Jump to content

Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Yegort (talk | contribs) at 23:48, 21 February 2020 (→‎Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Main source of this template

Currently the main source of this template is BNO news. However WHO began to publish its daily report since 21 January. We should use the reports as a main source of this template.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 10:33, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You ~ 116.15.233.190 11:36, 7 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.15.255.8 (talk)
Well these WHO reports will be issued once each day. (They may also be corrected later on). They would be more useful for the animated map rather than an up-to-date total that BNO attempts to present, and that this template is maintaining. When editors lose interest in continuously updating, then the WHO historic figures will be useful. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:28, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree 1,000%. BNO News does provide an earlier update, based on Chinese national reports. I still think the most credible source is the WHO which does provide an update every day at approximately 2:00 pm Eastern Standard Time. Krazytea(talk) 19:02, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We should NOT be attaching sources to content they do not support. I have removed the WHO from a bunch of stuff. We have two choices. We can either provide older data and use the WHO as the source or provide newer data and use BMO. If We decide to provide older information we will need consensus and we will need to fully protect this page because people will continously try to add newer data. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:49, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Where does BNO get it's news from? Strongly suspect it is: https://ncov.dxy.cn/ncovh5/view/pneumonia . We should include at least include the original source. The original source has additional info, like breakout by city under province. For example you can see stats for Shenzen. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 February 2020

Why not using this flag for non-country cases count, i know that not all country is part of the UN but for most people, the UN represent the world !?


---

---


Thanks, --Eric1212 (talk) 19:36, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the choice of the Lima flag as is, is more suitable for the purpose. All the countries under the UN have their own flag anyway. Non-counties are not really in the UN. Anyway its open for discussion. I was advocating including the count under the country where a ship is docked or where the patients are. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:17, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Lima flag wasen't used when i suggested it. --Eric1212 (talk) 23:10, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Every ship has its country of registration. DouglasHeld (talk) 08:11, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Split Hubei from Rest of China?

Given the concentration of cases in Hubei, would it make sense to split off that province from the rest of the country in the table? Hong Kong and Macau already are, for other reasons.
—WWoods (talk) 08:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, I think we should keep the table simple. Nguyen QuocTrung (talk) 11:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely keep the table as simple as possible, country and territory. I would not be opposed to a separate table of cases by state/region in China though. Krazytea(talk) 21:38, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Restore the Locations row

Time has come to restore it. Yug (talk) 18:54, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And what is that? Can you point to a revision with it in? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"International conveyance" (Diamond Princess)

