This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Resolved

Should we create a WikiProject banner for appropriate talk pages? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 17:17, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I think that would be helpful! TJMSmith ( talk) 17:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

TJMSmith,  Done See below. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:24, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 to be moved to COVID-19 virus. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 19:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{ bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

A requested move discussion has been initiated for 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic to be moved to 2019–20 coronavirus disease pandemic. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 20:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{ bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

The Afd discussion regarding List of people with coronavirus disease 2019 is quite mess. If you have any suggestions please add them. Abishe ( talk) 01:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

There are a few issues going on at Deborah L. Birx. Please see the talk page over there and contribute where you can. Thanks.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 04:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Issue dealt with Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 21:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Do we have a navigation solution for readers that lets them see all of the many articles related to the pandemic? Schazjmd  (talk) 16:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic exists, and looks like this: CoronavirusPlagueDoctor ( talk) 17:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

CoronavirusPlagueDoctor, thanks! Schazjmd  (talk) 17:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

We need to explain the scope and objectives of the WikiProject on the project page. One thing I really want to see is to attempt avoiding fake and inaccurate information in the Covid-19 articles. Regards. -- Titodutta ( talk) 18:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I think it should include articles to do with the virus and pandemic including people. — RealFakeKim T 18:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

A requested move discussion has been initiated for 2020 Italy coronavirus lockdown to be moved. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 18:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{ bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

• White House Coronavirus Task Force SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

  SandyGeorgia, Thanks, tagging the talk page now. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:58, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

There is an RfC on linking to the template namespace within the navbox. Please contribute your comments there.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 19:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to modify this userbox. Stay safe everyone. — hueman1 ( talk • contributions) 19:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

HueMan1, cool. -- Titodutta ( talk) 19:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Also posted at Village Pump/Technical, but I just saw the announcement for this new wikiproject on wikimedia-l so I figured I'd post here too! - J

I noticed the other day that the popular pages report had gone down. I've been working on something similar for work (an inbound social media traffic report), and I had a lot of related code already written, so I put together this top 1000 viewed articles report. I plan to update the report daily, with the previous day's results. If it's helpful, I'd be happy to maintain it indefinitely.

Where else should I announce this? It seems to me that in the middle of a global pandemic, it's more important than ever for us to know what articles people are reading.

BTW, I think I could also create a complete replacement for the Popular Pages report (which is weekly, not daily) pretty easily—as long as 1000 pages is enough, since that's the limit of what you can grab from the Rest API in a single query. Feedback appreciated! Cheers, J-Mo 21:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I started a discussion about a COVID-19 themed WIR April edit-a-thon here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Ideas#COVID-19. Please feel free to add your thoughts. I started a crowd-sourced list of redlinks and stubs of women connected to COVID-19. TJMSmith ( talk) 23:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

A requested move discussion has been initiated for COVID-19 vaccine to be moved to Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine research. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 01:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{ bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

A requested move discussion has been initiated for 2020 stock market crash to be moved to 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic bear market. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. — RMCD bot 01:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{ bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Should File:Novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.jpg be classified as featured media? I'm not seeing the star. I went ahead and added the project's other currently featured media to the project page. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 19:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/SARS-CoV-2 Username ⁶⁸⁹² 19:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Username6892, Thanks, but shouldn't there be a star or template identifying the image as featured? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 19:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

It's fully protected, so the admin must've forgotten to put it there. Username ⁶⁸⁹² 20:00, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Armbrust: Bringing this to your attention. Thank you! --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 20:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done now that the file page isn't cascade protected. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 05:45, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Armbrust, Thank you. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Very good initiative, because this virus has created soo many new articles and also soo many new categories in Wikipedia. Can you imagine now almost every single country on earth as a new category on (Category:Health disasters in xxx and Category:Medical outbreaks in xxx).

But just one question. Generally, all of the COVID-19-related articles, they are Always classified into WikiProject Disaster management, WikiProject Medicine (under Pulmonology task force) and WikiProject Viruses - to the very minimum. Of course if it is about a particular country, then the WikiProject of that country will also be put into the talk page of that article.

But now since we have this WikiProject COVID-19 which is essentially about medicine and virus (although not directly about disaster management) and it is the derivative of WikiProject Medicine (Pulmonology task force) and WikiProject Viruses, which makes those 2 WikiProjects the "parent WikiProject" of WikiProject COVID-19, thus shall we delete those 2 WikiProjects once we have the WikiProject COVID-19? Or now we keep those 4 WikiProjects as the minimum at all time (WikiProject COVID-19, WikiProject Disaster management, WikiProject Medicine (Pulmonology task force) and WikiProject Viruses)? Chongkian ( talk) 01:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Chongkian, I think it makes more sense to redirect COVID-19 content on the two parent WikiProjects over to this one. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

This page is getting cluttered, so I decided to add auto archiving. However, I want time for discussions to run their course, so the bot will wait 7 days before archiving anything. CoronavirusPlagueDoctor ( talk _{about the coronavirus}/ Contributions _{about the coronavirus}) 03:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

CoronavirusPlagueDoctor, Thanks, --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 11:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

FYI, I have just created s:Category:COVID-19 on en.Wikisource. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:20, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing, Thanks, --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 11:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Is everybody aware of Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/COVID-19 articles by quality log? Maybe there should be a link to that somewhere. I recommend watchlisting. Agathoclea ( talk) 11:27, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Anyone know what are Category:SIA-Class COVID-19 articles and Category:SL-Class COVID-19 articles for? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 11:33, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

SL is a Stub List

and

• SI (for set index pages; adds pages to Category:SIA-Class military history articles)

is what I could find. Agathoclea ( talk) 11:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Agathoclea, Huh, thanks. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 11:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Coming back to the log. I suspect that the traffic today will be so much that one page is not enaugh. In that case the bot will split the pages and you will need to access the revisions. Agathoclea ( talk) 11:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Why is every entry on the table under "Content" at 0? Victionarier ( talk) 13:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Victionarier, This project's pages were all created yesterday. I think it takes a couple days for bots to start working, tables to be updated, etc. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that. Victionarier ( talk) 14:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I would like to share an idea to have a more precise understanding of the number of cases of COVID-19.

