![]() | 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. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Long COVID 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:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | Long COVID has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: September 21, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
Fritzmann2002
talk
12:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Femke ( talk). Self-nominated at 08:20, 23 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Long COVID; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Good article, well sourced and reads well. Only 4 prior DYKs, so no QPQ needed. Passed earwig test. ALT1 is the most interesting, but I think it should give a time period for the 6% - my read of the source is that it is referring to June 2023?
Onceinawhile (
talk)
12:13, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
For consideration: "[A]n infection-associated chronic condition that occurs after COVID-19 infection and is present for at least 3 months as a continuous, relapsing and remitting, or progressive disease state that affects one or more organ systems." – from NASEM report: https://doi.org/10.17226/27768 ( Secondary source, also cites quote with no need to register as with the report itself) Mapsax ( talk) 23:57, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
The article leaves the reader confused because on the one hand it is said that older age is a risk factor, and on the other hand the statista graph shows older age cohorts reporting less long covid. This might be the result of reporting distortion etc., but still there needs to be an explanation for what will be perceived as a contradiction by most readers. 2A02:3100:5F02:7301:C4AC:C9EF:1675:361D ( talk) 08:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
https://theconversation.com/long-covid-puzzle-pieces-are-falling-into-place-the-picture-is-unsettling-233759 this looks interesting as a reference for symptoms continuing to appear/develop up to 3 years after the initial infection EdwardLane 2A02:C7E:311A:FF00:9992:E0AF:B195:9399 ( talk) 07:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Long COVID 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:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | Long COVID has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: September 21, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The result was: promoted by
Fritzmann2002
talk
12:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Improved to Good Article status by Femke ( talk). Self-nominated at 08:20, 23 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Long COVID; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
General: Article is new enough and long enough |
---|
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
---|
|
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
---|
|
QPQ: Done. |
Overall:
Good article, well sourced and reads well. Only 4 prior DYKs, so no QPQ needed. Passed earwig test. ALT1 is the most interesting, but I think it should give a time period for the 6% - my read of the source is that it is referring to June 2023?
Onceinawhile (
talk)
12:13, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
For consideration: "[A]n infection-associated chronic condition that occurs after COVID-19 infection and is present for at least 3 months as a continuous, relapsing and remitting, or progressive disease state that affects one or more organ systems." – from NASEM report: https://doi.org/10.17226/27768 ( Secondary source, also cites quote with no need to register as with the report itself) Mapsax ( talk) 23:57, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
The article leaves the reader confused because on the one hand it is said that older age is a risk factor, and on the other hand the statista graph shows older age cohorts reporting less long covid. This might be the result of reporting distortion etc., but still there needs to be an explanation for what will be perceived as a contradiction by most readers. 2A02:3100:5F02:7301:C4AC:C9EF:1675:361D ( talk) 08:23, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
https://theconversation.com/long-covid-puzzle-pieces-are-falling-into-place-the-picture-is-unsettling-233759 this looks interesting as a reference for symptoms continuing to appear/develop up to 3 years after the initial infection EdwardLane 2A02:C7E:311A:FF00:9992:E0AF:B195:9399 ( talk) 07:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)