WHO terms cases occurring in international waters / spaces as "Cases on an international conveyance". For our own sanity sake, it could be interesting to count them as such, as a special row, and thus avoid the current weird situation with Japan's cell containing 3 different numbers : Japan ; Ship ; Japan+Ship. Yug (talk) 13:59, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hzh, thanks for the line break. Yug (talk) 14:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Yug. The current presentation is very messy and it is not immediately clear which number we should be looking at. Readers may have difficulty determining which is number is which, e.g. 26 cases on the cruise ship and 135 local cases, or vice versa? If we are following The Who's approach we should give Diamond Princess its own row and separate it from Japan's count, if we decide to combine them then we should just remove "(incl. Diamond Princess)" and the other two numbers, the note alone would be sufficient. Hayman30 (talk) 16:44, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. But i didnt know how to split the 4 recoveries. Yug (talk) 19:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
However I do not like the term "International conveyance" as it obscure to many of our readers. Even "diamond princess" would be better as it is the only one. Otherwise perhaps you could use "ships". Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A ship is not a country, this is a list of countries, and the ship's patients are all hospitalized in Japan. People who were flown out of Wuhan by respective governments, are also counted among the numbers of that country, and not as a China patient anymore. As an inhabitant of Japan, I saw the need to come back to my former life as a heavy Wikipedia user to make a strong point about including the ship in the total of Japan numbers (as it was 4 or 5 days ago). Too bad that even my Wikipedia veteran status doesn't grant me right to make this change myself, so i am making my case here> A ship is not a country, and this is a highly tailored exception to meet the demands of the Japan government that obviously doesn't want to show second in this questionable medal table with almost 300 infected patients and counting. WHO is obviously also going along with Japan's request, as it is a big contributor. But Wikipedia is neither an official WHO or Japan page. All "Diamond Princess" patients are hospitalized on Japanese territory (the ambulances are roaring by several days on the street in front of my house, as we live close to 2 of the hospitals treating those patients). So please revert to the previous version where Japan number included the ship's patients.--Neumannkun (talk) 03:11, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a ship is not a country, but I think it sort of qualifies as a territory if you think about it? Maybe not, and a lot of other sources combine the numbers, but the two official sources (Japanese government and WHO) do have a separate count, so we're just following their approach. I don't know if the WHO or the Japanese government is pushing an agenda here, but that's not up to us to decide. It's fair to compare this situation to the evacuation of citizens from Wuhan by various countries, but those other countries willingly include the numbers in their official count. I agree that the existence of this table is questionable and the way we're sorting it almost seems like it's some sort of competition, but this is what we had with SARS and MERS too. Anyway, the ship is currently not included in the total number of territories, and we have a detailed footnote explaining why the cases on board are not included in Japan's official count. I agree that it's not a great solution, but it's probably the best one we could come up with right now. The previous presentation, in which we combined the two numbers and showed how the math was done in addition to having a lengthy footnote, was probably more confusing to readers and destroyed the tidiness of the table (yes I'm being overly pendantic). Hayman30 (talk) 11:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for the detailed reply and the attempt. I still think the Japan/WHO counting method is purely politically motivated (as inbound tourism is already dwindling, population slowly starts to panic and Tokyo 2020 is only a few months ahead), while any common sense and best practice arguments point to including the ship numbers in Japan. I almost hope that we will see more and more cruise ships (or planes or whatever) with infected people so maintaining the current approach with this table will look more and more questionable. --Neumannkun (talk) 12:49, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm perfectly fine with combining the two numbers. I too think that it's nonsensical to have a separate count when the ship is literally in Japan and the Japanese government is the one who's handling all the infected people on board. I'm just trying to say that we typically rely more on official sources (government announcements, WHO, etc.) when it comes to these epidemic statistics. Third-party sources (newspapers, etc.) are somehow regarded as less trustworthy or reliable. The core source of this template, BNO News, also sources most of its stats from government announcements. I was just so disgusted by the previous approach where we literally had a mathematic expression in the confirmed cases column showing how the math was done by adding up the two numbers, and in the country and territories Japan was written as "Japan + Diamond Princess", which was really weird because if it was so important to make such a distinction then it'll probably be better to put them in separate rows, which is what we have right now. If there is consensus I see no problem in reverting to the old version, but Japan should be written as Japan, not "Japan + Diamond Princess", "Japan + international conveyance" or any variation of that, the footnote is there to do all the explaining. Pinging Yug, Graeme Bartlett, Nguyen QuocTrung, Krazytea and TheGreatSG'rean for additional input. Hayman30 (talk) 20:56, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My first preference on how to deal with this is just to include the Diamond Princess numbers with Japan. Do not put any formula in the column, instead put a footnote on the "Japan" name and explain it at the bottom of the table. Already the People who came off the Westerdam are counted in the country they are in, so this will not be a precedent. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:25, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't agree more, this is exactly my view. Pinging more people: Darylgolden, Akira CA and Admanny. Hayman30 (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am not looking to actively partake in this discussion however my first thought is to leave "International Conveyance" the way it is without it being combined with Japan since I feel the numbers are large enough to warrant its own row. Admanny (talk) 13:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Graeme Bartlett, Hayman30: Diamond Princess is not country, but it is in Japanese waters now, and a reference of table also mentions it. So, we should write "International conveyance (Japan)" like WHO. --Garam (talk) 18:37, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We should not use small text though. Small could be used for something not relevant, eg a joke on a talk page. But if it is important enough to include in an article it should be readable for those with tiny screens. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:45, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You mean, is "China (mainland)" on the article also joke? And normally it can read in mobile, too. --Garam (talk) 01:50, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Was that a joke? I am sure the writers were serious. See Wikipedia:SMALLTEXT. I am saying it should be normal-sized text. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If it is in Japanese waters right now, we should include the numbers on the Japanese count. Or else just leave it as is, the footnote is more than sufficient. There's no point in adding "(Japan)" after "International conveyance", it'll be really confusing for the reader when they see both "Japan" and "International conveyance (Japan)". Hayman30 (talk) 06:38, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hayman30: Merging the numbers, without a reference to back it up, contravenes WP:SYNTH and WP:NOR. The Japanese count and the international conveyance count should remain separate and faithful to the WHO original source, until an alternative source combining the numbers is provided. EP111 (talk) 12:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merging the two because they are in Japanese waters is WP:OR. WHO separated the two because they are epidemiologically different regions. The epidemic in the ship never spread into the land of Japan except for limited persons working closely with the infected persons on the ship. Also CDC doesn't count the 14 confirmed cases returned to the US as cases in the US.[1] It leaves them as WHO's "International conveyance".―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 12:49, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here are two sources that combine the numbers: SCMP, NHK World. Anyway I have reverted the change for now, and I'm not getting involved in this anymore because clearly I'll get stabbed either way. Hayman30 (talk) 13:24, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 February 2020

