Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in Alabama

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 pandemic in Alabama 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 Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) 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 has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Alabama

This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles

COVID-19 Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management 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.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Society / Pulmonology Low‑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 Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pulmonology task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Science Policy Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Policy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science policy 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.Science PolicyWikipedia:WikiProject Science PolicyTemplate:WikiProject Science PolicyScience Policy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Viruses Low‑importance

	Viruses portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: 50,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was created or improved during this WikiProject's 50,000 Challenge, which started on November 1, 2016, and is ongoing. You can help!

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Mobile's WWE Live cancelled.[edit]

https://www.fox10tv.com/news/coronavirus/mobile-mayor-sandy-stimpson-releases-updated-city-response-to-covid/article_cf29fba4-6646-11ea-ab82-2b7b5326b9fa.html

https://twitter.com/MobileCivicCtr/status/1239601143518580744 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kokoroanime (talk • contribs) 05:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Look out for updates for Mobile's Mobicon and Daphne's Mobile Bay Anime Festival.[edit]

http://mobilecomiccon.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kokoroanime (talk • contribs) 05:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline formatting -- prefer bullets or prose?[edit]

When giving the timeline (of disease progression, government response, etc) is there a reason to prefer prose vs. bullet lists? I added bullet-like formatting, which was later converted to prose by User:Another_Believer. (For reference, here are historical versions with the two approaches: bullet list, prose format.) I personally find the bullet format easier to read and skim for the content of interest -- but open to other perspectives! Contralethe (talk) 22:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contralethe, Per WP:PROSE: "Prefer prose where a passage is understood easily as regular text. Prose is preferred in articles because it allows the presentation of detail and clarification of context in a way that a simple list may not. It is best suited to articles because their purpose is to explain." ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another Believer Thanks for the pointer. What about separating days for easier skimming? Contralethe (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Following the style of some other timeline pages I gave day-by-day formatting a try, seems to work well. Contralethe (talk) 19:53, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Add chart of daily increase[edit]

The graph in this article is awesome! The Alabama Department of Public Health doesn't even provide the trend in total cases with time (that is, by date). Perhaps someone would add another graph that would be of the number of new cases per day. Yes, that number can be deduced from the raw data in the current table, but a graph would make it easier to see the trend. If the number of new cases per day is increasing, then things are getting worse. If the number is roughly constant, then the situation is stable, and hospitals may be able to handle the number of new patients. That information would, I think, be useful to policy makers, and so would make the effort to create the graph worthwhile.--Christopher King (talk) 20:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one complained, I went ahead and added that chart. Christopher King (talk) 03:49, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The chart is awesome, thank you! Very helpful. Question: at what time of day is it updated? It comes from the dashboard, right? (https://alpublichealth.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/6d2771faa9da4a2786a509d82c8cf0f7) Wtf2wtf (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tables[edit]

I have removed duplicate information from the article as it is already listed within the Alabama medical cases chart template. I have also removed the static table for the statistics and replaced it the Alabama medical cases by county template. By doing so for those three tables, it cleans up the page and allows for the data to easily be edited. If there are questions or concerns for this, please address them here. — Mr Xaero ^☎️ 16:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The daily fatalities table presented a clear and concise picture, representing data that is very important to the topic and to those using that informtion to make life decisions. The information that was presented by that table, is not duplicated by the other charts and the article as short as it is, by no means warranted the removal of important tables just to shorten it further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raven9nine (talk • contribs) 02:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What To Do About the Politically Motivated Manipulation of Covid-19 Articles?[edit]

Specific instance - the Alabama Covid-19 page. 2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Alabama

In recent weeks, with the push from business to reopen the economy, the actual daily increase in the number of infected and the daily increase in the number of fatalities have become highly relevent statistics because federal guidelines called for a consistant decrease in those numbers before economies should relax their stay at home directives. These daily statistics had been presented in charts on the wikipedia page as per this older version of the page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Alabama&oldid=952992317

I had noticed the stats in those tables had been updated consistantly since the beginning of March but the daily updates suddenly stopped about two weeks ago. I tried to update them myself but I found the edits I made did not show up on the charts. I assume this means the charts are locked to prevent editing? Shortly after that those two charts were removed completely, the edit comment claims the reason is because the data those charts presented was already contained in the main chart which it clearly is not.

Although it is possible to calculate the daily numbers by using the data from the main chart, the actual daily number of new infections and the actual number of new fatalities is not presented by the main chart. I reversed the aformentioned edit to put back the charts that had been removed but they were subsequently removed again the next day.

You can see, the only other way to source the actual number of fatalities each day is to manually calculate them from the main chart. Even the Alabama Dept of Health website is only presenting cumulative numbers. It seems to me, the political motivation for obscuring the actual daily numbers of new infections and new fatalities is obvious when the federal guidlines for reopening economies assumes access to those daily numbers. So what do we do about this? Raven9nine (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)Raven9nine[reply]

This is an invalid RfC for at least two reasons. First, the statement is far from brief - so long, in fact, that Legobot can't handle it. Second, the |policy parameter (which puts the RfC into WP:RFC/POLICY) is not for use on discussions about individual articles, it is for use on discussions seeking to change policy in general (see WP:RFCCAT). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is a perfectly valid rfc. For anyone with competent reading skills it is a 45 second read and it is regarding policy. Raven9nine (talk) 14:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Raven9nine[reply]

Allow me to quote from WP:RFCCAT:

The "Wikipedia policies and guidelines" category is for discussing changes to the policies and guidelines themselves, not for discussing how to apply them to a specific case.

Which policy or guideline are you discussing a change to? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:44, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so I removed that table originally because it was duplicating the information contained in the bar chart that includes the new fatalities and cases with percent increases. Shit, I just finished medical school and am about to start my residency in the middle of the pandemic, I'm not trying to cover up how much of a horrible, selfish hackjob reopening the economy is. I'm really, really not. My only political motivation is "not wanting a bunch of people to die because some dipshits want to get haircuts". I just want the data to be readable and not redundant. Would you be happy if we added the numbers of new cases per day to the bar chart in addition to the percent increases? Keilana (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The record shows another user named Mr Xereo removed the charts but whatever. I just think the two bar charts that displayed the daily numbers, complemented the main cumulative bar chart not least because they would clearly show any period of decline which the main cummulative chart would not and I saw no valid reson to remove them from what is already a short article especially without even a discussion about it first. Raven9nine (talk) 15:25, 18 May 2020 (UTC)Raven9nine[reply]

The main US data template has these tables if you just want a source for the daily increases in cases and deaths. JoelleJay (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Images[edit]

Images at Commons: commons:Category:COVID-19 pandemic in Alabama ---Another Believer _(Talk) 12:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with the COVID-19 Cases Chart.[edit]

Disparity between the ADPH source data and the data presented on this chart. According to the notes on the covid-19 cases chart, it is supposed to represent the data as provided by the ADPH but a comparison of the data on this chart with the data provided by ADPH on their website reveals a very poor correlation. Examples:

May 29, ADPH:17031 This chart:16558
May 30, ADPH:17359 This chart:17203
May 31, ADPH:17952 This chart:17494
Jun 01, ADPH:18246 This chart:18020

Raven9nine (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chart needs additional button to select the month of June. Raven9nine (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps related: data is missing for cases and deaths, from July 9th, 2020, onward. What happened? I added data for July 14, as of 7pm EST [and I added a very crude linear extrapolation estimate for July 9-13, but this should be fixed with real data!]. The template is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data/United_States/Alabama_medical_cases_chart I will not be able to keep it up to date. Wtf2wtf (talk) 02:12, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]