Talk:Monkeypox virus

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Untited

Hello to all who visit hereafter!


I am an AP Biology student who is currently taking this virus stub under my wing in the hopes that it will eventually reach "Good Article" status. I welcome and encourage all who visit to contribute/criticize, albeit constructively, as they see fit. Please, if you see ANYTHING that you think should be changed than by all means let me know! I am completely open to suggestions and greatly thankful for any help that might come from the Wikipedia community.
My end goal, as noted earlier, is to nominate and pass this article to "GA" standing sometime before June 6th, 2009. While it will be a difficult road ahead, I hope those of you who took the time to read this will understand my undertaking and seek to help me expand and improve Wikipedia.

Thank you for reading, and please comment/criticize!--FoodPuma (talk) 19:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yo 👋 we are students (3 of us) at the University of Georgia that are doing the same, but as a class requirement. Not entirely sure how thorough we are going to be. ICapt.NemoI (talk) 13:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]



Merge Proposal

Just wanted to suggest that the Monkeypox Disease be merged into the Monkeypox Virus page. Being that the Monkeypox Virus page in-and-of-itself is not justifiable as anymore than a stub, and that the Monkeypox Virus is the cause of the Disease, it makes sense to include the Disease under the main Monkeypox Virus page.

Please leave your thoughts and feelings on this as I feel merging the two topics into one would greatly improve their capability to assist Wikipedia users by condensing information into one place.--FoodPuma (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at it further, I realized that merging the Monkeypox Virus page into the Monkeypox page would ultimatly make more sense. If you agree than please respond--FoodPuma (talk) 22:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge: The virus & the disease are distinct entities. More & more is learned of each all the time. (I should know, I work in the field!) If merged, I think they would eventually need to be separated again. 140.139.35.250 (talk) 21:26, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that monkeypox and monkeypox virus are distinct entities and it is less confusing for readers to have a separation. When I want to read more about the virology I’ll read about monkeypox virus and when I’m interested in the disease (whose name may change) I’ll read about monkeypox.
I find the current situation with Japanese encephalitis merging the disease and ætiological agent a less than ideal compromise. Gary 21:55, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Post article

Just wanted to call attention to a feature article from the WP on this subject that could serve other editors: here.

73.152.131.12 (talk) 04:09, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal 2022

The Monkeypox Virus and the Monkeypox pages should be merged in my opinion, much like the proposal a decade ago. While in some cases the division between disease and causative agent is useful (for instance Meningococcal being split from Meningitis, because other causative agents exist too), the only causative agent for Monkeypox is the Monkeypox Virus. Furthermore, with the natural zoonotic reservoir of the virus unidentified we are largely absent in discussion of the virus in other animals, the pages only really note that it's thought to have a zoonotic origin, and that it can be spread by a couple of other animals.

Additionally, the similarity of the page names is a source of confusion for non-experts, I do appreciate we have disambiguation pages but those are an imperfect solution, and we should bear in mind the possible confusion from highly similarly named pages.

I propose a merge of the pages, with a section dedicated to the nature of the virus outside of its infection itself.

If at some future point the pages need to be split off again due to some new development, so be it, but at present it this does not seem to be the case, and an argument about hypothetical future developments seems silly because Wikipedia doesn't work to a deadline.

The 2022 epidemic page should remain its own page however.

Please feel free to add your thoughts below. 5.151.23.56 (talk) 09:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: MIBO 3500 Introduction to Microbiology

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 August 2022 and 5 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Solis.eve, ICapt.NemoI, Jap23630 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Meghanherlitzka, Acw66599, Microbio15, Walker16, Young416, Nathalieslebreton, Trinityt516, Egross123, Loganhardin, Dmancao7, Is73500, Ash0315, Jmoyang58, Zec57612.

— Assignment last updated by Jmoyang58 (talk) 04:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Virology 2022

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 15 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): FireWhirls, Celebrations18! (article contribs). Peer reviewers: CraftWyvern, Error 4001.

— Assignment last updated by FloeEdge (talk) 04:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Coatrack section tag

The sections "signs and symptoms", "prevention" and "treatment" are about the disease monkeypox rather than the virus (i.e. diseases have symptoms, prevention techniques, not viruses per se). It may be worth condensing these subsections into one single smaller section. For now I have put them all under one section "Monkeypox" and tagged with {{Coatrack section}} so that it can be discussed here. Thanks. ArcMachaon (talk) 19:48, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

User:Rreagan007, renaming the page was premature. The WHO do not name viruses or change their names. This is the responsibility of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses who have not acted. See [1]. Graham Beards (talk) 06:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 January 2023

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.

Moved. Treating this as a TR because consistency does not always override actual names found in reliable sources. If any editor thinks consistency is still more important, then they should consider a name change here to be controversial and open a fresh move request at any time. Thanks and kudos to the nom and other editors for your input; everyone stay healthy! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 14:26, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Mpox virusMonkeypox virus – This page should be moved back to Monkeypox virus. Virus name changes are directed by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses who have not changed the name of the genus. The move was not discussed and there is a re-direct. Graham Beards (talk) 11:44, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Closer's note

Have checked the most recent document from the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses dated 1 November 2022, and the species is still named "monkeypox virus". That is its official name and possibly still its common name. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 16:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ICTV has recently adopted the system of binomial nomenclature (see the proposal and Article 3.21 of the nomenclatural code) used for centuries for other species, where the name of a species is exactly two words and the first word is the name of the genus. Previously the names of virus species could be any number of words and didn't necessarily include the name of the genus (and when the name of the genus was included it was the usually the last word in the species name). So far, few species have been renamed to the new standards, but essentially every virus species will be renamed in the coming years. Assuming the circumscription of the genus doesn't change, Monkeypox virus will be renamed to something starting with Orthopoxvirus. Plantdrew (talk) 17:42, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Acknowledged and thank you editor Plantdrew! We can look forward to that time when it becomes the official name and, ultimately, the common name. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 17:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Despite there being still no updates on the ICTV taxonomy, "Orthopoxvirus simiae" now returns a surprisingly non-zero amount of search results. It seems to mainly have acceptance in German-speaking circles. Artoria2e5 🌉 07:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There was no ICTV release for 2023 (the first time since 2010 that there was no release). My assumption is that the release was deferred until all species had been renamed with binomials. Apparently that has been accomplished, and I expect there will be a fully binomial 2024 release around July. Plantdrew (talk) 20:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need for general update and better/more citations

I think this page needs thorough review and revision. Since the 2022 global outbreak, many reliable sources have been updated (e.g. WHO, CDC, Europa) and there has been new research and reviews which deserves to be included. Examples where the page is unsatisfactory:

  • Research section contains no sources and does not contain any useful information
  • Transmission section says "prolonged face to face contact is required " - this is unsourced and inconsistent with reliable sources
  • Repeated references to West Africa clade and Central Africa clade. Since August 2022 these names are no longer in use so they should be replaced (other than maybe a single historical note)

There are other places where it's not good. Please can editors review recent reliable sources and update the page to match. Bob (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]