The idea is that the confirmed cases are usually reported after a long incubation. I believe that the reported cases reflect the number of cases of about one week before. Since the number of cases is growing exponentially, the difference between the reported cases and the actual cases can be huge.

Please, have a look at Wikiversity:COVID-19/Julian_Mendez.

Thank you, -- Julian ( talk) 15:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi contributors,

Good work in updating the main article. I do see some of the Straits Times and CNA articles are archived. Please help to create an archive of each url link (especially those from MOH) as the weblink will not be available once the article provider(s) decide to change and relocate the news articles and will become deadlink. Do not waste the effort spent to update the article. Thank you. Flipchip73 ( talk) 14:09, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

External link: Archive.is

An example archive site one can use. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The Signpost is interested in the community's response to the virus crisis. If anyone here is interested in having their comments about the issue published, please contact me or Smallbones ☆ Bri ( talk) 18:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Bri, just to clarify, about the issue in general or about creating articles on here? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

It may shape up more about how we are responding to the crisis by pouring energy into article creation and updates. But this is not completely ironed out yet; it depends on what feedback we get. If there are personal stories about how the crisis has affected you or your family, your relationship to your "day job" vice life as a Wikipedian, missing Wikipedia events/meetups, we'd like to hear about that too. Have you heard about people turning to WP for information more than usual? That kind of stuff. ☆ Bri ( talk) 20:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

​ I see. Would you like me to reach out? The Guild of Copyeditors is seeing a lot of activity this month and that could be a possible reason. When's the deadline for comment submission? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, please do reach out to others. Let's say I'll include responses I get through next Saturday, March 21. After that I'll have to be wrapping up the column and moving on to other things. ☆ Bri ( talk) 22:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

​  Reached out to the GOCE. You are fine with having replies on your talk page? Or do you have somewhere else in mind? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

On my talkpage is fine, and if it becomes heavy I can move it to a subpage or something. ☆ Bri ( talk) 23:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm sure others are interested, but holler if you don't get enough volunteers. Thanks for covering this topic. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 20:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I've created very basic drafts for the U.S. states that don't yet have their own articles. They include some section headings, {{ infobox pandemic}} and external links to each state's coronavirus website. Trivialist ( talk) 18:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• Please could you link them so it's easier to find. — RealFakeKim T 18:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Trivialist, Feel free to copy over to main space sooner than later. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Gubernatorial announcements specifically. kencf0618 ( talk) 23:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

corporate and organisational communications and media reports of recent have been using the term Deep cleaning for sanitising possibly infected places - there may be better fits, but just a heads up that https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Deep_cleaning&redirect=no it is redirected to a dental process... JarrahTree 01:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

As we have a dedicated WikiProject now, please consider sharing your view here: Talk:2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_India#Proposed_merge_of_2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Karnataka_into_2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_India. Regards. -- Titodutta ( talk) 02:26, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Another editor made File:COVID-19 barnstar.png for this project. Thought I'd share here. Happy editing, --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 20:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The template is at {{ COVID-19 Barnstar}}. -- awkwafaba ( 📥) 23:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Like --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 00:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, pretty scary . -- Titodutta ( talk) 02:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I am writing to invite anyone to participate in Wikidata's d:Wikidata:WikiProject COVID-19. The following text is an intro to Wikidata for English Wikipedia contributors who are interested in COVID-19.

Hello, I participate in English Wikipedia WikiProject Medicine and I also contribute to Wikidata WikiProject Medicine, and the meta:Wikicite project, and as a researcher at the University of Virginia I develop a Wikidata project called d:Wikidata:Scholia. I am writing to invite anyone to edit COVID-19 content in Wikidata by the usual community norms, or if anyone understands Wikidata, to document new models of engagement. I will briefly share what I think is a good introduction for anyone to learn about Wikidata's ability to present information about disasters like COVID-19.

Wikidata can contain many sorts of data, but because Wikidata has the bias of its Wikipedia-editing contributor base, it has a lot of citation metadata. "Citation metadata" is content in the "references" section of Wikipedia articles. Among citation data, academic journal metadata is the easiest to bring to Wikidata, so Wikidata has great ability to sort academic journals, articles, authors, and topics. The subset of citation data in Wikidata can be called the Wikicite project.

To view collections in content in Wikidata one needs to write a SPARQL language database query in the d:Wikidata:Wikidata Query Service. Almost no one knows this technical language, so a common sort of Wikidata project is providing assistance in making queries. d:Wikidata:Scholia is a product and web interface which makes browsing Wikicite content much easier by allowing a user to search for a topic, like COVID-19, and get information about the academic publications covering this topic.

Here is what is useful to do now to contribute to COVID-19 on Wikidata:

1. for a person who is casually interested, just try to learn more about Wikidata
   1. browse and run example queries in query.wikidata.org by clicking "example"
   2. Talk about any of these queries or anything Wikidata by posting any comments or questions to d:Wikidata:Project chat
   3. Input any COVID-19 term into Scholia to see how Wikidata works, such as by viewing the profile of the pandemic
2. for a person with more interest, do any Wikidata edit
   1. Editing Wikidata is comparable to editing a Wikipedia infobox
   2. Having a community base with some understanding of the relationship between English Wikipedia and Wikidata is essential for long term collaboration
   3. Do whatever seems fun or interesting to you, and edit in Wikidata what you normally edit in English Wikipedia
3. for a person with lots of interest, curate a Wikidata collection
   1. This could mean 10-100 edits, which a beginner might do in 1-2 hours
   2. Ask questions and request support at d:Wikidata:WikiProject COVID-19
   3. Example good contribution - tag academic articles with main subject (P921) for topics which are the subject of English Wikipedia articles, like "COVID-19 in (X place)"

Thanks for your interest. Please visit English Wikipedia's WikiProject Medicine and whatever seems interesting on Wikidata. Ask questions anywhere. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, excellent, thanks for sharing. A good friend yesterday made major changes to improve 2020 coronavirus pandemic in India (Wikidata). Will ensure to promote this page among Wikidata India editors. Regards. -- Titodutta ( talk) 02:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic#How_can_we_get_this_talk_page_under_control?. Sdkb ( talk) 04:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Do we want to apply Wikipedia:Content assessment to this project? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 17:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, ya, however let's see how many articles we get under this project. -- Titodutta ( talk) 18:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok, it shows we have more than 700 articles. -- Titodutta ( talk) 18:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC) many of those are biographies etc. -- Titodutta ( talk) 18:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Assessment template

