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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Leaning oppose: I won't say the current title is perfect, but the proposed one seems too much like a WP:RECENT clickbait neologism and provides almost no information about what the subject is (e.g. the historical era or the involvement of viral illnesses, respiratory illnesses, or the disproportionate involvement of young children). The target title doesn't even redirect to the current title, so it would be replacing the primary meaning of the term. The proposal also implies a scope change that seems questionable. — BarrelProof (talk) 16:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning oppose: While cited sources definitely point toward other groups being affected by the atypical surge of viruses, there appears to be a uniquely troubling situation in regard to pediatric care, such that children's hospitals are struggling to provide care and abnormal numbers of deaths have arisen in places such as the UK, with Strep A. There may, however, be a role for a broader page regarding the general surge of viruses during the first winter season after the removal of pandemic-related precautions, yet "tripledemic" may soon become obsolete, since the UK's Strep A surge has recently spilled over into several US states; combined with SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and RSV, the neologism may shift toward "quademic" or something similar.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/dec/20/scarlet-fever-cases-in-uk-more-than-double-during-autumn-and-winter "means that there were 17,695 referrals of suspected scarlet fever between 12 September and 11 December, up from the 7,750 previously accounted for. The new total is 128% higher than previously thought.
This is significantly higher than the 2,538 at the same point in 2017 and 2018, the last time figures were unusually high.
In addition to this, on Tuesday the UKHSA said there were 9,482 notifications of scarlet fever infections between 11 December and 18 December reported to the agency. It brings the total to 27,177.
It means the total is now higher than the whole of 2017 and 2018, with another two weeks’ worth of reports yet to be published by the government." 88.112.31.26 (talk) 06:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