Please consider this source as a new, potential reliable source. There are map and statistics made or gathered by John Hopkins University of global cases.
Source: https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
Please update the number of cases if you consider the source above as reliable Andrew20070223 (talk) 05:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably as trustworthy as our table here, as they are using many of the same sources. It does look pretty up to date and is consistent with DXY. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:17, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update on Russia

Please update stats. All 2 cases in Russia have recovered, source https://www.gazeta.ru/social/news/2020/02/12/n_14026285.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lomogorov (talk • contribs) 08:08, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Hayman30 (talk) 08:46, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 February 2020

Add 1 next to recoveries for UK. https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-superspreader-steve-walsh-discharged-from-hospital-11932275 Lewisakkas (talk) 14:28, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit has been made by another user. MadGuy7023 (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 February 2020

In the table with the CoronaVirus deaths, cases, recoveries I'd like to add a total number of cases, where all of the deaths, recoveries and cases are added together so it would show how many people have been infected, regardless of if they died, recovered or are still infected. Canvas2005 (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I don't think this is appropriate. Adding all cases together wouldn't make sense as the number of confirmed cases already includes deaths and recoveries. The current presentation is fine. Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 February 2020

The BBC has just confirmed a ninth case in London, Link as proof: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51481469 Qertyooq (talk) 18:53, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit has been made by another user. MadGuy7023 (talk) 19:34, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

clinically diagnosed cases

As of February 13th, China is now also including clinically diagnosed cases, meaning people who are showing symptoms but haven't been tested yet are also included. Something should be done about this. Poklane 00:11, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

I inderstand that they will stop doing laboratory test in a near future. I also understand that clinically diagnosed cases are diagnosed by one of the "easy test" we been told on a few newspaper. --Eric1212 (talk) 01:12, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The standard of clinical diagnosis is CT imaging features of the pneumonia, as described by the fifth national diagnostic criteria. I've heard nothing about stopping lab tests though. Rethliopuks (talk) 05:57, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

For the category "International Conveyance" according to the WHO reports, should it be 174 or 175?
Source: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200212-sitrep-23-ncov.pdf?sfvrsn=41e9fb78_2 Andrew20070223 (talk) 02:01, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done I believe the number is now 218. The WHO report does not update as frequently as other sources, so it is always outdated in this regard. Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