Template:WikiProject_COVID-19 — RealFakeKim T 18:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

RealFakeKim, this needs to be added in script like rater.js which maked assessment easier. -- Titodutta ( talk) 18:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• I don't know how to do that. — RealFakeKim T 18:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Titodutta, Can you help with this? Or, maybe other folks at the WikiProject Council can help? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

pinging Evad37 ( talk · contribs). -- Titodutta ( talk) 19:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@ RealFakeKim, Titodutta, and Another Believer: It will show up when the cached wikiproject banner data Rater stores in your browser is updated. This happens automatically every couple of days, or you can go to the preferences page (cog wheel in the top-left of the Rater window), and click on the "Reset cache" button. - Evad37 [ talk 02:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Help adding banners to talk pages

Thanks to User:RealFakeKim for creating a talk page banner. Can volunteers help by adding the banner to talk pages?

Using Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic as a checklist, can folks claim certain sections to tag?

• Timeline  Done
• Locations  Done
  • Africa  Done
  • Asia  Done
  • Europe  Done
  • N. America  Done
    • United States  Done
  • Oceania  Done
  • S. America  Done
  • International conveyances  Done
  • Lockdowns  Done
• Institutions  Done
• Issues  Done
• People  Not done
• Data  Done
• category talk pages  Not done

Thanks for any help. Lots of tagging needed here... many hands make for light work! --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• I will start with Europe I suggest people do other sections to speed it up. — RealFakeKim T 18:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

  RealFakeKim, Thanks, I'll mark section as "doing" since you've claimed. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Once this account gets autoconfirmed, I could make a python bot to do it. CoronavirusPlagueDoctor ( talk) 19:23, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• I'll get issues covered! QueerFilmNerd ^talk 21:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I've marked as "doing" above, feel free to change to "done" when you're ready. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 21:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
• Institutions done! QueerFilmNerd ^talk 04:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
• For "People" via List of people with coronavirus disease 2019, I'm done the entertainment people, probably going to stop for a bit since this list is very long. QueerFilmNerd ^talk
• I have been tagging category talk pages with the WikiProject COVID-19 template. Hope everyone work together to provide the reliable news to readers. Stay safe everyone. Abishe ( talk) 12:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Importance scale

I have made a draft of what an importance scale would look like. It is far from done, but I would like community input on it, as well as topics not mentioned yet on the table.

Username ⁶⁸⁹² 19:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• I would say 2,500 for high. — RealFakeKim T 20:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• I think the difference should occur at some sort of drop-off between 2000 and 5000 (will likely go up). As of now, there are no countries with 2,000-3,000 cases and 8 with more than 3,000, so 2,500 seems like a good line as of now — Preceding unsigned comment added by Username6892 ( talk • contribs) 20:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• Yeah by the time this is organised it will be higher but for now I would say 2,500. — RealFakeKim T 20:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

At what level would the lockdowns be at? I'd say medium or high (Probably medium). Username ⁶⁸⁹² 20:23, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

As well, where should we put anything under "issues", I think the categories should account for articles that are indirectly related, like its effects on politics, the economy, cinema/tv, the people, basically anything that's not "X number of cases" if that makes sense. QueerFilmNerd ^talk 21:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

I would say mostly mid for the issues, though socio-economic impact is probably high-importance. Username ⁶⁸⁹² 21:27, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

At this point I would suggest to give the ~10 countries with the most cases importance high (China, Italy, Iran, South Korea are obvious, the list of 10 would also include Spain, Germany, France, the US, Switzerland and the UK - Norway, the Netherlands and Sweden might be relevant because their per capita rates are so high), give very small countries low, and wait for everything else, otherwise things need their assessment changed many times and the discussion which case counts are the limits has to be done every week. It is too early to know which countries will see the largest outbreaks. -- mfb ( talk) 03:44, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

There are currently only two articles without importance assessment, both finance related. When the dust has settled and the templeate gets updated it might be worth revisiting the number, to adust up and down. I think there is a particular mix of articles between 100 and 250 cases which could be either low or mid. Agathoclea ( talk) 08:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Importance tables for non-countries? People would be low-importance if they have it, high-importance if they die of it, are one of the doctors/others working on it, or a whistleblower. It might be harder to apply something to the issues and impacts. Kingsif ( talk) 23:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with this, I think I listed people as low, some certain institutions as low or mid depending. We should have guidelines based off of non-countries, that can help us with related topics not directly related to cases in countries. QueerFilmNerd ^talk 20:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

For country divisions (states & provinces), they should be low unless they have a very large amount of cases (Like New York and Washington) and high in the case of outbreaks similar in size to or larger than Hubei province. For people, I would say mostly low, but mid if they had some importance relating to the outbreak (Ex. Li Wenliang) and high if they cause some major turning point (like discovering a vaccine). Username ⁶⁸⁹² 21:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Assessment and article alerts

Assessments needs a little work.....-- Moxy 🍁 22:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

COVID-19 articles		Importance					Refresh
		Top	High	Mid	Low	???	Total
Quality	FA	0	0	0	0	0	2
	A	0	0	0	0	0	0
	GA	0	0	0	0	0	16
	B	0	0	0	0	0	169
	C	0	0	0	0	0	742
	Start	0	0	0	0	0	1011
	Stub	0	0	0	0	0	332
	FL	0	0	0	0	0	0
	List	0	0	0	0	0	158
	???	0	0	0	0	0	17
	Total	18	173	481	1788	51	2460

Article alerts request for bot.-- Moxy 🍁 22:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Moxy, Thanks --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 22:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Can this Assessment table be put on the main project page? TJMSmith ( talk) 23:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

TJMSmith, I just added, but admit there may be better ways to display the table so less white space is generated. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 23:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Moxy, TJMSmith, and Another Believer: the {{ Articles by Quality and Importance}} requires subcategories like Category:GA-Class COVID-19 articles of Low-importance ( 0 ) which is why the middle of that table is all zeroes. A better chart template should be used. -- awkwafaba ( 📥) 00:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Template changed... and article alerts up and running and trasncluded on the project page Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Article alerts.-- Moxy 🍁 20:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

AlexNewArtBot

New article bot implementation is done. Been doing this for over a decade and have never seen so many new articles under one projects scope...thus implemented scrolling list even though this may be an accessibility concern for some. This can be removed when new article creation is not such a big list. Great to see so many involved here....we need the help....400 + articles created and many bios affected in just over a month. WOW guys WOW......great work all!!!-- Moxy 🍁 21:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

If we have editors who have advanced knowledge in the areas of templates or template editors here please take a look at this discussion. We currently have two pages where some templates are not showing up and the software is giving Template include size is too large error. Thank you! Alucard 16 _{❯❯❯ chat?} 06:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Why is Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/China medical cases by province in "Template:" namespace? (And maybe further page too).

