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 Jw 193 (talk | contribs) at 16:28, 31 January 2020 (→‎Japanese government's case count). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

CORE SOURCES

  • Associated Press : Where the virus has spread, Phil Holm & Ken Moritsugu
  • NYTimes: Coronavirus Map: Tracking the Spread of the Outbreak By K.K. Rebecca Lai, Jin Wu, Allison McCann, Derek Watkins, Jugal K. Patel and Richard Harris
  • BNO News : Tracking coronavirus: Map, data and timeline
  • CHC: "新型冠状病毒感染的肺炎疫情防控 - Daily situation report on the new coronavirus pneumonia infection and epidemic". National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China. People's Republic of China: National Health Commission.
  • WHO : https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports

Mobile ?

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

@Orangewarning: : Hey, can you tell us more ? Yug (talk) 15:07, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added some class to the header. Is it still ok on mobile ? Yug (talk) 15:16, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can see it on my phone, if I know to tap the box that says "More information: Country/region, Confirmed cases ...", at the top of the Geographic diffusion section. Jw 193 (talk) 17:20, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it is visible now. Orangewarning (talk) 14:37, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fatality rate

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

It's premature and inaccurate to have a fatality rate that is literally just (currentDeaths)/(currentCases) when the epidemic is at such an exponential growth phase. The true fatality rate takes a long time to emerge. There is a reason researchers have been hesitant to release concrete numbers on this matter. --Charsum (talk) 19:28, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charsum: I messaged the user who made the addition, so he understand our choice. Yug (talk) 23:22, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unique source for the whole data ?

@Jw 193:,@Graeme Bartlett:,@BegbertBiggs:,@Tezakhiago:,@Nguyen QuocTrung:

AP has a table with cases, deaths, and date of first case. This UNIQUE source could be helpful for us. The 3rd information could be interesting to store for later (animated map). I'am just a bit embarrassed, the page is a feed, so I don't find any stable link to cite this table properly. NYT is also starting a tracker. Yug (talk) 23:22, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Naturally, if one country has fresher data, we can use multiple sources as well. Be we will move from 60 sources to 4~6 sources. Yug (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You'll note that AP is a full day behind, for China. If we want data with days of lag, the daily WHO situation report is more authoritative, and looks slightly more up to date. Jw 193 (talk) 23:53, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jw 193: I read Chinese, the Chinese Health Commission dropt that 20mins ago. (Google Translate). It report everyday at 8am local time the stats of the 00:00am to 24:00 for the previous days, new and cummulative. Google Trans and I can help with this, and the daily report are on the same exact model everyday. ;) Yug (talk) 00:26, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I took out the note to editors on the template, as it was far too prominent, and as it is out of date, it is best to only use it for non-time-sensitive information (like first report). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think on the contrary that we could use it for most cells, and complete the cells which are outdated by relevant sources. Could help us to drop most sources and ease our work. Yug (talk) 00:47, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Use it if you want, but make sure it is the most up to date at the time you use it, before removing other figures and references. Since it does not stay current, it's best to have several useful references listed. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:57, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese numbers

Hello Jw 193 ! Do you think HK, Macao, Taiwan should be substracted ? My Chinese source (CHC) isn't clear on this side. I can be interpreted both ways. Yug (talk) 00:31, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is why you need to use a source where it clear where the numbers came from. You would need to subtract numbers that that source uses. It may be 23, but that source may also be using out of date numbers, so you have to check every time before subtracting. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The source I'am citing is the National Health Commission of the People's Republic of China's official daily report. I don't think we can do fresher, litterally : their daily reports are THE source. So who decides/decided if the 8 of HK are included or excluded ? I really don't trust news media to make the decision. Yug (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We have decided here to list them separately, but you will have to check those sources used for their numbers per region/province. National Health Commission will include the three extra administrations figures, but do they list the numbers used? I like DXY as they have everything subtotalled per city. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:55, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it too late to save the world from the virus now?

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

As of this time! 19 countries are officially containing the infecting Corona Virus rise. With over 6000 infected people and over 130 deaths, it may be a chance but it may be too late to cure it if it continues among the next month. Which means we only have little time until the World is no longer a safe place to be!

Will Vaccines save us before the End of our lives?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustroHungarian1867 (talk • contribs) 08:29, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Yug (talk) 12:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are encouraging signs. Yesterday, for the first time, mainland China had fewer new cases, than the day before.Jw 193 (talk) 18:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
AustroHungarian1867 Please only use this talk page for constructive comments relating to this article.BigRed606 (talk) 23:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected Zambia case

An editor added one Zambia case today. The source was a South Africa radio station. This radio station didn't call it a suspected case, implying it was confirmed. Mascow noticed that the article was dated way back on January 24, and undid that edit.

Despite the date displayed, it appears that this news report really was from today, as it mentions Wednesday, and cites an announcement by South Africa's Minister of Health. That statement, dated today, can be found here. But the Minister's statement actually says "there is a suspected case under investigation in Zambia".

