This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
COVID-19 misinformation by governments article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
pseudoscience and
fringe science, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to
provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
|
A note on WP:MEDRS: Per this Wikipedia policy, we must rely on the highest quality secondary sources and the recommendations of professional organizations and government bodies when determining the scientific consensus about medical treatments.
Evidence of efficacy for ivermectin is inconclusive. It should not be used outside of clinical trials.( May 2021, June 2021, June 2021, July 2021, July 2021) ( WHO, FDA, IDSA, ASHP, CDC, NIH)
Neither hydroxychloroquine nor chloroquine should be used, either alone or in combination with azithromycin, in inpatient or outpatient settings.( July 2020, Aug 2020, Sep 2020, May 2021) ( WHO, FDA, IDSA, ASHP, NIH)
based in part on Shi [Zhengli]'s emailed answers." ( RfC, December 2021)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
List of good sources with good coverage to help expand. Not necessarily for inclusion but just for consideration. Preferably not articles that just discuss a single quote/press conference. The long-style reporting would be even better. Feel free to edit directly to add to the list. ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 17:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Last updated by Julian Brown ( talk) 23:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
] · |
---|
For the relevant sourcing guideline, see WP:SCHOLARSHIP. For a database curated by the NCBI, see LitCoVID |
|
] · |
---|
For the relevant sourcing guideline, see WP:RSOPINION. |
|
] · |
---|
Keep in mind, these are primary sources and thus should be used with caution! |
|
References
If Minister of AYUSH Ministry has spread some misinformation then that should also be considered misinformation by Indian Government in my opinion as he is the head of Ministry of AYUSH. So, the following content should be added into the article:
Minister of State for AYUSH Shripad Naik claimed that an Ayurveda practitioner cured Prince Charles when he tested positive for the Covid-19. This claim was rubbished by United Kingdom officials. [1] [2]
I would request other editors to present their opinion on it. Jasksingh ( talk) 11:42, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
References
It says that in spite of evidence of Chloroquine that it doesn't work. Bolsonaro continues recommending it. Well, this is not misinformation. As there is also plenty of evidence in support of it. Supporting the use of Chloroquine is not misinformation. This should be revised. 189.51.158.204 ( talk) 15:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
COVID-19 misinformation by governments article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
pseudoscience and
fringe science, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text has been copied to or from this article; see the list below. The source pages now serve to
provide attribution for the content in the destination pages and must not be deleted as long as the copies exist. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see the history links below.
|
A note on WP:MEDRS: Per this Wikipedia policy, we must rely on the highest quality secondary sources and the recommendations of professional organizations and government bodies when determining the scientific consensus about medical treatments.
Evidence of efficacy for ivermectin is inconclusive. It should not be used outside of clinical trials.( May 2021, June 2021, June 2021, July 2021, July 2021) ( WHO, FDA, IDSA, ASHP, CDC, NIH)
Neither hydroxychloroquine nor chloroquine should be used, either alone or in combination with azithromycin, in inpatient or outpatient settings.( July 2020, Aug 2020, Sep 2020, May 2021) ( WHO, FDA, IDSA, ASHP, NIH)
based in part on Shi [Zhengli]'s emailed answers." ( RfC, December 2021)
This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
List of good sources with good coverage to help expand. Not necessarily for inclusion but just for consideration. Preferably not articles that just discuss a single quote/press conference. The long-style reporting would be even better. Feel free to edit directly to add to the list. ProcrastinatingReader ( talk) 17:39, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Last updated by Julian Brown ( talk) 23:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
] · |
---|
For the relevant sourcing guideline, see WP:SCHOLARSHIP. For a database curated by the NCBI, see LitCoVID |
|
] · |
---|
For the relevant sourcing guideline, see WP:RSOPINION. |
|
] · |
---|
Keep in mind, these are primary sources and thus should be used with caution! |
|
References
If Minister of AYUSH Ministry has spread some misinformation then that should also be considered misinformation by Indian Government in my opinion as he is the head of Ministry of AYUSH. So, the following content should be added into the article:
Minister of State for AYUSH Shripad Naik claimed that an Ayurveda practitioner cured Prince Charles when he tested positive for the Covid-19. This claim was rubbished by United Kingdom officials. [1] [2]
I would request other editors to present their opinion on it. Jasksingh ( talk) 11:42, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
References
It says that in spite of evidence of Chloroquine that it doesn't work. Bolsonaro continues recommending it. Well, this is not misinformation. As there is also plenty of evidence in support of it. Supporting the use of Chloroquine is not misinformation. This should be revised. 189.51.158.204 ( talk) 15:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)