It is not transcluded in any page (except form itself (what! why?) and from an archived talk page) see list. -- Mezze stagioni ( talk) 21:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I find the tables in this template (and the similar templates for the rest of the world) very handy as open-source/easy to obtain disease statistics. I can imagine ways these tables would be useful as an archive of this important information in a tabular form, though I'm not familiar enough with Wikipedia to say where or how these should reside. I watched them slide out of article space and get orphaned; maybe they got too big? I do find them useful for quickly comparing the progression of this disease in different countries. Is there a convention for storing such a table of notable statistics and references? 47.36.166.123 ( talk) 08:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Related: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19#Where_should_the_data_live? 47.36.166.123 ( talk) 08:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Any chance we can get somebody to whip up a quick SVG colorization based on this source? GMG ^talk 13:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi everyone thank you all for the hard work keeping these articles updated! I have a small favor to ask on COVID-19 related articles that are either template, extended-confirmed or semi-protected. If there is an edit request that is open before archiving the edit request could you change answered=no to answered=yes. This would help a great deal the edit request area so editors who normally patrol those areas know what requests are still active, need attention and help reduce the backlog especially with semi-protection edit requests. Currently there is a trend with COVID-19 related requests being archived while open like this. I know sometimes this is unavoidable and is understandable. Again thank you all for all you do! Alucard 16 _{❯❯❯ chat?} 14:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I am outlining an article in Wikipedia's own newspaper, The Signpost, currently at

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Special report

Some resources are there.

I am interested in this Wikipedia article for the sake of COVID-19 itself but also as a model for Wikipedia's general disaster response. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, would this be related to the RfC that Bri posted on this page today? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Tenryuu: I collaborate with Bri on multiple projects, including that Signpost article, but do not see an RfC from Bri. Can you point to it? Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Bluerasberry, perhaps "RfC" isn't the right term to use, but further down was submitted today for editors to comment on the situation. I'm assuming this is the same assignment? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

It is indeed the same assignment, though we are moving to creating it across two columns in the same issue. I did not see this earlier post. ☆ Bri ( talk) 03:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Bluerasberry and Bri, I have done quite a bit of work on the virus article, so if you have any questions about it, just let me know. Dekimasu よ! 15:43, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Dekimasu: Acknowledged, will come back with questions after we have some form for the article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm looking for ways to help... can you tell?

I put together a draft of another potential report, this one specifically for the COVID-19 WikiProject. The COVID-19 daily article report contains pageviews for all the articles that use the 2019 coronavirus pandemic template. It also contains predicted article quality scores for each of these articles. The predictions come from ORES and are based on the Enwiki article quality classes—but they're statistical predictions based on the current status of the article, not its status whenever it was last assessed. And the predictions are available for any article, even brand new ones. And they'll change day-by-day as articles are edited.

This list will also grow day-by-day, as new articles are given the Covid-10 template.

I haven't set the code up to run this report on a daily basis yet, but that would be possible with a few more hours of work. Please let me know if you think this would be useful. Please also let me know if you see any bugs, or if there is other information you'd like me to add to the report! Cheers, J-Mo 00:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi everyone, just an update to confirm that the COVID-19 article pageview + quality report is now set up as a regularly-scheduled HostBot job. That means that the report page ( User:HostBot/COVID-19_article_report) will be updated every day around this time, with a list of the top-viewed COVID-19 articles from the previous day, and quality predictions for each of those articles.

Again, don't hesitate to reach out if you have other data needs. Even if I can't run the analysis or build the tool myself, I probably know someone who can. There are a lot of researchers and analysts (with WMF and outside) who want to help out! Cheers, J-Mo 16:43, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

• User:Sylwia Ufnalska has been adding false and harmful content to Wikipedia and Commons. I have nominated a number of their additions for deletion at Commons. [1]

And have requested an edit restriction Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Limiting_people_ability_to_edit_COVID19_content_when_they_add_"falsehoods"

Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding /info/en/?search=Xenophobia_and_racism_related_to_the_2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic

I feel that this article is risk at becoming of embroiled in an editorial war, especially in light of recent political tensions in days past, the ongoing issues in its talk page, and the rampant disinformation campaigns raging about internationally.

It requires some high-level editorial oversight to ensure its neutrality and objectiveness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:9880:2148:50:5418:6E31:896C:6680 ( talk) 23:05, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi wikipedians, I noticed that Travel restrictions related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic does not include United States.

Thanks, Sue

@ SWP13: The United States is mentioned several times in that article; the article is divided into country restrictions by heading (that is, the area that makes up the heading is the area in question that travel is being restricted to), and in the body of those sections are each country's individual response to that area. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

>>I meant it does not have its own section. SWP13 ( talk) 19:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

SWP13, you're asking if other nations have imposed travel restrictions on the United States? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Sections are only made if several other countries restricted travel from this country in particular. While there are many countries that limit travel from the US these are always global limitations, not US-specific. -- mfb ( talk) 04:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I've forgotten the name of the program, but state warehouses in times of crisis serve as federal transshipment points, usually under the aegis of Health & Welfare, so it's not all National Guard, etc. Might have to dig deep into budgets to find these. kencf0618 ( talk) 11:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Hot articles and Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Popular pages will populate soon. Put them on your watchlist. I imagine Hot Articles will need some fine tuning, with how hot all the articles are now. Also available now is the clean-up listing for COVID-19 -- awkwafaba ( 📥) 18:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi all, I added the recent news and current events template to the portal, but I wondered if anyone thought it would be useful to have a news by location template, pulling the text whenever a certain "2020 coronavirus pandemic in X" article was mentioned at current events? Kingsif ( talk) 18:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I've aded USNS Mercy (T-AH-19) to this project. I believe another ship has been tapped for similar purposes but I didn't catch the name. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 19:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Is there a consensus among this project regarding the addition of information regarding possible COVID-19 treatments? In the past 20 minutes, I have seen two separate articles ( Hydroxychloroquine and Favipiravir) extensively edited to indicate their possible efficacy in treating this disease, based on, at best, early experimentation. WikiDan61 ^ChatMe! _ReadMe!! 16:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I think they can include a passing mention, but nothing that suggests people should start using them. Kingsif ( talk) 17:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