Replace the notes in the deaths and recoveries column ("—" denotes that no data is currently available for that territory, not that there are zero cases.) with ("—" denotes that no data is currently available for that territory, not that the value in this column is zero.) for clarity. Leaving these notes as they are wouldn't make sense as deaths ≠ cases and recoveries ≠ cases. RayDeeUx (talk) 02:13, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

International conveyance now has 218 cases, up from 174. Conker The King (talk) 04:49, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done by The Lord of Math Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:35, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

Cases in Vietnam have increased from 15 to 16. Conker The King (talk) 05:32, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

Japan Interlepus (talk) 12:21, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

There has been one death attributed to the Wuhan coronavirus in Japan, bringing the total from 0 to 1. Conker The King (talk) 12:26, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

The death in Japan was a new case, and there was another new case there as well. They bring the total up from 30 to 32. Conker The King (talk) 12:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done I believe the number is now 33. Hayman30 (talk) 13:06, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 13 February 2020

New case in Japan, total is up from 33 to 34. Conker The King (talk) 13:24, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Hayman30 (talk) 13:56, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The source is BNO: https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1227937471549386758 Conker The King (talk) 14:51, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, as per the source, you are correct Hayman30. 33. Conker The King (talk) 14:56, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 February 2020

56 cases in Hong Kong http://news.tvb.com/instant/5e465ac0335d19a5656f7b62/%E7%8F%BE%E5%A0%B4%E8%A1%9E%E7%94%9F%E7%BD%B2%E6%9C%AC%E6%B8%AF%E6%96%B0%E5%A2%9E%E4%B8%89%E5%AE%97%E6%96%B0%E5%9E%8B%E8%82%BA%E7%82%8E%E7%A2%BA%E8%A8%BA%E5%80%8B%E6%A1%88-%E7%B4%AF%E8%A8%88%E5%85%B156%E5%AE%97 Please tell a Chinese person to read it, thx Keith chau yet (talk) 08:43, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 13:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 February 2020

Trying to parse this data daily as it seems to be updated often, however changing columns, and moving to th instead of just using td is really annoying. Can we please just use td tags. Brrojas (talk) 09:09, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The country names use th in the output html, but in the Wikitext they are marked with "!". When I want to parse it, I just highlight the part of the table and past it into an excel spreadsheet. I dont see particular problems with th vs td. (But formulas and footnotes in the number columns stuff up adding up!) Do you have a particular reason for requesting a change? At this point I am not changing it unless there is a clear reason. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:32, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 February 2020

Please update recoveries count in Thailand from 10 to 13. Source from official Ministry of Public Health site: https://pr.moph.go.th/?url=pr/detail/2/04/138663/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimda01 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 13:27, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 February 2020

Hello, a person from Spain has recovered. Here is the source: https://www.lavozdelanzarote.com/articulo/canarias/paciente-afectado-coronavirus-gomera-recibe-alta-segundo-resultado-negativo/20200214143730147239.html and https://www.lavanguardia.com/vida/20200214/473552852633/coronavirus-primer-paciente-espana-la-gomera-alta-medica.html --Jarl93 (talk) 16:21, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Hayman30 (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 February 2020

They are now 29 territories, not 28.--138.75.123.124 (talk) 17:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 18:56, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Canada number

It should still be 7. There does not appear to exist an 8th confirmed case. Michael Lee Baker (talk) 22:31, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The core source of this template says 8. Hayman30 (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm pretty sure it is wrong: probably counting the one on the Diamond Princess, as far as I can tell. Sources shouldn't be trusted so blindly. 2620:101:F000:4901:C5C:0:0:72 (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First death in Europe

Death case in France https://www.bfmtv.com/sante/coronavirus-buzyn-annonce-la-mort-d-un-patient-en-france-le-premier-en-dehors-de-l-asie-1858467.html .--138.75.18.133 (talk) 10:30, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 11:06, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 February 2020

As per latest reports all 3 confirmed cases in India have recovered. 

