Talk:COVID-19 pandemic: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 10:10, 17 April 2021 editCutePeach (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users1,782 editsNo edit summaryTags: use of deprecated (unreliable) source Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 13:00, 17 December 2024 edit undoOzzie10aaaa (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers212,654 edits →How did covid end in 2024
(1,000 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Skip to bottom}}
	{{Talk header}}		{{Talk header}}
			{{British English\|date=April 2020}}
	{{Gs/talk notice\|covid}}
			{{Contentious topics/talk notice\|topic=covid\|style=brief}}
	{{Recruiting}}
			{{Article history
	{{anchor\|elsewhere}}{{tmbox
			\|action1 = FAC
			\|action1date = 28 February 2020
			\|action1link = Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/2019–20 coronavirus outbreak/archive1
			\|action1result = failed
			\|action1oldid = 943074902

			\|action2=GAN
			\|action2date=10:11, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
			\|action2link=Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/GA1
			\|action2result=failed
			\|action2oldid=977670632

			\|action3=GAN
			\|action3date=22:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
			\|action3link=Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/GA2
			\|action3result=failed
			\|action3oldid=1063341310

			\|action4=GAN
			\|action4date=11:03, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
			\|action4link=Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/GA3
			\|action4result=failed
			\|action4oldid=1118027541

			\|action5=GAN
			\|action5date=13:15, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
			\|action5link=Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/GA4
			\|action5result=listed
			\|action5oldid=1159777027

			\|currentstatus= GA
			\|topic=Biology and medicine
			\| itndate = 20 January 2020 \| itnlink = Special:PermanentLink/936682518
			\| itn2date = 28 January 2020 \| itn2link = Special:PermanentLink/937918559
			\| itn3date = 31 January 2020 \| itn3link = Special:PermanentLink/938462246
			\| itn4date = 4 February 2020 \| itn4link = Special:PermanentLink/939198475
			\| itn5date = 11 March 2020 \| itn5link = Special:PermanentLink/945073804
			\| itn6date = 16 March 2020 \| itn6link = Special:PermanentLink/945890159
			\| itn7date = 6 May 2023 \| itn7link = Special:Diff/1153376409
			\| otd1date = 2024-01-30 \| otd1oldid = 1200660669
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=GA\|collapsed=y\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors\|user=Lfstevens\|date=25 December 2021}}
			{{WikiProject COVID-19\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Medicine\|importance=Top\|pulmonology=y\|pulmonology-imp=top}}
			{{WikiProject Viruses\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Disaster management\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Death\|importance=High}}
			{{WikiProject China\|importance=high\|history=y}}
			{{WikiProject 2010s\|importance=High}}
			}}
			{{tmbox
	\|image = ]		\|image = ]
	\|text = '''Want to add new information about COVID-19?''' Most often, it should not go here.<br/>Please consider choosing the most appropriate article, for example:		\|text = '''Want to add new information about COVID-19?''' Most often, it should not go here.<br />Please consider choosing the most appropriate article, for example:
	{{div col}}		{{div col}}
	* ] (the virus that causes COVID-19)		* ] (the virus that causes COVID-19)
	* ] (the disease caused by the virus)		* ] (the disease caused by the virus)
	* ]
	* One of the ]		* One of the ]
	* One of the ] articles		* One of the ] articles
	{{div col end}}		{{div col end}}
	... or dozens of other places, as listed in {{tl\|COVID-19 pandemic}}. Thanks!		... or dozens of other places, as listed in {{tl\|COVID-19 pandemic}}. Thanks!
	}}
	{{Current COVID-19 Project Consensus}}
	{{British English\|date=April 2020}}
	{{WikiProject banner shell\|collapsed=yes\|1=
	{{WikiProject Current events}}
	{{WikiProject COVID-19 \|class=C \|importance=Top}}
	{{WikiProject China \|class=C \|importance=High \|history=y}}
	{{WikiProject Disaster management \|class=C \|importance=top}}
	{{WikiProject Medicine \|class=C \|importance=Top \|pulmonology=yes \|pulmonology-imp=Low}}
	{{WikiProject Viruses \|class=C \|importance=top}}
	}}		}}
	{{Banner holder\|collapsed=yes\|		{{Banner holder\|collapsed=yes\|
			{{Current COVID-19 Project Consensus\|collapsed=yes}}
	{{Vital article\|class=B\|level=4\|topic=History\|link=Misplaced Pages:Vital articles/Level/4/History}}
			{{Banner holder\|text=Article history\|collapsed=yes\|
	{{Section sizes}}		{{Section sizes}}
			{{Copied\|collapse=yes
	{{Article history
			\|from1=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak\|from_oldid1=939276783\|to1=2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease\|to_oldid1=939278614\|date1=5 February 2020
	\| action1 = FAC
			\|from2=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak\|from_oldid2=941907149\|to2=2020 coronavirus outbreak in Japan\|to_oldid2=941907541\|date2=21 February 2020
	\| action1date = 2020-02-28
			\|from3=Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|from_oldid3=950541825\|to3=2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|to_oldid3=950602338\|date3=12 April 2020
	\| action1link = Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/2019–20 coronavirus outbreak/archive1
			\|from4=Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the environment\|from_oldid4=950286586\|to4=2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|to_oldid4=950602338\|date4=12 April 2020
	\| action1result = failed
			\|from5=Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on education\|from_oldid5=950559816\|to5=2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|to_oldid5=950602338\|date5=12 April 2020
	\| action1oldid = 943074902
			\|from6=Travel restrictions related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|from_oldid6=950542322\|to6=2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|to_oldid6=950602338\|date6=12 April 2020

			\|from7=2020 coronavirus pandemic in Europe\|from_oldid7=950598540\|to7=2019–20 coronavirus pandemic\|to_oldid7=950604430\|date7=12 April 2020
	\|action2=GAN
	\|action2date=10:11, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
	\|action2link=Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/GA1
	\|action2result=Not listed
	\|action2oldid=977670632