If it's just rumors it should not be mentioned at all. There is an infinite amount of hoaxes being disseminated right now. Most of them will not be notable at all after one month. Anyway, what do reliable sources say? ( WP:MEDRS). -- MarioGom ( talk) 18:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

We can tag the pages with Template:COVID-19 GS editnotice per Wikipedia:GS/COVID19. Folly Mox ( talk) 20:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I think I've requested the two editnotices, using instructions found at WP:EDN. Folly Mox ( talk) 21:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The Portal:COVID-19 is now available, to be a visual outline for readers and editors - please make and suggest improvements, it's currently pretty rough and borrowing templates from the Medicine portal. Kingsif ( talk) 15:25, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Kingsif, Thanks for sharing. Is there an icon we can add to portal/bar displays? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 17:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Is there a WikiProject image that would work at that size? Found it, made the edit request. Kingsif ( talk) 17:57, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Like --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I've linked it from Portal:Viruses. Espresso Addict ( talk) 20:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Should the portal be added to Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 22:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Kingsif ( talk) 22:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I know that every editor and user working on COVID-19 articles is trying their best to write articles as rapidly as possible, but I'd like to ask the editors here to help cut back on excess verbiage and article bloat by adhering to the WP:INTEXT editing guideline. In particular, cluttering up articles with phrases such as, "according to the BBC" is against the guideline. Wikipedia has the refs system so that articles do not have to be written in this reporter-ese. News reporters cite other media inline that way because they have an ethical obligation to give credit to the originator of the information. Wikipedia has the references for that. Abductive ( reasoning) 01:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

With so many people editing these pages so quickly, please keep in mind that it is very helpful for refnames to use text rather than numbers. To quote WP:REFNAME, Names should have semantic value, so that they can be more easily distinguished from each other by human editors who are looking at the wikitext. This means that ref names like "Nguyen 2010" are preferred to names like ":1". This makes it much easier to track down these references when they break. It also helps if you check for broken references in the preview before you save your edits, especially after deleting content. There are already over 3,700 articles in the backlog of pages with broken reference names, and I've already fixed 7 coronavirus articles with this error in the last 24 hours, so please try to not add to the backlog. Thank you! -- Secundus Zephyrus ( talk) 14:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this is how visual editor "names" references. It's really annoying, and the VE team don't see it as a priority to fix. It's not something people are doing intentionally. Guettarda ( talk) 14:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I was not aware of that, thank you for letting me know! -- Secundus Zephyrus ( talk) 01:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I've been working on this a little bit. It's challenging, though, as a lot of these articles are fast moving, and renaming refs is usually not restricted to one section at a time, so there are a LOT of edit conflicts. pauli133 ( talk) 16:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a great time to try out the refname script tool. I'll see what happens. I forgot I deactivated it because it's glitchy. Kingsif ( talk) 16:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

There is a script called "ref organizer" or something that helps with organizing refs, I use it all the time. QueerFilmNerd ^talk 19:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, I'm going to give it a try. -- Secundus Zephyrus ( talk) 01:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Introducing Template:The COVID-19 Barnstar. Jerm ( talk) 23:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this an alt form of the Template:COVID-19 Barnstar, because I like them both. Kingsif ( talk) 23:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Didn’t know there was one already, I’ll get rid of my template then. Jerm ( talk) 23:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Kingsif: Awkwafaba added it as an alt. Jerm ( talk) 02:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Nice Kingsif ( talk) 04:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a bit technical, but I think the cases per capita maps (e.g. File:COVID-19 Outbreak World Map per Capita.svg) should use a more suitable scale.

1. For the case count map, I can see why powers of 10 are used. It's the order of magnitude of cases, and order of magnitude is something we are used to using for large numbers. That is not true for per capita cases though. The difference between 1 case per 10,000 and 100 million inhabitants is still quite abstract to me. What matters is darker means more.
2. After plenty of experience making gradient maps, I can say the scale of such maps should generally be one of squares (e.g. 1, 4, 9... or 1, 9, 25...). That's because brightness of light is proportional to the square of amplitude.
3. Considering how a scale separates data, the exponential scale thresholds are too concentrated on the low end. It's separates small values finely and lumps many large values together. Italy's is 5 times higher than Sweden and they have the same colour. While that may be fine for the beginning of an outbreak when most places have few cases, eventually the curve would become something like a Normal distribution where the peak moves away for the left.
4. Exclusion of outliers. What I have done for some of these maps is use the 95th percentile to calculate the scales in order to represent the remaining 95% values better.

Any thoughts? Ythlev ( talk) 10:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC) @ Raphaël Dunant, Dan Polansky, Redav, St.nerol, and Sdkb: Ythlev ( talk) 10:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

1) I agree that the scale should separate the high-end countries better.

2) I do not follow the reasoning behind having a sequence of squares. In physics, the energy content of light goes with the square of the amplitude, but this is not true for the percieved brightness. I really don't think this is applicable here.

