This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Flattening the curve 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 |
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As for WikiProject COVID-19, I evaluated "Flatten the curve" as "importance=mid". Maybe we should rate it higher. Yug (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
I wanted to bring this point back to the surface, as I have made a few attempts to submit content that was relevant to flattening the curve, specifically the raise the line section which has been regularly removed. There is an opportunity to provide relevant content that supports how the different hemispheres are flattening the curve and or raising the line, with thoughtful and innovative mechanisms. I am of the view that whether or not raise the line isn't heavily sighted in traditional mediums, it is is alternative avenues. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CBazilDA ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
The reason for one part of my rewrite may deserve comment. WP:BALASP says that aspects of a topic should be treated with a weight proportional to their appearance in published material on the subject. "Flatten the curve" appears vastly more often than "raise the line", so they shouldn't have equal emphasis here. Dan Bloch ( talk) 09:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
References
Yug (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
The graphics there and on the main COVID article show that flattening the curve leads to rashly half as many cases.
1) This is very optimistic.
2) Just normal measures to stop the disease and limit the cases count would lead to the same - as any successful measures taken also lead to flattening the curve in some degree. So to distinguish the idea of this article from the regular typical measures against diseases, it should not show just plain vast reduction of cases. As the readers seeing this will optimistically associate flattening the curve with just plain lower number of cases - which is not correct. Number of cases is ofc the area below the curve.
But ofc governments all around the world tell stories to calm public down as people would not be so complacent knowing the restrictions would lengthen the disease in time and the Wikipedians comply as I see... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.93.118 ( talk) 15:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
The lead image in this article (entitled "Flattening the curve") was replaced yesterday by @ RCraig09: with an image that shows both flattening the curve and raising the line. This makes no sense to me. Let me know if I'm missing something--otherwise I'm going to put it back. Dan Bloch ( talk) 03:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
@ Danbloch: Any choice here of which graphic to display, should be accomplished by changing the name of the file inside the article's wikitext here on Wikipedia. Someone with your username on Wikimedia Commons just reverted one of the files to an earlier state — which should be done only in special circumstances, circumstances that do not apply in this case. Thanks to Sdkb for returning the file to its intended state. — RCraig09 ( talk) 21:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
The epidemic curve used in this article is mislabeled. The vertical axis is NOT "Number of cases", which never decreases, instead it's the "Number of New Cases", which does rise and fall, as shown. This shape arises from the first differential of the Number of Cases, which is typically Sigmoidal. Syzygy303 ( talk) 10:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
I think, that the graph should show LONGER period of recovery, if it's flattened. For now, I think it is slightly misleading: following the "flatten the curve" process ends at the same time point as not following it, and this is not true. Sorry for my English, but I hope someone gets my point. Rafal S
I personally feel like "raising the line" should have its own article. JJPMaster ( talk) 19:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello,
I am just curious whether or not the "raising the line" article is still being considered as a separated file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CBazilDA ( talk • contribs) 16:07, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Form what I can see no one disagrees with creating a separate article, but no one cares enough to do it. Dan Bloch ( talk) 18:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Yug (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC) (from my phone)
See - https://ak.sbmu.ac.ir/uploads/epidemiology_gordis_5_edi.pdf Search for the term "Flatten the Curve" - even try just the word "flatten" no hits... Might be in the 6th edition but regardless the term seems to be a recent invention. The Gordis book is considered a solid reference in the field of epidemiology ... 96.255.42.67 ( talk) 19:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Flattening the curve 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 |
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As for WikiProject COVID-19, I evaluated "Flatten the curve" as "importance=mid". Maybe we should rate it higher. Yug (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
I wanted to bring this point back to the surface, as I have made a few attempts to submit content that was relevant to flattening the curve, specifically the raise the line section which has been regularly removed. There is an opportunity to provide relevant content that supports how the different hemispheres are flattening the curve and or raising the line, with thoughtful and innovative mechanisms. I am of the view that whether or not raise the line isn't heavily sighted in traditional mediums, it is is alternative avenues. Thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CBazilDA ( talk • contribs) 16:15, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
The reason for one part of my rewrite may deserve comment. WP:BALASP says that aspects of a topic should be treated with a weight proportional to their appearance in published material on the subject. "Flatten the curve" appears vastly more often than "raise the line", so they shouldn't have equal emphasis here. Dan Bloch ( talk) 09:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
References
{{
cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link)
References
Yug (talk) 16:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
The graphics there and on the main COVID article show that flattening the curve leads to rashly half as many cases.
1) This is very optimistic.
2) Just normal measures to stop the disease and limit the cases count would lead to the same - as any successful measures taken also lead to flattening the curve in some degree. So to distinguish the idea of this article from the regular typical measures against diseases, it should not show just plain vast reduction of cases. As the readers seeing this will optimistically associate flattening the curve with just plain lower number of cases - which is not correct. Number of cases is ofc the area below the curve.
But ofc governments all around the world tell stories to calm public down as people would not be so complacent knowing the restrictions would lengthen the disease in time and the Wikipedians comply as I see... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.11.93.118 ( talk) 15:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
The lead image in this article (entitled "Flattening the curve") was replaced yesterday by @ RCraig09: with an image that shows both flattening the curve and raising the line. This makes no sense to me. Let me know if I'm missing something--otherwise I'm going to put it back. Dan Bloch ( talk) 03:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
@ Danbloch: Any choice here of which graphic to display, should be accomplished by changing the name of the file inside the article's wikitext here on Wikipedia. Someone with your username on Wikimedia Commons just reverted one of the files to an earlier state — which should be done only in special circumstances, circumstances that do not apply in this case. Thanks to Sdkb for returning the file to its intended state. — RCraig09 ( talk) 21:28, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
The epidemic curve used in this article is mislabeled. The vertical axis is NOT "Number of cases", which never decreases, instead it's the "Number of New Cases", which does rise and fall, as shown. This shape arises from the first differential of the Number of Cases, which is typically Sigmoidal. Syzygy303 ( talk) 10:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
I think, that the graph should show LONGER period of recovery, if it's flattened. For now, I think it is slightly misleading: following the "flatten the curve" process ends at the same time point as not following it, and this is not true. Sorry for my English, but I hope someone gets my point. Rafal S
I personally feel like "raising the line" should have its own article. JJPMaster ( talk) 19:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
Hello,
I am just curious whether or not the "raising the line" article is still being considered as a separated file. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CBazilDA ( talk • contribs) 16:07, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Form what I can see no one disagrees with creating a separate article, but no one cares enough to do it. Dan Bloch ( talk) 18:01, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
Yug (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2021 (UTC) (from my phone)
See - https://ak.sbmu.ac.ir/uploads/epidemiology_gordis_5_edi.pdf Search for the term "Flatten the Curve" - even try just the word "flatten" no hits... Might be in the 6th edition but regardless the term seems to be a recent invention. The Gordis book is considered a solid reference in the field of epidemiology ... 96.255.42.67 ( talk) 19:30, 12 February 2022 (UTC)