Template talk:Notable flu pandemics

Inconsistent Case Fatality Rate for Spanish Flu

The values for the Spanish Flu (1918-1920) are currently inconsistent; the case fatality rate appears to incorrectly refer to the global fatality rate. Given 500M cases and 50-100M deaths (estimated) the case fatality rate should be 10-20% not 2-3% as stated. The value in this table is also inconsistent with the Spanish flu page. The given reference () does have a table with the 2-3% Case Fatality Rate, however the values in reference table are also internally inconsistent and would seem to refer to the global mortality rate instead. Amicitas (talk) 17:29, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

I suggest changing the reference to and changing the case fatality rate in the table to 5-20% as discussed in the reference. Amicitas (talk) 17:29, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

More references for the Case Fatality Rate and Global Fatality Rate can be found here: Amicitas (talk) 17:43, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Merged with below :  Done

See talkpage history for details. -- Yug (talk) 14:24, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Unused sources ?

• this. Yug (talk) 14:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Rename "Notable modern pandemic" ?

Considering it. Yug (talk) 17:18, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Explanation: The ongoing covid19 pandemics seems pretty in line with the other influenza pandemics. Flu and covid19 are similarly respiratory diseases, pardemic, nearly similarly viral and contagious, and represent similar threats for human societies. It seems therefor interesting to gather them altogether for comparisons. Splitting in 2 tables seems quite counter productive, as the split would be unbalanced. While the renaming seems necessary, I favor some caution so to not have to undo it later on. Yug (talk) 22:26, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Oppose They are not similar diseases or viruses and COVID-19 is not "(an)other influenza pandemic". We have influenza pandemics because of genetic shift and because influenza viruses have a segmented genome and undergo genetic reassortment. Coronaviruses do not. Graham Beards (talk) 08:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

User:Graham Beards, you are creating an edit war by yourself alone. You unilaterally removed duly sourced data / work of others without joining the existing discussion.

We are talking of scope change and your whole argument is "new scope is not in old scope". Yes, you are right : it's an argumented scope change because it makes sense. This template is clearly about pandemic : the spread of disease among world population. The exact same dimensions are available and sourced for influenzas and covid19. I cannot change the reality that covid19 aligns with influenza on this dimensions. Should we ?

Your single argument about genetic reassortment is not the matter treated by this template, at all. Yug (talk) 08:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

So where do we stop? By renaming you would have to include smallpox of which there have been many pandemics. Sweating sickness, yellow fever, measles , poliomyelitis and of course HIV, which is still ongoing. And there are others, what about the bacteria bubonic plague and cholera. And you should check the meaning of "modern" in this context. Graham Beards (talk) 08:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Oppose I was looking at the influenza page and was confused why it included an entry on Coronavirus when it is not related to the influenza article. I think this will confuse many people who are looking up influenza and without any background think coronavirus might be the same as influenzavirus. I'd prefer this not be added, or we create a separate template for "modern" pandemics. Luxdormiens (talk) 07:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Note: Luxdormiens you've consulted a vandalized version of the page with messed up Flu-only title and vandal "coronavirus" remplacing "Seasonal flu"'s title in the seasonal flu row. This is a messed up configuration. I encourage you to remove your oppose vote since it judges a messed up configuration that no one is arguing for. Yug (talk) 11:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Alternative bikeshed colour: Modern respiratory disease pandemics. The diseases caused by the various flu strains and the coronavirus are practically indistinguishable without lab testing. I suggest that this forms a pretty natural category, which will give readers useful context. 80.6.208.95 (talk) 03:33, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'am also thinking of this. Would be a good compromise. I also think we need to raise awareness on Covid potential as "grave pandemic" (spread x mortality), therefor would help to keep it in this template. Also, Graham Beards, a reminder that you did 3R in ~24h and are at a push level bordering the 3RR, this before engaging discussion. I'am drained by my 40 days non-stop coverage on covid, but discussion before removing other people work would have been appreciate. Yug (talk) 11:22, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

I restored the covid19 row within a <noinclude> tag. So it prevents the unilateral destruction of sourced materials while this discussion is ongoing. It keeps an article view following Graham Beards' preference. Yug (talk) 11:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)