1 - https://weather.com/en-IN/india/news/news/2020-02-14-kerala-defeats-coronavirus-indias-three-covid-19-patients-successfully

2 - https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/kerala/2020/feb/14/three-people-who-tested-positive-for-coronavirus-in-kerala-fully-recover-2103292.html

Mayankj429 (talk) 12:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 20:58, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Change link in template because separate article

Please change both links in the template from 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak by country and territory#Singapore and 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak by country and territory#Philippines to 2020 coronavirus outbreak in Singapore and 2020 coronavirus outbreak in the Philippines because they are now have separate article from main country and territory article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.69.53.66 (talk) 15:33, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:51, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2020

Change the 'Recoveries' for Belgium from – to 1

The Belgian patient has been cured, tested negative on the virus the past 2 days and therefore left the hospital.

(Dutch language sources, haven't found any English sources so far) https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/02/15/ziekenhuis-verlaten/ and https://www.hln.be/nieuws/binnenland/enige-besmette-belg-mag-sint-pietersziekenhuis-verlaten~aaa29faa/ Kef274 (talk) 03:34, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Has been updated, BMO confirms in English. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:14, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2020

Change France's number of confirmed infections from 11 to 12 74.51.11.217 (talk) 03:51, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:16, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2020

Newly reported death of Taiwanese taxi driver; brother of driver also confirmed case. Total number of confirmed cases now 20. 2001:B011:3000:40AA:28A3:94A7:4736:9EEA (talk) 10:36, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by Hayman30 Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2020

Please update the number of cases of Taiwan to 20 and 1 death
Source:https://www.cdc.gov.tw/Bulletin/Detail/C7SfkryzIXWf0eF_1O03hw?typeid=9 Andrew20070223 (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done by Hayman30 — This is a duplicate request, but thanks for providing a reference. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 February 2020

South Korean cases are now 30. Sources(Yonhap news, Hankyoreh) Monochromy (talk) 23:53, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:44, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2020

Current Active Cases 211.16.115.139 (talk) 02:05, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The quick answer is that we are not going to include such a column on request. But if you place a more complete argument for having it, a discussion could decide on whether to include it. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:47, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2020

Please the total recoveries, it's not the sum of all countries'. Peterwu2019 (talk) 12:16, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:49, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 February 2020

Please update Thailand's recoveries count from 15 to 17. Here is the source from official health ministry: https://pr.moph.go.th/?url=pr/detail/2/04/138823/ Nimda01 (talk) 08:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for providing the source! Hayman30 (talk) 10:56, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2020

Please update the number of recoveries in Vietnam from 9 to 14, thank you! Source from the Ministry of Health: https://ncov.moh.gov.vn/ Casper1220kkz (talk) 07:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC) Casper1220kkz (talk) 07:49, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for providing a reliable source. Hayman30 (talk) 08:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 February 2020

2 new cases in Iran https://twitter.com/khabaronlinee/status/1230073182767452160 Conker The King (talk) 10:51, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: As the tweet says, these are only initial test results. Subsequent tests will need to be carried out (and return positive) in order for these cases to be considered “confirmed”. Because of this, I’m declining this request for now. Hayman30 (talk) 11:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recoveries

Not sure why they were removed in this edit?[2]

User:Almaty yes they are not perfect but I still think they are useful. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:23, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did so because whilst we can list recoveries, we shouldn't list them right next to the deaths and cases, because this draws undue comparison to the general reader. This isn't done in outbreak communication usually not just because its unreliable but because the immense lag leads public to overestimate the severity of the disease. --Almaty (talk) 21:40, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
User:Almaty I saw it as very reassuring actually as we have a fair number of countries with no current cases. ::There was a fair bit of discussion for its inclusion. I have restored for now as people were asking about it.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:08, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
By the way at least 10 of the countries listed no longer have any cases... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:20, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that's fine. However, the wiki article as it stands overall to a generalist reader looks like the outbreak is worse than it is - based on graphs and recoveries. If we want to include recoveries here, this is althemore reason for the graph needs to be changed to an epidemic curve, esp for this particular outbreak we can see that its very readable to the general reader (namely graphically showing that the "new case rate" peaked in china weeks ago). I'll give it a shot are you able to help? I can easily make it on excel but I want it in wiki code. would appreciate a comment on the RfC. --Almaty (talk) 05:59, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a csv to media wiki converted Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:53, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 February 2020

First death in South Korea https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1230407347899641859 Conker The King (talk) 08:34, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 08:54, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Recoveries: Remove or Keep?