	\|current status= FGAN
	\| itndate = 20 January 2020 \| itnlink = Special:PermanentLink/936682518
	\| itn2date = 28 January 2020\| itn2link = Special:PermanentLink/937918559
	\| itn3date = 31 January 2020\| itn3link = Special:PermanentLink/938462246
	\| itn4date = 4 February 2020\| itn4link = Special:PermanentLink/939198475
	\| itn5date = 11 March 2020\| itn5link = Special:PermanentLink/945073804
	\| itn6date = 16 March 2020\| itn6link = Special:PermanentLink/945890159
	}}		}}
			{{All time pageviews\|83}}
	{{Annual readership\|days=30\|scale=log}}
	{{Annual report\|]\|~~83,764,908~~}}		{{Annual report\|] and ]}}
	{{Top 25 report\|Jan 19 2020 (3rd)\|Jan 26 2020 (4th)\|Feb 2 2020 (5th)\|Feb 9 2020 (3rd)\|Feb 16 2020 (20th)\|Feb 23 2020 (1st)\|Mar 1 2020 (1st)\|Mar 8 2020 (1st)\|Mar 15 2020 (1st)\|Mar 22 2020 (1st)\|Mar 29 2020 (1st)\|Apr 5 2020 (1st)\|Apr 12 2020 (1st)\|Apr 19 2020 (2nd)\|Apr 26 2020 (4th)\|May 3 2020 (4th)\|May 10 2020 (3rd)\|May 17 2020 (3rd)\|May 24 2020 (6th)\|May 31 2020 (17th)\|Jun 7 2020 (11th)\|Jun 14 2020 (11th)\|Jun 21 2020 (5th)\|Jun 28 2020 (12th)\|Jul 5 2020 (11th)\|Jul 12 2020 (14th)\|Jul 19 2020 (7th)\|Jul 26 2020 (13th)\|Aug 2 2020 (16th)}}		{{Top 25 report\|Jan 19 2020 (3rd)\|Jan 26 2020 (4th)\|Feb 2 2020 (5th)\|Feb 9 2020 (3rd)\|Feb 16 2020 (20th)\|Feb 23 2020 (1st)\|Mar 1 2020 (1st)\|Mar 8 2020 (1st)\|Mar 15 2020 (1st)\|Mar 22 2020 (1st)\|Mar 29 2020 (1st)\|Apr 5 2020 (1st)\|Apr 12 2020 (1st)\|Apr 19 2020 (2nd)\|Apr 26 2020 (4th)\|May 3 2020 (4th)\|May 10 2020 (3rd)\|May 17 2020 (3rd)\|May 24 2020 (6th)\|May 31 2020 (17th)\|Jun 7 2020 (11th)\|Jun 14 2020 (11th)\|Jun 21 2020 (5th)\|Jun 28 2020 (12th)\|Jul 5 2020 (11th)\|Jul 12 2020 (14th)\|Jul 19 2020 (7th)\|Jul 26 2020 (13th)\|Aug 2 2020 (16th)}}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/UMass_Boston/Composition_II_(Summer_2020) \| assignments = ] \| start_date = 2020-07-14 \| end_date = 2020-08-28 }}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/Florida_International_University/IDH3035_-_Digital_Fairytale_(Spring_2020) \| assignments = ] \| reviewers = ], ], ] \| start_date = 2020-01-06 \| end_date = 2020-04-25 }}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/UCLA/Viruses_and_Biotechnology_(Winter) \| assignments = ] \| start_date = 2021-01-04 \| end_date = 2021-03-12 }}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/Ontario_Tech_University/Writing_and_Publishing_in_the_Digital_Age_-_W2021_(Winter_2020) \| assignments = ] \| start_date = 2021-01-14 \| end_date = 2021-04-07 }}
	{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment \| course = Misplaced Pages:Wiki_Ed/York_University/Information_and_Technology_(Winter_2021) \| assignments = ] \| start_date = 2021-01-11 \| end_date = 2021-04-30 }}
	{{Press\|subject=article\|author=Omer Benjakob\|title=On Misplaced Pages, a fight is raging over coronavirus disinformation\|org=]\|url=https://www.wired.co.uk/article/wikipedia-coronavirus\|date=February 9, 2020\|quote=While a short and generic Misplaced Pages page on "coronavirus" had existed since 2013, the article about the "2019–20 coronavirus outbreak" was created on January 5, 2020.\|accessdate=February 9, 2020\|subject2=article\|author2=Stephen Harrison\|title2=The Coronavirus Is Stress-Testing Misplaced Pages’s Policies\|org2=]\|url2=https://slate.com/technology/2020/03/coronavirus-wikipedia-policies.html\|date2=March 19, 2020\|quote2=At press time, more than 2,100 editors have contributed to the pandemic’s main Misplaced Pages article.\|accessdate2=March 19, 2020\|subject3=article\|author3=Laurence Dodds\|title3=Why Misplaced Pages is winning against the coronavirus 'infodemic'\|url3=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/04/03/wikipedia-winning-against-coronavirus-infodemic/\|quote3=Against all odds, Misplaced Pages's eccentric volunteer editors are holding back the tide of coronavirus misinformation\|accessdate3=April 6, 2020\|date3=April 3, 2020\|subject4=article\|author4=Omer Benjakob\|title4=Why Misplaced Pages Is Immune to Coronavirus\|url4=https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-why-wikipedia-is-immune-to-coronavirus-1.8751147\|accessdate4=April 8, 2020\|date4=April 8, 2020\|subject5=article\|author5=Mikael Thalen\|title5=Meet the Misplaced Pages editors fighting to keep coronavirus pages accurate\|url5=https://www.dailydot.com/debug/wikipedia-coronavirus-page/\|quote5=Those pages include the Misplaced Pages article for the virus itself, known as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, the disease it causes, COVID-19, and the ongoing global pandemic the coronavirus has caused.\|accessdate5=April 8, 2020\|date5=March 25, 2020\|subject6=article\|author6=Farah Qaiser\|title6=Like Zika, The Public Is Heading To Misplaced Pages During The COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic\|url6=https://www.forbes.com/sites/farahqaiser/2020/03/18/like-zika-the-public-is-heading-to-wikipedia-during-the-covid-19-coronavirus-pandemic\|accessdate6=June 21, 2020\|date6=March 18, 2020\|subject7=article\|author7=Shaan Sachdev\|title7=Misplaced Pages's Sprawling, Awe-Inspiring Coverage of the Pandemic\|org7=]\|url7=https://newrepublic.com/article/161486/wikipedia-coverage-pandemic-covid\|date7=February 26, 2021\|quote7=The Misplaced Pages article for the Covid-19 pandemic didn't exist until January 2020. By June, it was one of the site's most visited entries of all time. It became, according to Misplaced Pages's ] of article rankings, 'the biggest phenomenon Misplaced Pages has ever known.'\|archiveurl7=https://web.archive.org/web/20210228122324/https://newrepublic.com/article/161486/wikipedia-coverage-pandemic-covid\|archivedate7=February 28, 2021\|accessdate7=February 28, 2021
	}}
	{{split article		{{split article
	\|from=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak		\|from=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak\|to=Timeline of the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak\|date=23 January 2020
	\|to=~~Timeline~~ of ~~the~~ 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak		\|from2=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak\|to2=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak by country and territory\|date2=26 January 2020}}
	\|date=23 January 2020
	\|from2=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak
	\|to2=2019–20 coronavirus outbreak by country and territory
	\|date2=26 January 2020
	}}
	{{Copied
	\|from1 = 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak
	\|from_oldid1 = 939276783
	\|to1 = 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease
	\|to_oldid1 = 939278614
	\|date1 = 5 February 2020

