Talk:Sophia Genetics

Awards

The awards section needs immediate clean-up. Any award that is primary sourced –e.g. cited to the awarding media outlet – is liable to be deleted. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:10, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted section. The other problem was that most if not all of these awards were lists of 50 or 100 awardees, which makes them even less appropriate for an encyclopedia. One award was also to the CEO as an individual, not to the company. All in all, this falls under PR style writing as documented at WP:Identifying PR. ☆ Bri (talk) 01:13, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

History edit request

Hello Wikipedia editors, I'm Kelly, and I'm here on this Talk page as a Sophia Genetics employee to post my first edit request. I understand the importance of declaring a conflict of interest as an employee of the company, so I posted a detailed explanation of my COI on my user page here: User:Comms Kelly.

For this update, I've put together the most significant change I'm proposing: to absorb the Funding section of the article into the History section, keeping only the most essential bits of information. I totally understand why there is a Funding section within the article now, but since the company went public in 2021, offering a detailed breakdown of every minor round of funding from the 2010s seems like an over-explanation of now irrelevant information. Below, I'll list all the changes I'm proposing:

  • Updated the description of the Sophia DDM platform in the second paragraph of the History section, citing the following outlets to verify updated information: FierceBIotech, Medical Device Network, and TechCrunch. Also, I removed the TechTour citation from the section as the link is broken. Overall, I attempted to simplify the explanation of what the DDM platform does.
  • Removed the final sentence from the section's third paragraph, which read, "The algorithms were built bottom-up from raw FASTQ data." This read as way too science-specific for Wikipedia.
  • Removed the Funding section and ported over the funding round of Series E, Series F, and the paragraph about the company going public to the History section. I kept Series E because many high-quality citations were attached to this fundraising round.
  • Removed the following rounds of funding: Series A, Series B, Series C, and Series D.
  • In the paragraph regarding the acquisition of Interactive Biosoftware, added that IB was acquired for Alamut and added a small explanation of the product. I removed previous citations for this sentence (ICT Journal and La Tribune). I replaced them with citations from MobiHealthNews and GenomeWeb, which are better sources on the deal's specifics.
  • Removed the mention of Lara Hashimoto becoming Sophia's CBO because the citation link to her appointment at the company was broken. I attempted to find a replacement source but could not find anything of high quality also, coupled with the fact that she has since left the company, it made sense to remove it.
  • Removed the sentence about Sophia supporting 100 university hospitals in the US. I'll defer to editors, of course, but it did seem unbalanced to add just this one specific number.
  • Added the phrase "in response to the COVID-19 pandemic" in the sentence regarding Sophia's data analysis solution that was focused on predicting the disease evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
  • I removed the mention of Sophia Genetics being listed on the Nasdaq towards the end of the article since this has already been addressed in an earlier section of the article.
  • Added a sentence about how there are 780 healthcare organizations within the Sophia DDM Network, cited to GEN.
  • Added a sentence about how, in 2022, Sophia Genetics hit one million genomic profiles, cited to Inside Precision Medicine.
  • Updated all access dates within each citation to show editors that each has been reviewed in this proposed update. I went through each of them and they all seem to be working and valuable.

Here is a drop-down box with the new History draft:

I understand that this is a reasonably large edit request and that there will likely be feedback from editors. I'm certainly prepared to work together to get this draft to the best place possible within Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you so much for taking the time to evaluate this draft, and I'll be around for responses as they come. Comms Kelly (talk) 21:04, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note re: COI edit request above

For some reason I am unable to respond directly within the thread above, so I am starting a new thread to allow me to do so. Much of the present article is of a highly promotional nature, which is unsurprising given that 75% of the text was added by single purpose accounts which must surely have been associated with the company in some way. Really this article needs to be dramatically stripped back before new material is added. (Copying in user:Comms Kelly.) Axad12 (talk) 08:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from my note above, I have now removed a significant amount of material from the article. This mainly consisted of promotional material, material in relation to funding, material in relation to awards, and material where company products were described in detail.
I would suggest that you go back to the drawing board with the COI edit request above. It would be best to start a new request thread below, using the revised article as a base, and not adding any material of the type now removed. It would also be useful if the requested additions were clearly marked so as to allow volunteers to see at a glance what is being requested to be added.
Hopefully the above notes are of assistance.
Kind regards, Axad12 (talk) 08:21, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello User:Axad12, thank you for your attention to this page. I understand that there was content in the article that was potentially added by someone connected to the company in the past, and I just wanted to note that since I joined the company fairly recently, I have aimed to make sure that the company follows Wikipedia's guidelines and Terms of Use. My only experience with Wikipedia has been this engagement.
The edit you made to the page was fair, as much of that content needed to be removed. As far as the flag on the page goes, it seems that you have removed most, if not all, of the content within the article that the undisclosed COI editor added. I understand that the previous version of the article deserved a flag, but now that it's been stripped down to just the essentials, is the flag still needed? Of course, this comes down entirely to your judgment.
Regarding future requests, I will certainly use this version of the article as the basis for any future proposed updates. There was some valuable information about the company that was caught in the crossfire of removal in your edit, like the IPO and some of the company's technology, which does have the proper sourcing to be re-added to the article.
I'll make sure to add these in my subsequent edit request. Again, thank you for your attention here. Comms Kelly (talk) 14:25, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your post above.
Yes, I've now removed the tag, no problem.
Thank you for the approach you are pursuing to getting the article in order, much appreciated. Axad12 (talk) 14:54, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IPO edit request

Hello, this is Kelly from Sophia Genetics. I'm back on this talk page for another edit request. Since the article has gone through some significant overhaul recently, I took a look at the current version of the article. I noticed a handful of essential bits of history are now missing. While overall, the article is now in a better place thanks to the helpful edits by User:Axad12, I believe a handful of these bits of content should make their way back into the article in some capacity, including what I'm proposing below.

I've whipped up a quick draft that seeks to add back the information about Sophia Genetics' IPO in 2021, managed by J.P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley, and Credit Suisse. I've cited two new sources in the short draft: Boston Business Journal and GenomeWeb.

Here's the drop-down box with the proposed sentence, which would ideally be added at the very end of the History section:

Please let me know if there are any questions about this one. Thank you! Comms Kelly (talk) 18:56, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done PK650 (talk) 20:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much! Comms Kelly (talk) 14:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Technology Edit Request

Hello Wikipedia editors, I'm Kelly, and I'm here on this Talk page as a Sophia Genetics employee to post an edit request. I understand the importance of declaring a conflict of interest as an employee of the company, so I posted a detailed explanation of my COI on my user page here: User:Comms Kelly.

For this update, I'd like to propose adding a section after the introduction describing the technology of SOPHiA GENETICS, which incorporates a brief overview and history of the technology behind the company's platform but features only the most essential bits of information. Overall, I attempted to simplify the explanation of what the company's technology platform does and believe readers may understand the topic at hand more with this section added in after the introduction.

Here is a drop-down box with the new Technology draft with citations provided throughout:

I understand that there will likely be feedback from editors. I'm certainly prepared to work together to get this draft to the best place possible within Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you so much for taking the time to evaluate this draft, and I'll be around for responses as they come. Comms Kelly (talk) 22:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]