 14:50, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
End discussion
SECOND PARAGRAPH:
"In the field of DNA vaccines or genetic immunization, the term "naked DNA" was coined by Vical to mean DNA delivered free from agents which promote transfection. Vical is an important vaccination produced recently working on the H1N1 virus vaccine. It needs lots of contributions so it can finish its studies on humans. The companies studies have shown 100% results in animals and is ready for humans but it needs to be completed to save people from the future pandemic. Research on the use of naked DNA for DNA vaccinations and gene therapy has shown some initial success, but have not yet resulted in any generally available therapy."
CONCERNS:
[1] "coined by Vical"
Who is Vical?
[2] "Vical is an important vaccination"
a] important = unsubstantiated opinion b] how does a vaccination coin a term?
[3] "needs lots of contributions"
solicitation????
[4] "have shown 100% results" and "shown some initial success"
a] contradictory b] no citation
Rodtheman ( talk) 18:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)rodtheman
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Naked DNA redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past. |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Naked DNA page were merged into DNA on October 2017 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
This article is unnecessary and any worthwhile information should be merged with DNA. -- September 2016 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.119.202.254 ( talk) 21:45, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Article was listed on
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion June 30th to July 6th 2004, consensus was to keep. Discussion:
Merge with DNA and delete. Neutrality 14:50, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
End discussion
SECOND PARAGRAPH:
"In the field of DNA vaccines or genetic immunization, the term "naked DNA" was coined by Vical to mean DNA delivered free from agents which promote transfection. Vical is an important vaccination produced recently working on the H1N1 virus vaccine. It needs lots of contributions so it can finish its studies on humans. The companies studies have shown 100% results in animals and is ready for humans but it needs to be completed to save people from the future pandemic. Research on the use of naked DNA for DNA vaccinations and gene therapy has shown some initial success, but have not yet resulted in any generally available therapy."
CONCERNS:
[1] "coined by Vical"
Who is Vical?
[2] "Vical is an important vaccination"
a] important = unsubstantiated opinion b] how does a vaccination coin a term?
[3] "needs lots of contributions"
solicitation????
[4] "have shown 100% results" and "shown some initial success"
a] contradictory b] no citation
Rodtheman ( talk) 18:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)rodtheman