	\|from2 = 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak
	\|from_oldid2 = 941907149
	\|to2 = 2020 coronavirus outbreak in Japan
	\|to_oldid2 = 941907541
	\|date2 = 21 February 2020

	\|from3 = Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|from_oldid3 = 950541825
	\|to3 = 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|to_oldid3 = 950602338
	\|date3 = 12 April 2020

	\|from4 = Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the environment
	\|from_oldid4 = 950286586
	\|to4 = 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|to_oldid4 = 950602338
	\|date4 = 12 April 2020

	\|from5 = Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on education
	\|from_oldid5 = 950559816
	\|to5 = 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|to_oldid5 = 950602338
	\|date5 = 12 April 2020

	\|from6 = Travel restrictions related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|from_oldid6 = 950542322
	\|to6 = 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|to_oldid6 = 950602338
	\|date6 = 12 April 2020

	\|from7 = 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Europe
	\|from_oldid7 = 950598540
	\|to7 = 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic
	\|to_oldid7 = 950604430
	\|date7 = 12 April 2020

	}}
	{{Old moves		{{Old moves
	\| small = no <!-- Just in case -->		\| small = no <!-- Just in case -->
Line 140:		Line 113:
	* RM, COVID-19 pandemic → Coronavirus pandemic, Not moved, 25 August 2020 (])		* RM, COVID-19 pandemic → Coronavirus pandemic, Not moved, 25 August 2020 (])
	}}		}}
	{{photo\|of=the ] better than ]\|in=Wuhan}}
	}}		}}
			{{Annual readership\|days=180\|scale=log}}
	{{Auto archiving notice\|bot=lowercase sigmabot III \|age=7 \|units=days}}
			{{section size}}
	{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
			{{Press\|collapsed=yes\|1=
	\|target=/Archive index
			\|subject=article\|author=Omer Benjakob\|title=On Misplaced Pages, a fight is raging over coronavirus disinformation\|org='']''\|url=https://www.wired.co.uk/article/wikipedia-coronavirus\|date=February 9, 2020\|quote=While a short and generic Misplaced Pages page on "coronavirus" had existed since 2013, the article about the "2019–20 coronavirus outbreak" was created on January 5, 2020.\|accessdate=February 9, 2020
	\|mask=/Archive <#>
			\|subject2=article\|author2=Stephen Harrison\|title2=The Coronavirus Is Stress-Testing Misplaced Pages’s Policies\|org2='']''\|url2=https://slate.com/technology/2020/03/coronavirus-wikipedia-policies.html\|date2=March 19, 2020\|quote2=At press time, more than 2,100 editors have contributed to the pandemic’s main Misplaced Pages article.\|accessdate2=March 19, 2020
	\|leading_zeros=0
			\|subject3=article\|author3=Laurence Dodds\|title3=Why Misplaced Pages is winning against the coronavirus 'infodemic'\|org3='']''\|url3=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/04/03/wikipedia-winning-against-coronavirus-infodemic/\|quote3=Against all odds, Misplaced Pages's eccentric volunteer editors are holding back the tide of coronavirus misinformation\|accessdate3=April 6, 2020\|date3=April 3, 2020
	\|indexhere=yes}}
			\|subject4=article\|author4=Omer Benjakob\|title4=Why Misplaced Pages Is Immune to Coronavirus\|org4='']''\|url4=https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-why-wikipedia-is-immune-to-coronavirus-1.8751147\|accessdate4=April 8, 2020\|date4=April 8, 2020
			\|subject5=article\|author5=Mikael Thalen\|title5=Meet the Misplaced Pages editors fighting to keep coronavirus pages accurate\|org5='']''\|url5=https://www.dailydot.com/debug/wikipedia-coronavirus-page/\|quote5=Those pages include the Misplaced Pages article for the virus itself, known as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, the disease it causes, COVID-19, and the ongoing global pandemic the coronavirus has caused.\|accessdate5=April 8, 2020\|date5=March 25, 2020
			\|subject6=article\|author6=Farah Qaiser\|title6=Like Zika, The Public Is Heading To Misplaced Pages During The COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic\|org6='']''\|url6=https://www.forbes.com/sites/farahqaiser/2020/03/18/like-zika-the-public-is-heading-to-wikipedia-during-the-covid-19-coronavirus-pandemic\|accessdate6=June 21, 2020\|date6=March 18, 2020
			\|subject7=article\|author7=Shaan Sachdev\|title7=Misplaced Pages's Sprawling, Awe-Inspiring Coverage of the Pandemic\|org7='']''\|url7=https://newrepublic.com/article/161486/wikipedia-coverage-pandemic-covid\|date7=February 26, 2021\|quote7=The Misplaced Pages article for the Covid-19 pandemic didn't exist until January 2020. By June, it was one of the site's most visited entries of all time. It became, according to Misplaced Pages's ] of article rankings, 'the biggest phenomenon Misplaced Pages has ever known.'<!--\|archiveurl7=https://web.archive.org/web/20210228122324/https://newrepublic.com/article/161486/wikipedia-coverage-pandemic-covid\|archivedate7=February 28, 2021\|accessdate7=February 28, 2021-->
			\|author8=Jackson Ryan\|title8=Inside Misplaced Pages's endless war over the coronavirus lab leak theory\|org8=]\|url8=https://www.cnet.com/features/inside-wikipedias-endless-war-over-the-coronavirus-lab-leak-theory/\|date8=June 24, 2021\|quote8=In recent weeks, increasing press coverage from the likes of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post has seen the lab leak hypothesis endlessly debated on social media, talk radio and primetime TV. It's become unavoidable. Unless you visit Misplaced Pages's COVID-19 pandemic page. The words 'lab leak' aren't mentioned anywhere.
			}}
			}}
			{{To do}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
	\| algo=old(7d)		\| algo = old(60d)
	\| archive=Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/Archive %(counter)d		\| archive = Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/Archive %(counter)d
	\| counter=42		\| counter = 48
	\| maxarchivesize=~~200K~~		\| maxarchivesize = 100K
	\| archiveheader={{Automatic archive navigator}}		\| archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
	\| minthreadsleft=4		\| minthreadsleft = 5
	\| minthreadstoarchive=1
	}}		}}
	{{To do}}
	{{bad page for beginners\|reason=its size and complexity\|alternative=edit a ] (such as the one for your home country)}}

	{{TOC limit\|3}}		{{TOC limit\|3}}
			{{clear}}

			==Current consensus==<!-- This header must be on this page, not the subpage, to support mobile users. -->
	<!-- START PIN -->{{Pin message}}<!-- ] 20:29, 6 April 2030 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil\|1901737788}}<!-- END PIN -->
	{{/Current consensus}}		{{/Current consensus}}
	</div>

	== Adding extra information regarding the impact on education ==

	I intend to add a small paragraph containing statistics of students' experience learning during the pandemic. I will be using the .--] (]) 16:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
	:thank you for post--] (]) 12:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

	== Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2021 ==

	{{edit semi-protected\|COVID-19 pandemic\|answered=yes}}
	I want to edit indian section in covid-19 pandemic ] (]) 07:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
	:Please, specify the changes that you want to make. ]_] 08:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

			== How did covid end in 2024 ==
	== Semi-protected edit request on 10 April 2021 (2) ==

			Dff ] (]) 06:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
	{{edit semi-protected\|COVID-19 pandemic\|answered=yes}}
			::It didn't ] (]) 07:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
	Please change reference 143 (Levine-Tiefenbrun, Matan et al. (8 February 2021). "Decreased SARS-CoV-2 viral load following vaccination". medRxiv: 2021.02.06.21251283. doi:10.1101/2021.02.06.21251283.) to https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01316-7, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-021-01316-7. The paper is now published after peer review. ] (]) 18:24, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
	:] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Seems like you had an earlier version of the article because this has been removed, seemingly for other reasons, now. And simply changing the link is insufficient, that reviewed version needs to be checked to see if there's any change in the content being cited. ] (] / ]) 22:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

			:Nobody knows. Ask ten years from now, when maybe they'll have a good answer. ] (]) 07:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
	== Fake News ==
			::this may help...(more in the section below)--] (]) 23:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
	{{hat\|DFTT ] ] 16:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)}}
	There is fake news in this article. The number of cases is 135 million, not 13.8 million. Fix that please. ] (]) 01:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

			== The US Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic investigation ==
	:"fake news" is a contrived political term. There is an error. That is the correct term, and proper notification has been made to address it. ] (]) 01:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
	:This error has been corrected. ] (]) 15:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
	{{hab}}

			After a 2-year investigation, the US Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic has confirmed what the conspiracy theorists determined FIVE years ago: EVERYTHING about the COVID pandemic was fraudulent.
	== Origin2 ==
			https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/12.04.2024-SSCP-FINAL-REPORT.pdf ] (]) 06:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