Sourcing for recoveries is a lot harder to find than new cases. As such the data is iffy. Do we keep it, or not? Ultimograph5 (talk) 21:07, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would say keep, as it is useful to know for our readers. There is sourcing to cover most of it, so it is informative. A footnote can note the existence of missing or out of date information. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:25, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't really have an opinion on whether to keep or remove, but reliable sources for recoveries are quite hard to find. The core source of this template, BNO News, is slow to update their recoveries count (they even have the wrong number sometimes), so we always need to find additional sources to verify the latest number. I try my best to find these sources, and a lot of other users, including IPs and auto confirmed users who cannot edit the template, will post them on the talk page too, so it's not too bad I guess. An interesting note: the "confirmed cases" table for SARS and MERS do not have a "recoveries" column, instead there's a "fatality" column in its place, but from my understanding the fatality rate could only be determined after the outbreak has ended. Hayman30 (talk) 07:41, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

ITALY CASES ARE 4 86.138.27.255 (talk) 00:25, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:57, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

There are 2236 deaths in China and 11 deaths outside, so the total number of deaths is 2247, not 2245. This has to be changed in the summary as well as the table. Ntthung (talk) 02:10, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:56, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Change total number of deaths from 2,245 to 2,247. RedRamage (talk) 02:44, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 07:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Taiwan's Centers for Disease Control reported 2 new cases in Taiwan. Please change the row "Taiwan" from 24 to 26.
Source: https://www.cdc.gov.tw/Bulletin/Detail/-aJ2VX6yo1lkj-fCLzPB5Q?typeid=9 Andrew20070223 (talk) 06:39, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Hayman30 (talk) 07:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Italy cases are Now 6 2A00:23C8:2F84:C900:9879:EB1:E709:A1AD (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 10:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Italy has now 6 cases 2A00:23C8:2F84:C900:9879:EB1:E709:A1AD (talk) 10:04, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done Hayman30 (talk) 10:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Iran cases from 5 to 18, deaths from 2 to 4 https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1230800894419140610 Conker The King (talk) 10:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Conker The King: Already done It seems like someone made that edit without your request or someone did not reply to your request Nevertheless, it's done. Can I Log In (talk) 14:48, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Hi, I report you the first recovery case in Italy, here the source http://www.ansa.it/sito/notizie/topnews/2020/02/21/coronavirusspallanzaniitaliano-guarito_eff4b3fa-ed87-4bcf-bc2a-9d27800cbd78.html. Please update the info in the template, thanks very much --Samuele Madini (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: It doesn’t seem to be an official recovery, and the patient hasn’t been discharged for the hospital yet. Even though the patient tested negative multiple times, the health director says that they will make a decision in the following days on whether to put him in another room for observation, although I may be mistaken by Google Translate. Hayman30 (talk) 20:32, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Italy now 11 86.138.27.255 (talk) 17:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Can I Log In (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

Italy one recovered 2A00:23C8:2F84:C900:9879:EB1:E709:A1AD (talk) 21:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 February 2020

You have to split US confirmed cases into two numbers: United States: 14 and Repatriated: 21 "We are keeping track of cases resulting from repatriation efforts separately because we don't believe those numbers accurately represent the picture of what is happening in the community in the United States at this time," Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, told reporters Friday. https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/21/health/cdc-coronavirus-update/index.html Also see US CDC count page: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-in-us.html

Otherwise it is not a true picture of what is happening and creates unnecessary fear and panic. And so goes for all countries that have Repatriated cases. Yegort (talk) 23:47, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:COVID-19_pandemic_data&oldid=942001721"