3) I think that the most straightforward way to separate out e.g. Italy better is to just add an extra intermediate level at e.g. 300 cases per million. I understand that you prefer calculating cutoff levels for optimal data separation. I maintain the intuitiveness and communicative power of using large, simple, rounded numbers as cutoff levels. – St.nerol ( talk) 12:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I am using log_10 of the ratio for color index in File:COVID-19 Outbreak World Map Total Deaths per Capita.svg and it seems informative. -- Dan Polansky ( talk) 10:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't have the numbers for that map but for cases per capita, Italy's is 5 times higher than Sweden and they have the same colour. Ythlev ( talk) 10:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Dan Polansky: Nice map! I took the liberty of making it visible. — St.nerol ( talk) 13:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The map seems production ready. I did some superficial checking against the calculated results and it looks ok. -- Dan Polansky ( talk) 14:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Ythlev, Raphaël Dunant, Dan Polansky, Redav, St.nerol, and Sdkb: According to my current views:

1. Ideally, the world map is divided into roughly same-size regions. Using constituent countries (for e.g. the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the United Kingdom), prefectorates (Japan), states (United States of America), provinces and territories (Canada), etc. seems helpful towards this end.
2. Ideally, the colours give a clear indication of meaningful differences between the numbers (absolute and/or per capita) of reported cases, total and/or active. Without having a definite opinion (yet), I can understand that at the low end, orders of magnitude may be be meaningful to depict the (reported part of) the pandemic dynamics, particularly if and as long as it behaves (nearly) exponentially with time. At the high end, the spread of a disease may slow down and/or approach e.g. an endemic equilibrium, and here a measure and/or appropriate scale for the closeness to a maximum and/or final state may be more relevant. Any endemic equilibrium that may (approximately) exist, depends on the regional particularities of a population as to (distributions of) contact frequencies, behaviour, vulnerability, vaccination, immunity, etc., and these characteristics change with time; at least that is what I understand from Compartmental models in epidemiology and some knowledge of (physical) modelling and mathematics. This means, I think, that any endemic equilibrium - or maximum, for that matter - cannot be known precisely. That, I think, should be borne in mind in case at the high end the scales for the colouring are adapted to accommodate nearness to a maximum and/or equilibrium.
3. If with outliers either end of the spectrum and with the 95th percentile some cutoff value for the scaling (be they logarithmic and/or normal distribution) is meant, I can see that re-scaling may be helpful, but the above considerations apply.
4. I lack enough knowledge and therefore a definite view on the technicalities of colours and shades. Redav ( talk) 16:57, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Ythlev: Your proposed scale sounds good to me. I agree that separating Italy and Sweden is important. Sdkb ( talk) 17:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

As discussed here, the purpose of the map is to show that Europe is getting worse than the rest of the world, not to show details about Europe. An advantage of the powers of 10 scale is that this scale shows the differences in roughly same sized colors, as the cases per capita distribution seems exponential (groups are of size 25(most cases), 42, 46, 28 and 11(less cases)). Nevertheless, if a consensus is reached for a new scale, I would gladly apply it. Which scale are you suggesting? Raphaël Dunant ( talk) 00:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

46 and 11 are not exactly same-sized. The band size of that 11 is also tiny. The log scale is really only good when most values are small. A square root scale would move some in the 46 and 28 to the right. Ythlev ( talk) 06:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

2020 coronavirus pandemic in Wyoming has been nominated for deletion. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 22:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Same with 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Klang Valley. Is there an AfD list for this WikiProject yet? Would that be run by a bot? TJMSmith ( talk) 22:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

TJMSmith, the bot on the project main page has a section for "Articles for Deletion". Not sure why the bot isn't catching that. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 07:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Can we please fix the formatting on the disease progress box so that the references don't smoosh up against the left hand side? I would do it myself, but trying to edit a portal is like trying to edit in hieroglyphics by flashlight. GMG ^talk 10:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

People keep adding the WP:DAILYMAIL as a source to Covid-19 articles. I've had to remove WP:THESUN quite often too.

This is seriously bad - the DM was deprecated as a source because it kept printing made-up nonsense, and was famously bad as a WP:MEDRS.

But people keep using it, because it prints so much information and it looks like a useful source.

I just removed a use of it from 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Akrotiri and Dhekelia, a good-faith well-meaning article that now has no sources for its claims. It's not clear to me that the article isn't harmful to keep without sources. I'm not sure there's a speedy-deletion reason that covers this case, but possibly there should be.

So - please watch out for deprecated sources - WP:DAILYMAIL, WP:THESUN, Epoch Times, etc, and zap on sight - David Gerard ( talk) 12:45, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up (although I do consider Epoch to be somewhat reliable in reporting this pandemic). A table of deprecated sources can be found here. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Currently relevant data on US cases are not well captured, aggregated and reported. Epidemiological inquiry and the related Informatics here are non trivial. As testing capacity goes up and tests roll in fast and furious the Contact tracing challenge will be formidable. See more at at Talk:Contact_tracing. Rick ( talk) 14:57, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

All pages related to COVID-19 across all wikis as of March 17th, 2020. I just added this to the statistics section. It gathers all pages that link the the COVID-19 WikiData item, and pages linked from other WikiData items that link to that item. User:Diego (WMF) is considering making this report update daily. Ping him if you have questions or feedback, or share it here and I'll pass it along! J-Mo 20:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

• I've been working in a new definition for articles strongly related to COVID-19. This solves the Tom Hanks problem, focusing in pages mainly focused in COVID-19 related stuff. Diego (WMF) ( talk) 04:41, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Chloroquine has been approved for testing and for "compassionate" use - big announcements. The Chloroquine#COVID-19 article section is super tricky, as ideally all that stuff would be under harshest WP:MEDRS but it's also a noteworthy current news topic - someone was talking about it in a chat and pointed people at that section, so it's out there in the wild. Could someone with more MEDRS experience than me please review the section, and keep an eye on it? - David Gerard ( talk) 17:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@ David Gerard: I took a chainsaw to it and removed some of the worst of the woo. I don't like this trend of citing prepub articles, but they are better than citing newspapers our propaganda outlets -- In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 18:33, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Relevanr article: Compassionate use -- 47.146.63.87 ( talk) 05:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, I didn't even get a chance to post a welcome note before editors started using this page for a variety of purposes (which, of course, is appropriate and encouraged). I think the immediate use and fast addition of ~20 participants already demonstrates the need for this WikiProject. So, welcome.