			:Just political silliness, of no relevance to Misplaced Pages (until/unless some decent sources analyse it). ] (]) 07:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
	We have discussed China origin before, and this news is getting . We have discussed this before here ] and now this is probably ]. MEDRS as I have noted before is not a valid reason to exclude. Maybe someone here could propose one sentence? I am sure we wont get consensus here, as we can come to a sentence (those that want to include) and then we run an RFC and see if the MEDRS excuse holds or not. Thanks! ] (]) 16:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
			::The existence of this report is in fact relevant to WP, and the analyzation of the findings of it are in the report itself. Might want to give it a read. Past that - any further commentary regarding it in here violates ] ] <b style="color:red">•</b> ] ] <b style="color:red">•</b> 14:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
	:Already covered with a dedicated sub-section at ]. We can mention the popular press and political theories there. They should not be presented as a "both sides" (]) option to the scientific consensus, though. ] (] / ]) 16:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
			:::We have plenty of high-quality sources on the lab leak nonsense. This is more of the nonsense. In time the ] might cover it. ] (]) 15:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
	:This article in Slate doesn't really change the analysis of ], IMO. Particularly since Dr. Chan seems to be suggesting it be considered and investigated (which the WHO did in their latest joint report, and this interview doesn't even address let alone cast doubts upon). I'd suggest the 'popular press reports of fringe science doesn't need MEDRS' idea is an attempted end-run, looking to apply a scientific veneer of credibility to a conspiracy. It's either a ] alternative scientific hypothesis in which case we should rely on secondary sources (latest WHO report), or it's a conspiracy theory in which case it goes in ]. ] (]) 17:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
			:And why would we care about the claims of ignorant politicians? They are are not experts on the topic, they have no reputation for ], and they have a tendency to make self-serving claims. ] (]) 08:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
	::The current ] section provides an excessive summarization and fails to include any of the DUE conspiracy theories on this article. One or two sentences would be sufficient. Saying 'there are various false information and conspiracy theories' is excessive summarization. ] (]) 17:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
			:, but you have to jump to conclusions that this report PROVES that EVERYTHING "THEY" were LYING about. Right? IP from Russia. ] (]) 15:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
	:::IMO, there is no such thing as a "due conspiracy theory". At least, not for the primary article versus one specifically covering conspiracy theories (see the single short paragraph in ] vs ]). But perhaps you should be more clear, what do you want included in the article? Outright conspiracy theory, or non-mainstream science? Where do you categorize the article above on the range of ]? ] (]) 17:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
			:A substantial report, not one reasonably considered silly or nonsense, that's for sure! CNN, ABC, Al Jazeera have articles but I'm mobile right now. ] (]) 16:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
	::::Of course there are due conspiracy theories and we have entire pages dedicated to them, as as you pointed out. ] as you mention points out "Alternative theoretical formulations" in which those skilled in the art have different opinions. The former director of the CDC is obviously in that 'skilled in the art' category (borrowing an IP term). Just because the status quo doesn't accept that opinion doesn't 'deem' them scientific (of course they would deem them unscientific if they disagree). Obviously, with attribution, the opinion of the very definition of a category expert (even if the opinion differs from the mainstream) is due a sentence. Specifically, a sentence that summarizes the other sub-article, such as 'various people including xyz and abc have alleged the virus escaped from a lab in china, although these opinions are disputed by the mainstream.' (insert notable people's name, obviously, the person making the statement would need a wikilink itself, or their opinion would be undue in my opinion to begin with, but just because they have a wikilink it doesnt make it due. but expert + notable = due) ] (]) 13:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:::::Except the lab leak has failed to gain any significant traction amongst scientists. The odd one here and there (notice how the CDC director is also a political appointee...); but it's IMHO much closer to the "Questionable science" bit (nothing but anecdotal/circumstantial evidence) than to the "serious theory which is only supported by a minority" end of the scale. It being an "alternative theoretical formulation" would require it be reported as a serious possibility in multiple MEDRS (which would demonstrate it is a possibility actually entertained by scientists) - yet these, if they mention it at all (most don't), say things like "extremely unlikely". As to the mention in the article, that's already there, innit? {{tq\|"Without evidence, some people have claimed the virus is a bioweapon accidentally or purposefully leaked from a laboratory,"}} ] (] / ]) 13:25, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::::::{{re\|RandomCanadian}} One quibble, the "SARS-CoV-2 could have been collected from bats then accidentally leaked from the lab which collected it" hypothesis is distinct from the "it's a bioweapon" conspiracy theory, and the WHO report including the hypothesis as one of the 4 being investigated very much makes it an "alternative theoretical formulation". It's just one that's unlikely enough (according to the same MEDRS source which concludes it's an alternative worthy of consideration) not to be worth mentioning on this page, just like how the ] article doesn't reference ]. ] (]) 13:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:::::{{re\|Jtbobwaysf}} And this is covered in ], which is transcluded on ]. Feel free to add Dr. Chan as a notable supporter over there, but you've not made the argument (beyond an interview in Slate being 'more coverage') that it's DUE here on this article. Just like with the ] page, no need for the details here. ] (]) 13:41, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:Per ] and ] it is not necessary for us to summarize fringe viewpoints outside of the sub article (the investigations into the origins). And yes, MEDRS is a valid reason to exclude things that can only be sourced to "popular news" articles, as investigation of a pandemic's origin, index cases, etc is biomedical information - whereas ''statistics'' are not, investigation of single cases ''is''. The theory is not fully disproven at this point but is considered so unlikely as to be fringe by mainstream science. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (]/]) 14:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:::::::There are no known sources of the virus. Disproving something that is not known is silly. Are there no other sources besides slate? I am guessing there are a few. There are numerous China lab leak theories as you point out, they are in fact theories, not conspiracies as the POV pushers would try to assert. I am not taking any position at this time on subsets of the China lab leak theory, whether it is a bioweapen, accidental, bats, etc. There is no discussion of the inclusion of that there and that is an attempt to the discussion off track, it is clear above what I am proposing. ] (]) 17:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::::::::{{re\|Jtbobwaysf}} {{tq\|it is clear above what I am proposing}}. With respect it is not. Perhaps it would be more clear if you wrote up the sentence you wanted added so we could discuss that, instead of hoping for someone else (who agrees with you) to write up the sentence under discussion. Until then, there's no point in continuing. ] (]) 18:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:Our MEDRS and RS on origins only weigh probabilities of different hypotheses as there is no direct evidence for any of them, and should therefore be properly ] as ], and not presented as '''facts''' in Wikivoice. The probability of accidental zoonosis are based on priors and is weighed higher than probability of lab origins, which Chan and other much more senior scientists are reported in reliable sources to contest, as lab origins has both priors with SARS viruses leaking from biosecure labs in China '''and''' circumstantial evidence linking SARS-CoV-2 to WIV through ], as reported just yesterday in . A multilateral statement by 14 governments contests the weighting of the four hypotheses made in the interim WHO report, which were quietly '''dropped''' from its final report, and the WHO DM made a follow on statement calling for {{tq\|further investigation}}s of lab origins in specific . ::The lab origins hypothesis is falsifiable, as both our MEDRS and RS explicitly state, but only '''if''' China cooperates with these further investigations, specifically in providing access to its early patient and donor blood samples/data for seroanalysis. ] (]) 18:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::MEDRS (and not just the WHO) explicitly put the lab leak on the "extremely unlikely" end of things. As for arguments to false balance and debunked arguments such as the RaTG13 "link" and political (not scientific) claims, that's already discussed in an RfC last year, and I don't see anything that has changed the situation. It's not WPs job nor purpose to advocate for "further investigations", nor to criticise the scientific consensus (there are multiple sources, not just MEDRS which explicitly say that natural zoonosis is the scientifically accepted hypothesis - you picking only the ones which report on politics is of course cherry-picking); nor to present minority opinions which are based on circumstantial evidence which in all honesty boils down to "there's a lab in Wuhan" (see the quote from a Nature article posted here or on some other talk page). ] (] / ]) 18:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:::] would apply only to really ridiculous origin hypotheses like meteorites, little green men or ]. The WHO's '''joint study''' with China and the four main hypotheses they considered includes the laboratory leak hypothesis that was assessed in their '''interim''' report as {{tq\|extremely unlikely}} , but that appellation was dropped in their final report . The WHO DG later said lab origin hypothesis indeed requires {{tq\|further investigation}} , which he also stated after the interim report . The US led multilateral statement made in response to the long awaited '''final''' report on the WHO joint study "underscores" the need for an investigation with {{tq\|full and open collaboration}} from the government of China, which is well documented to have covered up the early outbreak of this pandemic , and is well documented to ] stuff in the general. We should not express academic opinions or contrived government policies as facts in Wikivoice. ] (]) 18:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::::Politics should not be confused with science. You shouldn't take governments as unbiased entities (especially not the US government which was led by the most virulent of COVID misinformation spreaders). We're writing on science. Re. the WHO report; what you're giving is the annexes, not the report itself, as should be clear from the file name and the first page. What the annexes do contain is stuff like "WIV was ''heavily targeted by conspiracy theories''. Staff talked to media and scientific journalists to dispel the myths.", "the low likelihood that RaTG13 was the precursor of SARS-CoV-2", etc...; but that's nothing new, since you've obviously read the whole thing and are providing an unbiased assessment of it, since you're talking about it, right? ] (] / ]) 18:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::::: Politics shouldn't be confused with science, and the WHO is science... right? We give due weight to all kinds of things at WP including green people as another editor points out above, not sure that was his objective ;-) ] (]) 19:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::::::Even if we disregarded the WHO all other serious scientific sources point in the same direction... See ] for a sampling. ] (] / ]) 19:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	::::{{re\|CutePeach}} Correcting a significant error in what you said above: {{tq\|the laboratory leak hypothesis that was assessed in their '''interim''' report as {{tq\|extremely unlikely}} , but that appellation was dropped in their final report .}} The first link is indeed the final report, and contains the "extremely unlikely" conclusion. The second link is a supplemental document with reference data, not a later or replacement document. It's also worth noting that this final report also concluded with {{tq\|, the team called for a continued scientific and collaborative approach to be taken towards tracing the origins of COVID-19}}. As for wikivoice, I suggest it's a stretch to say everything that ''might'' change in the future must be discussed as such in every article (see: ]). Consensus might change in the future, but that shouldn't stop us from describing current consensus. ] (]) 19:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
	:::::{{re\|Bakkster Man}}, thanks you for correcting that significant error as the final WHO report '''does''' in fact use the {{tq\|extremely unlikely}} appellation, which I missed late last night. I am much better rested now and already on my second coffee of the day. I think my main point still stands. The WHO DG <strike>'''critiqued'''</strike> '''rejected''' the report’s findings saying that the team’s {{tq\|assessment}} was not {{tq\|extensive enough}}, and that the lab leak hypothesis needs {{u\|further investigation}} . The WHO’s Joint Study - which was performed by an independent group of scientists and not the WHO itself - is presented on the WHO website alongside the WHO DG’s statements , so the report should '''not''' be taken alone as the WHO’s official position on COVID-19 origins, until its findings are verified by underlying data .
	:::::Also, the US led multilateral response of WHO member states who would have liked to have had more of a say in the Terms of Reference of the Joint Study and for it have taken place earlier, and for further investigations to be expedited with {{tq\|full and open collaboration}}, casts doubt on the WHO Joint Study and its assessments , but agrees with the report’s call for a {{tq\|continued scientific and collaborative approach}}, as you pointed out. China's response to the WHO DG and the US led multilateral statement is not reassuring
	. Without blood samples/data, the lab leak hypothesis cannot be falsified, and if they are confident of the report’s findings, the Chinese government would have every reason to share the relevant data with the WHO like they did after the SARS-COV-1 epidemic of 2003 . WHO team member ] said it is the norm for member states to share such data in a ] .
	:::::As to your point on Wikivoice, the current scientific consensus on COVID-19 origins as presented in our MEDRS and RS - including the WHO report - is based '''entirely''' on weighing/assessing probabilities of different hypotheses based on ] and ], and '''not''' ] or ] evidence. There are senior scientists and officials - including the WHO DG - expressing widely varying viewpoints supporting different hypotheses, but '''all''' of them call for further investigation of '''all''' hypotheses - including lab origins - which China has yet to acquiesce. All these views should be properly attributed as opinions and not stated as fact in Wikivoice, until '''direct evidence''' is presented in a peer reviewed journal, or the Chinese government releases the blood data/samples requested by the WHO. Since you want to discuss the application of this policy on other articles, it should be no different to how we treat China’s claims in the ] and the ]. They are just claims, which we attribute to the ], and it's as simple as that. In this article, we should not present PRC claims as facts on matters pertaining to what looks like a matter of non compliance with ] that are legally binding on all members of the ]. Those regulations were reformed after the Chinese government’s disastrous coverup of SARS-COV-1 and will have to be reformed again after SARS-COV-2 and what looks like another coverup on its origins and emergence . ] (]) 10:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 13:00, 17 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 pandemic article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49Auto-archiving period: 2 months