I can't find anything from Zambia itself. Zambia's Ministry of Health has a web page, but it's rarely updated, with no press releases in over a year. So it's unlikely they'll post a confirmation themselves. The first confirmation on this case, if it's ever confirmed, may come from WHO's daily situation report.
Jw 193 (talk) 20:40, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fastest-updating sources for mainland China updates

Watching this unfold over the past few days, the quickest update to mainland China's case count and death count seems to come from qq.com. Within an hour or two, dxy.cn catches up. And within a few hours BNOnews.com catches up.

As best as I can tell, almost all this information is from the official reports from the thirty-some provinces, which get posted online within two or three hours of each other, every morning. Well before the national government rolls them up into its daily report.

More than once, when I've posted an update from qq.com, it's gotten reverted, because that number doesn't match what's on dxy.cn. (Yet.) I'm not familiar with either source, but at face value, neither seems any higher quality than the other; one just seems to be updated more quickly. If somebody is more familiar with these sources, is there any reason to think dxy.cn is more accurate than qq.com? If not, can we stop reverting the updates from qq.com? Jw 193 (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jw 193: hey, nice finding ! :) I can add that the NHC's daily report is published around 00:00 ETC (in 30 mins), daily.
Also, I don't see the need to race. We aren't here to BREAK THE NEWS, wikipedia is notorious to lag behind for most topics... is the principle of an ongoing knowledge base. I still favor using APnews, which is simplier, even if we loose some hours of scoop, which is not our mission. Yug (talk) 22:33, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We, as a crowd of volunteers, are losting lot of energy on this petty race, tiny calculations, and mutual corrections. Volunteers' time and brain is has value, and would be more helpful elsewhere rather than in this tiny edits. Yug (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I created a section #CORE SOURCES above. I let you add your qq, dxy sources with which I'am not familiar. Yug (talk) 23:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Columns title are failing on mobile

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

See Talk:2019–20_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak#Reporting_something_wrong_with_template. Yug (talk) 23:32, 29 January 2020 (UTC) (must sleep)[reply]

Fixed by removing a class which doesn't display in mobile because navboxes are omitted there.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add recover data

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

Please add how may recovered, it's quite helpful Neutrinium 12:11, 30 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutrinium (talk • contribs)

@Neutrinium: Hi! Thanks for your message. The present page is a lighter format. For detailled counts, please consult Template:2019-20_Wuhan_coronavirus_data/China_medical_cases. Yug (talk) 20:41, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's just for China case, what about other country? Neutrinium 05:40, 31 January 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neutrinium (talk • contribs)

Japanese government's case count

If you go by the press releases being issued by Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, the count of cases is low by two. That's because they aren't counting two people who are confirmed to be carrying the virus, but aren't showing symptoms—yet. This started with this press release (Google translated, "three cases of infectious diseases associated with the new coronavirus. One is a patient and two are asymptomatic pathogen carriers." But they only increased their case count by one.) The latest press release makes no mention at all of the two cases who aren't showing symptoms yet, creating a case count of 12, instead of 14. At least one press outlet (NHK World-Japan) is adding back in the two cases that the government keeps not counting.

I agree with NHK World-Japan; I don't see how you can say that a confirmed carrier isn't a confirmed case. --Jw 193 (talk) 16:12, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

+1. This 12 (+2) is BS political counting. True count is 14 identified contamined individuals. We, wikipedia, don't have to publish gov non-sense. We will publish the common-sensical sum : all individual confirmed as carrying the virus. Yug (talk) 20:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've added an explanatory footnote to Japan's case total. Hopefully this will keep editors from replacing the true total.

Chart date is incorrect when looking at historical pages

The following discussion is closed and will soon be archived.

There is a date at the bottom of the chart (to the left of a hyperlink) which is always showing January 30th, even when looking at history. Dayindaveout (talk) 17:34, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the code. It's hand writen text changed daily by wikipedia editors, not a {today} template. So It seems it has been fixed. Yug (talk) 20:33, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fix the table

 Done (under test) Yug (talk) 20:34, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone fix the table so that the total affected territories are beneath the territory column? Mr. Cuckoo (talk) 18:20, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Cuckoo : I implemented it. Waiting the feedback of other users (=testing). Not sure we keep it but thanks for this idea ! :D Yug (talk) 20:29, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, we'll see how it goes. I think it's a no-brainer to keep all values under the appropriate columns. Mr. Cuckoo (talk) 21:23, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed cases

Coronavirus confirmed cases increasing fast Nickayane99 (talk) 23:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Was it worth it to build Hospitals in China?

If the virus is unstoppable and they didn't found a cure yet, does this mean that its worth it to build 2 mega hospitals in China? So far its been 4 days since the construction started and I feel like they should have started earlier when the virus was on its early stages of infection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustroHungarian1867 (talk • contribs) 06:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:COVID-19_pandemic_data&oldid=938503653"