Unfortunately, this project has been created because of a large problem we face collectively at this time. But I think we can all agree, we as Wikipedia editors can do so much good right now by making the site as helpful as possible to communities across the globe. Thanks for contributing to this project and affiliated articles and other pages. Please stay safe, --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 19:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, yes unfortunately we have this problem but fortunately we have this project. There might be a bit of recentism in this but given the amount of coverage this has got already and the fact that in places like the UK its predicted to get a lot worse (presumably that's the case for most places other than China and Italy that have already been hit hard) so maybe we can have the virus (or pandemic) as a WP:Vital article especially given that Black Death is a level 3 VA. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 18:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Maybe is not the best place to post a question about the nature of the 2019 Coronavirus, but since the origin of it is cloudy but associated with a wet market in central China, I've been thinking that other large mammals can also be vectors for the transmission, like Apes, Dogs or Bears. I had been reading many articles from several countries and there is no input in this matter. It is highly possible that dogs (or other canids) can also be hosts for this virus, after all they are, or were, the majority of exotic meat traded in the wet markets of central China. ( Rumiñawee ( talk) 07:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC))

With the vast number of COVID-19 articles there are now, I feel that we should have, on the main project page, a "to do" section broken down into subsections like "Needs updating", "More sources needed", and "Requires copyediting"; this would allow the project to focus its efforts rather than patrolling multiple pages on the off-chance something needs to be addressed. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Another Believer: Reviving this. Can we add things the bot isn't catching manually to the "Article Alerts" section? Bait30 noticed articles that didn't meet the MOS but aren't mentioned in the botlist (probably because of lack of tags). -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I think article alerts are only for things that are being discussed like AFDs, RFCs, RMs, etc. I do agree though with the addition of some sort of centralized "to-do" list. It would definitely make things more efficient.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 04:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC) P.S.: I'm talking about a to-do list larger in scope than Template:WikiProject cleanup list.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 04:26, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Bait30: Agreed. In the meantime I guess we could {{ MOS}} templates on articles that don't comply with the MOS. Maybe we should just create a "To do list" that offers proposals from editors? This idea will be reworked under a new subsection here if it seems like a productive avenue of organising "to-do items". -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:51, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

U.S. state articles

I'm not suggesting we need a page for each U.S. state, at least not yet, but here are redirects for possible future expansion:

• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in American Samoa
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the Northern Mariana Islands

--- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Excellent idea. They should be more substantial than stubs. kencf0618 ( talk) 23:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Gave each current link a status. Classes were arbitrarily chosen (please change them if they do not meet assessment guidelines). -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Updated a little more. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

 Observation It seems that Article Alerts fulfills this purpose. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, We could remove stubs and start-class pages, keeping just the list of articles to create, if preferred. Like a "to do" checklist of redirects to convert into articles... --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, works for me. I'll clear those. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 14:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, Thanks! --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:58, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

• @ Another Believer:, I believe that every state should get its own article with time. Deaths are occurring and states are going on lockdown. However, right now, states like WV and AK do not need them. I predict though that with time they will.
  • There are just a few links left to create. Seems User:CAWylie may be tackling. Thank you! --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Not sure where this fits on wiki (as these extend to many non-wiki efforts), but here are two editable collections of links and information. Please help update them:

• Catalog of COVID-19 data + visualization efforts.
• Corona Handbook of information, protocols, and research:

And here is an international community of visualizers helping frame options and potential policy decisions, w/ the new england complex systems institute. They could help generate more wiki visuals (and we could import their current daily visuals, all freely licensed):

• End Coronavirus

–  SJ  + 15:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Sj, thanks for showing us those links. I think the URL for the Corona Handbook may have been inputted incorrectly as it leads me to a "site cannot be reached" page. The catalog seems to be a helpful source to connect different ongoing efforts and I personally feel it would be a good link to have on the project's main page. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Tenryuu, I fixed the second link. –  SJ  + 17:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Sj: You're welcome! This project looks pretty nice (just like a tinier Wikipedia). Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 16:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Another Believer: do you think we need articles like 2020 coronavirus pandemic in England, 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Wales and 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Northern Ireland? Considering some like the US and Canada have now started creating articles on sub national units I wander if all the UK counties could have articles? Maybe one for England would be difficult due to the overlap with England and the UK but Wales and Northern Ireland could presumably like 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Scotland already exists. I'm assuming that unlike the US the sub national units (closest equivalent to a US state but having less power) would be the counties such as 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Essex, 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Fife, 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Flintshire and 2020 coronavirus pandemic in County Antrim but maybe redirects could exist like that those in the US without separate articles have. Note that the likes of 2020 coronavirus outbreak in Wales exist as redirects from before it was classified as a pandemic. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 18:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The U.S. might be a special case because of its federal system; the state and tribal governments can make decisions independent from, and even at odds with, the national government. Not sure this is so true in the UK. Is there an example of something that would be in a sub-national article but wouldn't fit in to the national article? ☆ Bri ( talk) 19:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Bri. I'm not opposed to creation of the articles you mentioned but as an American who is not closely following the pandemic in UK specifically, I think I will let others determine appropriateness. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 21:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Since devolution means that England, Wales, Scotland, and N. Ireland can (and have) all implemented their own travel, education and importantly health and social care measures independently - and the media has been reporting infections and deaths per each of these as well as the UK as a whole - it would make sense. (Currently in the ghost town of England) And places with more autonomy within England (London, Manchester, Yorkshire) could also get their own? Kingsif ( talk) 23:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

If it differs significantly from other cities and there is too much material to cover it in an England article, I would say. If it just means more articles to update with case counts every day there is no point in a separate article. -- mfb ( talk) 04:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Northern Ireland now has an article, I'd note I'd accidentally used 2020 coronavirus pandemic in in Northern Ireland above which I have corrected. Just England and Wales needed, similar to the fact that now all US states now have articles. Crouch, Swale ( talk) 21:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Related: 2020 coronavirus pandemic in London. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 18:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

This is currently handled inconsistently. Some infoboxes use Wuhan, some infoboxes use the place where their first confirmed case comes from. I think the latter isn't really helpful. The first confirmed case doesn't have to be the first case and it also doesn't have to be the case that started a local outbreak. In fact, unconfirmed cases are much more likely to spread. I suggest to use the origin of the pandemic everywhere (Wuhan, China), or to remove the parameter. -- mfb ( talk) 02:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Mfb: Agree with using Wuhan: I think it would be hard to pinpoint exactly where each first case in each region came from even when going through news sources to figure out who patient zero is there. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Agree with using Wuhan if using "Origin" at all: it's a pandemic now and the origin of the first confirmed case is often not representative nor decisive for the spread.-- walkee ^talkee 12:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

2020 Gibraltar Open is currently part of this project. Relevant enough to keep, or tangentially related? --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 01:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, I find it to be tangentially related. I'm assuming it's only part of this project because the bot caught mention of "coronavirus" in the article. As an aside, I'm honestly surprised that Broadway theatre hasn't mentioned COVID-19 at all, and compared to the Gibraltar Open, that definitely affects a major portion of a major city. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:46, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the WikiProject COVID-19 template. I agree, too tangentially related. --- Another Believer _{( Talk)} 14:23, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Just created my first portal and its called pandemic portal!