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.

COVID-19 pandemic 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 28, 2020	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
September 10, 2020	Good article nominee	Not listed
January 2, 2022	Good article nominee	Not listed
October 27, 2022	Good article nominee	Not listed
June 12, 2023	Good article nominee	Listed
News items involving this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "In the news" column on January 20, 2020, January 28, 2020, January 31, 2020, February 4, 2020, March 11, 2020, March 16, 2020, and May 6, 2023.
A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 30, 2024.
Current status: Good article

This

level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Lfstevens, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 25 December 2021.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

COVID-19 Top‑importance

	COVID-19 portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Pulmonology Top‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Pulmonology task force (assessed as Top-importance).

Viruses Top‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

China: History High‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as High-importance).

2010s High‑importance

	2010s portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Want to add new information about COVID-19? Most often, it should not go here.
Please consider choosing the most appropriate article, for example:

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (the virus that causes COVID-19)
Coronavirus disease 2019 (the disease caused by the virus)
One of the country-specific articles on the pandemic
One of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic articles

... or dozens of other places, as listed in {{COVID-19 pandemic}}. Thanks!

Other talk page banners

WikiProject COVID-19 consensus

WikiProject COVID-19 aims to add to and build consensus for pages relating to COVID-19. They have so far discussed items listed below. Please discuss proposed improvements to them at the project talk page.

General

Superseded by TfD October 2020 and later practice - consult regular {{Current}} guidance.

Refrain from using Worldometer (worldometers.info) as a source due to common errors being observed as noted on the Case Count Task Force common errors page. (April 2020, April 2020)

For infoboxes on the main articles of countries, use Wuhan, Hubei, China for the origin parameter. (March 2020)

"Social distancing" is generally preferred over "physical distancing". (April 2020, May 2020)

Page title

COVID-19 (full caps) is preferable in the body of all articles, and in the title of all articles/category pages/etc.(RM April 2020, including the main article itself, RM March 2021).

SARS-CoV-2 (exact capitalisation and punctuation) is the common name of the virus and should be used for the main article's title, as well as in the body of all articles, and in the title of all other articles/category pages/etc. (June 2022, overturning April 2020)

Map

There is no consensus about which color schemes to use, but they should be consistent within articles as much as possible. There is agreement that there should be six levels of shading, plus gray for areas with no instances or no data. (May 2020)

There is no consensus about whether the legend, the date, and other elements should appear in the map image itself. (May 2020)

For map legends, ranges should use fixed round numbers (as opposed to updating dynamically). There is no consensus on what base population to use for per capita maps. (May 2020)

To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.

Article history

Section sizes

Section size for COVID-19 pandemic (84 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	10,167	10,167
Terminology	183	9,511
Pandemic	1,350	1,350
Virus names	7,978	7,978
Epidemiology	1,143	39,731
Background	8,401	8,401
Cases	9,255	9,899
Test positivity rate	644	644
Deaths	11,672	20,288
Infection fatality ratio (IFR)	6,977	6,977
Case fatality ratio (CFR)	1,639	1,639
Disease	33	38,560
Variants	2,832	2,832
Signs and symptoms	3,793	3,793
Transmission	2,604	2,604
Cause	2,010	2,010
Diagnosis	3,773	3,773
Prevention	2,559	8,785
Vaccines	6,226	6,226
Treatment	9,937	9,937
Prognosis	4,793	4,793
Strategies	4,602	18,586
Containment	1,927	1,927
Mitigation	908	5,297
Non-pharmaceutical interventions	791	791
Other measures	1,005	1,005
Contact tracing	2,593	2,593
Health care	2,793	5,777
Improvised manufacturing	2,984	2,984
Herd immunity	983	983
History	133	34,885
2019	4,430	4,430
2020	9,588	9,588
2021	6,343	6,343
2022	8,235	8,235
2023	6,156	6,156
Responses	3,372	72,347
Asia	15,081	15,081
Europe	15,723	15,723
North America	7,428	7,428
South America	6,273	6,273
Africa	7,177	7,177
Oceania	9,322	9,322
Antarctica	2,698	2,698
United Nations	3,856	3,856
WHO	1,417	1,417
Restrictions	1,955	8,011
Travel restrictions	3,801	3,801
Repatriation of foreign citizens	2,255	2,255
Impact	106	80,894
Economics	4,887	9,493
Supply shortages	4,606	4,606
Arts and cultural heritage	2,091	2,091
Politics	1,638	25,104
Brazil	6,057	6,057
China	2,546	2,546
Italy	2,774	2,774
United States	5,501	5,501
Other countries	6,588	6,588
Food systems	2,358	2,358
Education	2,359	2,359
Health	10,869	10,869
Environment	7,124	7,124
Discrimination and prejudice	6,995	6,995
Lifestyle changes	7,406	7,406
Historiography	3,302	3,302
Religion	3,687	3,687
Information dissemination	2,420	3,974
Misinformation	1,554	1,554
Culture and society	5,646	5,646
Transition to later phases	6,433	6,433
Long-term effects	24	5,492
Economic	2,046	2,046
Travel	1,195	1,195
Health	435	435
Immunisations	1,792	1,792
See also	687	687
Notes	138	138
References	32,276	32,276
Further reading	4,226	4,226
External links	34	5,443
Health agencies	1,369	1,369
Data and graphs	1,045	1,045
Medical journals	2,995	2,995
Total	377,007	377,007

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.

Copied pages:

Copied 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak (oldid, history) → 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease (diff) on 5 February 2020
Copied 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak (oldid, history) → 2020 coronavirus outbreak in Japan (diff) on 21 February 2020
Copied Misinformation related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (oldid, history) → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (diff) on 12 April 2020
Copied Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on the environment (oldid, history) → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (diff) on 12 April 2020
Copied Impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic on education (oldid, history) → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (diff) on 12 April 2020
Copied Travel restrictions related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (oldid, history) → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (diff) on 12 April 2020
Copied 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Europe (oldid, history) → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (diff) on 12 April 2020

This article has been viewed enough times to make it onto the all-time Top 100 list. It has had 83 million views since December 2007.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2020 and 2021.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 29 times. The weeks in which this happened:

Material from 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak was split to other pages. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter pages, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter pages exist. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. The former page's talk page can be accessed at Talk:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak.

Timeline of the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak (talk | history) on 23 January 2020
2019–20 coronavirus outbreak by country and territory (talk | history) on 26 January 2020

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, Consensus to not move, 23 March 2020 (permalink)
Proposal: Move moratorium, 30-day moratorium, 26 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → COVID-19 pandemic, Moved, 4 May 2020 (permalink)
RM, COVID-19 pandemic → Coronavirus pandemic, Not moved, 25 August 2020 (permalink)

Older discussions:

RM, 2019–20 outbreak of novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) → 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak, Moved, 16 January 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019–20 novel coronavirus outbreak, No consensus, 2 February 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019–20 novel coronavirus outbreak, Speedy close, 9 February 2020, (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019 Novel Coronavirus Outbreak, Speedy close, 11 February 2020, (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → COVID-19 outbreak, Speedy close, no viable consensus and without prejudice, 11 February 2020, (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019-20 coronavirus epidemic, Speedy closed. Too soon and snowing., 13 February 2020, (permalink)
MRV, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → COVID-19 outbreak, Endorsed, 13 February 2020, (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak, Moved, 18 February 2020, (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → Coronavirus disease outbreak, Speedy close without prejudice to renomination, 3 March 2020, (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, Moved, 11 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → Coronavirus pandemic, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → 2019-2020 COVID-19 pandemic, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → Wuhan Chinese Coronavirus Pandemic, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019-20 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak in China, Closed, 15 March 2020 (Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic/Archive 1#Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak in China)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → novel-coronavirus-2019 outbreak, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → 2019-2020 2019 nCoV coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak → Coronavirus outbreak, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → 2019–20 coronavirus disease pandemic, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → 2019-20 Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, Closed, 15 March 2020 (permalink)
RM, 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic → 2019–2020 coronavirus pandemic, Not moved per WP:SNOW, 19 March 2020 (permalink)

Section sizes

Section size for COVID-19 pandemic (84 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	10,167	10,167
Terminology	183	9,511
Pandemic	1,350	1,350
Virus names	7,978	7,978
Epidemiology	1,143	39,731
Background	8,401	8,401
Cases	9,255	9,899
Test positivity rate	644	644
Deaths	11,672	20,288
Infection fatality ratio (IFR)	6,977	6,977
Case fatality ratio (CFR)	1,639	1,639
Disease	33	38,560
Variants	2,832	2,832
Signs and symptoms	3,793	3,793
Transmission	2,604	2,604
Cause	2,010	2,010
Diagnosis	3,773	3,773
Prevention	2,559	8,785
Vaccines	6,226	6,226
Treatment	9,937	9,937
Prognosis	4,793	4,793
Strategies	4,602	18,586
Containment	1,927	1,927
Mitigation	908	5,297
Non-pharmaceutical interventions	791	791
Other measures	1,005	1,005
Contact tracing	2,593	2,593
Health care	2,793	5,777
Improvised manufacturing	2,984	2,984
Herd immunity	983	983
History	133	34,885
2019	4,430	4,430
2020	9,588	9,588
2021	6,343	6,343
2022	8,235	8,235
2023	6,156	6,156
Responses	3,372	72,347
Asia	15,081	15,081
Europe	15,723	15,723
North America	7,428	7,428
South America	6,273	6,273
Africa	7,177	7,177
Oceania	9,322	9,322
Antarctica	2,698	2,698
United Nations	3,856	3,856
WHO	1,417	1,417
Restrictions	1,955	8,011
Travel restrictions	3,801	3,801
Repatriation of foreign citizens	2,255	2,255
Impact	106	80,894
Economics	4,887	9,493
Supply shortages	4,606	4,606
Arts and cultural heritage	2,091	2,091
Politics	1,638	25,104
Brazil	6,057	6,057
China	2,546	2,546
Italy	2,774	2,774
United States	5,501	5,501
Other countries	6,588	6,588
Food systems	2,358	2,358
Education	2,359	2,359
Health	10,869	10,869
Environment	7,124	7,124
Discrimination and prejudice	6,995	6,995
Lifestyle changes	7,406	7,406
Historiography	3,302	3,302
Religion	3,687	3,687
Information dissemination	2,420	3,974
Misinformation	1,554	1,554
Culture and society	5,646	5,646
Transition to later phases	6,433	6,433
Long-term effects	24	5,492
Economic	2,046	2,046
Travel	1,195	1,195
Health	435	435
Immunisations	1,792	1,792
See also	687	687
Notes	138	138
References	32,276	32,276
Further reading	4,226	4,226
External links	34	5,443
Health agencies	1,369	1,369
Data and graphs	1,045	1,045
Medical journals	2,995	2,995
Total	377,007	377,007

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Omer Benjakob (February 9, 2020). "On Misplaced Pages, a fight is raging over coronavirus disinformation". Wired. Retrieved February 9, 2020. While a short and generic Misplaced Pages page on "coronavirus" had existed since 2013, the article about the "2019–20 coronavirus outbreak" was created on January 5, 2020.
Stephen Harrison (March 19, 2020). "The Coronavirus Is Stress-Testing Misplaced Pages's Policies". Slate. Retrieved March 19, 2020. At press time, more than 2,100 editors have contributed to the pandemic's main Misplaced Pages article.
Laurence Dodds (April 3, 2020). "Why Misplaced Pages is winning against the coronavirus 'infodemic'". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved April 6, 2020. Against all odds, Misplaced Pages's eccentric volunteer editors are holding back the tide of coronavirus misinformation
Omer Benjakob (April 8, 2020). "Why Misplaced Pages Is Immune to Coronavirus". Haaretz. Retrieved April 8, 2020.
Mikael Thalen (March 25, 2020). "Meet the Misplaced Pages editors fighting to keep coronavirus pages accurate". The Daily Dot. Retrieved April 8, 2020. Those pages include the Misplaced Pages article for the virus itself, known as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2, the disease it causes, COVID-19, and the ongoing global pandemic the coronavirus has caused.
Farah Qaiser (March 18, 2020). "Like Zika, The Public Is Heading To Misplaced Pages During The COVID-19 Coronavirus Pandemic". Forbes. Retrieved June 21, 2020.
Shaan Sachdev (February 26, 2021). "Misplaced Pages's Sprawling, Awe-Inspiring Coverage of the Pandemic". The New Republic. The Misplaced Pages article for the Covid-19 pandemic didn't exist until January 2020. By June, it was one of the site's most visited entries of all time. It became, according to Misplaced Pages's project page of article rankings, 'the biggest phenomenon Misplaced Pages has ever known.'
Jackson Ryan (June 24, 2021). "Inside Misplaced Pages's endless war over the coronavirus lab leak theory". CNET. In recent weeks, increasing press coverage from the likes of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post has seen the lab leak hypothesis endlessly debated on social media, talk radio and primetime TV. It's become unavoidable. Unless you visit Misplaced Pages's COVID-19 pandemic page. The words 'lab leak' aren't mentioned anywhere.