Check it out here Portal:Pandemic AustroHungarian1867 ( Talk)

19 March 2020 5:44 (UTC)

Many of our COVID-19 articles are 100k+ in size, some much larger. We should endeavour to reduce that, by editing or sub-dividing, in order to ensure ease of access for readers on slow devices, and/or restricted data volume tariffs. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Definitely agree, I think starting with the March timeline is a good idea. Definitely soon taking a look at the page sizes and seeing what can be split should be done soon. QueerFilmNerd ^talk 20:50, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Brainstorming: since good copyediting takes time, per IAR, might it be a good idea to have a bot or script split big articles into chunks and copy them somewhere? We can just delete the pages when they're not needed anymore. -- 47.146.63.87 ( talk) 05:24, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing, It's being discussed on the talk pages of some rather big articles like Timeline of the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic in February 2020 and Timeline of the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic in March 2020 as the huge number of {{ cite}} templates were causing {{ reflist}} to render improperly; splitting tags are present on the articles proper. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:11, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

On my Facebook I've seen news articles circulating about claiming that ibuprofen may worsen COVID-19 symptoms ( [2], [3], and [4]) and the WHO encouraging consumers not to take ibuprofen to alleviate symptoms, though that statement has been retracted pending further investigation. Most of this revolves around this Lancet paper. Does anyone have full access to it to analyse it further? -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

 Update Its URL text claims that it is the full text. -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:02, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

This is "Correspondence", which I think means the letters section of the journal. It's not a "journal article" as such, which is why it's just one page. Not an expert; anyone who is please speak up if I'm incorrect. -- 47.146.63.87 ( talk) 04:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Formally published correspondence in the Lancet group of journals, such as this, should have been peer reviewed. This is not just a Letter to the Editor which in the Lancet is usually labelled as a Comment. Many British journals (eg Nature) use "research letter" for a short peer-reviewed articles. Espresso Addict ( talk) 13:57, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Is there sufficient notability and references on COVID-19 on its impact on how goods and services are being performed? I gotten started on this article with User:Qwertyxp2000/Impact of the 2019-2020 coronavirus epidemic on goods and services. Mostly, I am intending for that article to explain the excessive hoarding and purchases of certain goods, oil price drops, and the impact of how services are run worldwide. Qwertyxp2000 ( talk | contribs) 02:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Playboy magazine has ceased print publication in part due to supply chain problems. (COVID-19 just accelerated what was already in the works.) kencf0618 ( talk) 11:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

A lot of the newer/smaller articles about the pandemic in specific locations, such as this and this, begin with “this article details” or “this article documents”. It’s very unencyclopedic and against MOS:SELFREF. Could some editors help with cleaning this up? Thanks.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 02:24, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Bait30:  Both are done. Have you noticed any others? -- Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:10, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@ Tenryuu: Sorry, I was away for a bit. Honestly, there are a lot more. It would just be easier for different editors to just look around.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 03:51, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

For example, all the articles for Africa except Morocco, Mauritius, Nigeria, Ghana, Namibia, and South Africa, have this issue.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 03:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

There are just a lot of these types of MOS: problems in general. I am seeing a lot of MOS:AVOIDBOLD problems as well. Editors should take note of the Manual of Style instead of just rushing to create the next pandemic subdivision article.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 04:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

The same thing happens to me... My 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Croatia begins with This article documents... yet i tried to change that but some user named Pjesnik21 undid the edits. (AustroHungarian1867) 10:18 (UTC) 20 March 2020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustroHungarian1867 ( talk • contribs)

• Also an issue at 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Norway Carl Fredrik ^talk 10:55, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
• Also on the articles related to the pandemic in British Columbia, Alberta, Quebec, and New Brunswick. Username ⁶⁸⁹² 14:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

  Username6892, thanks for doing all of those. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Remember to also keep WP:AVOIDBOLD in mind, which states that “ the article's title does not lend itself to being used easily and naturally in the opening sentence, the wording should not be distorted in an effort to include it.” If you see the example used on the avoid bold page, you can see why a lot of the titles need to be changed as well.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 16:14, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I would like to bring this topic to your attention: Template talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data § Worldometers/WOMC: we have a problem. Thank you. -- MarioGom ( talk) 11:15, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Please see Talk:Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2#Is there a difference (in this context) between "ACE2" and "ACE2 receptor"?. This should be a fairly simple question for a virologist. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 15:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Something needs to be done about the large statistics templates on the coronavirus pandemic pages. For example the {{2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/United States medical cases}} is so large that it kept breaking the reflist template on the United States page. Either references need to be removed from those templates (this one had over 300!) or these templates simply should be removed (after all WP:NOTSTATS).  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 18:21, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Do we have any WHO or Wikipedia page precedents or arguments of how to list people who are lab-confirmed to be SARS-CoV-2 positive and then die for an unrelated reason (or at least, according to official sources or more reliable sources than official ones, if these exist)?

Right now we have a case in Poland. There are 5 official COVID-19 deaths. A sixth one was declared earlier this morning (UTC+1), and later withdrawn. I haven't checked the sources, but apparently the patient was pregnant, she was getting better, she gave birth, and afterwards caught an infection and died of sepsis - not pneumonia. So the Ministry of Health point of view is that she did not die of COVID-19. Other cases could happen (and probably have happened) - for example, a home accident happens to someone who is SARS-CoV-2 positive and in strict home quarantine; or a hospital room collapses and crushes the SARS-CoV-2 positive person inside. Medically, these are not "caused by COVID-19".

Adding extra columns for these tiny numbers of cases would make tables even broader than they already are. In any case, any suggestions here or directly at the talk page of the PL COVID-19 page would be welcome. Boud ( talk) 19:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)