To-do list for COVID-19 pandemic: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2023-06-13

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Maintain : PEIS limits
- Current solution: Linking to {{COVID-19 pandemic data}} via a sidebar.

Current consensus

NOTE: It is recommended to link to this list in your edit summary when reverting, as:
] item
To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.

01. Superseded by #9 The first few sentences of the lead's second paragraph should state The virus is typically spread during close contact and via respiratory droplets produced when people cough or sneeze. Respiratory droplets may be produced during breathing but the virus is not considered airborne. It may also spread when one touches a contaminated surface and then their face. It is most contagious when people are symptomatic, although spread may be possible before symptoms appear. (RfC March 2020) 02. Superseded by #7 The infobox should feature a per capita count map most prominently, and a total count by country map secondarily. (RfC March 2020) 03. Obsolete The article should not use {{Current}} at the top. (March 2020)

04. Do not include a sentence in the lead section noting comparisons to World War II. (March 2020)

05. Cancelled

Include subsections covering the domestic responses of Italy, China, Iran, the United States, and South Korea. Do not include individual subsections for France, Germany, the Netherlands, Australia and Japan. (RfC March 2020) Include a short subsection on Sweden focusing on the policy controversy. (May 2020)

Subsequently overturned by editing and recognized as obsolete. (July 2024) 06. Obsolete There is a 30 day moratorium on move requests until 26 April 2020. (March 2020)

07. There is no consensus that the infobox should feature a confirmed cases count map most prominently, and a deaths count map secondarily. (May 2020)

08. Superseded by #16 The clause on xenophobia in the lead section should read ...and there have been incidents of xenophobia and discrimination against Chinese people and against those perceived as being Chinese or as being from areas with high infection rates. (RfC April 2020) 09. Cancelled

Supersedes #1. The first several sentences of the lead section's second paragraph should state The virus is mainly spread during close contact and by small droplets produced when those infected cough, sneeze or talk. These droplets may also be produced during breathing; however, they rapidly fall to the ground or surfaces and are not generally spread through the air over large distances. People may also become infected by touching a contaminated surface and then their face. The virus can survive on surfaces for up to 72 hours. Coronavirus is most contagious during the first three days after onset of symptoms, although spread may be possible before symptoms appear and in later stages of the disease. (April 2020)

Notes

Close contact is defined as 1 metres (3 feet) by the WHO and 2 metres (6 feet) by the CDC.
An uncovered cough can travel up to 8.2 metres (27 feet).

On 17:16, 6 April 2020, these first several sentences were replaced with an extracted fragment from the coronavirus disease 2019 article, which at the time was last edited at 17:11.

010. The article title is COVID-19 pandemic. The title of related pages should follow this scheme as well. (RM April 2020, RM August 2020)

011. The lead section should use Wuhan, China to describe the virus's origin, without mentioning Hubei or otherwise further describing Wuhan. (April 2020)

012. Superseded by #19 The lead section's second sentence should be phrased using the words first identified and December 2019. (May 2020) 013. Superseded by #15 File:President Donald Trump suggests measures to treat COVID-19 during Coronavirus Task Force press briefing.webm should be used as the visual element of the misinformation section, with the caption U.S. president Donald Trump suggested at a press briefing on 23 April that disinfectant injections or exposure to ultraviolet light might help treat COVID-19. There is no evidence that either could be a viable method. (1:05 min) (May 2020, June 2020) 014. Overturned Do not mention the theory that the virus was accidentally leaked from a laboratory in the article. (RfC May 2020) This result was overturned at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard, as there is consensus that there is no consensus to include or exclude the lab leak theory. (RfC May 2024)

015. Supersedes #13. File:President Donald Trump suggests measures to treat COVID-19 during Coronavirus Task Force press briefing.webm should not be used as the visual element of the misinformation section. (RfC November 2020)

016. Supersedes #8. Incidents of xenophobia and discrimination are considered WP:UNDUE for a full sentence in the lead. (RfC January 2021)

017. Only include one photograph in the infobox. There is no clear consensus that File:COVID-19 Nurse (cropped).jpg should be that one photograph. (May 2021)

018. Superseded by #19 The first sentence is The COVID-19 pandemic, also known as the coronavirus pandemic, is a global pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). (August 2021, RfC October 2023)

019. Supersedes #12 and #18. The first sentence is The global COVID-19 pandemic (also known as the coronavirus pandemic), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), began with an outbreak in Wuhan, China, in December 2019. (June 2024)

How did covid end in 2024

Dff 217.95.69.110 (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

It didn't HiLo48 (talk) 07:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Nobody knows. Ask ten years from now, when maybe they'll have a good answer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:19, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

this may help...(more in the section below)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

The US Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic investigation

After a 2-year investigation, the US Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic has confirmed what the conspiracy theorists determined FIVE years ago: EVERYTHING about the COVID pandemic was fraudulent. https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/12.04.2024-SSCP-FINAL-REPORT.pdf 95.25.133.157 (talk) 06:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Just political silliness, of no relevance to Misplaced Pages (until/unless some decent sources analyse it). Bon courage (talk) 07:29, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

The existence of this report is in fact relevant to WP, and the analyzation of the findings of it are in the report itself. Might want to give it a read. Past that - any further commentary regarding it in here violates WP:NOTFORUM --Picard's Facepalm • _Engage! • 14:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

We have plenty of high-quality sources on the lab leak nonsense. This is more of the nonsense. In time the WP:BESTSOURCES might cover it. Bon courage (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

And why would we care about the claims of ignorant politicians? They are are not experts on the topic, they have no reputation for fact-checking, and they have a tendency to make self-serving claims. Dimadick (talk) 08:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

report criticizing public health response to the pandemic, but you have to jump to conclusions that this report PROVES that EVERYTHING "THEY" were LYING about. Right? IP from Russia. YBSOne (talk) 15:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

A substantial report, not one reasonably considered silly or nonsense, that's for sure! CNN, ABC, Al Jazeera have articles but I'm mobile right now. SmolBrane (talk) 16:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: