Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data/China medical cases by province

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Name change to COVID-19?

Now that the disease has an official name, this template should probably change name too. Don't know the policy for templates. jax (talk) 08:55, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twin template

See also {Template:2019-20 Wuhan coronavirus data/China medical cases} Yug (talk) 14:03, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Though that template does not include data per province. jax (talk) 08:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Guanxi missing ?

@Rethliopuks: Guanxi seems missing from 2 tables. Could you help ? Yug (talk) 21:50, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. The template format doesn't allow visual editing, which makes managing the data and inserting the sources considerably harder for me. The table is basically copied from the Chinese Wikipedia page on https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/新型冠狀病毒肺炎全球疫情病例. Rethliopuks (talk) 01:50, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I added verticle titles ;) I'am checking around to see if there is a way to edit via the visual editor. Yug (talk) 21:05, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rethliopuks: I found a way ! Please check the template page. Yug (talk) 21:17, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you -- that is absolutely brilliant! Rethliopuks (talk) 13:00, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Problem edit

This edit, by a blocked editor, introduces a link to a non-existant reference,as well as tweaking variou snumbers. Can someone check it out? All the best: Rich Farmbrough (the apparently calm and reasonable) 21:54, 1 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Extracting data from sources

@Cywn5f: or anyone else making updates. If you reuse a refreshed version of a source such as https://ncov.dxy.cn/ncovh5/view/pneumonia, which is now archived at https://archive.ph/8xGGl (the version from an hour ago is now called ref name="dxy:20200203_1455UTCp8"), then please:

  • copy/paste the reference data of the old reference and update the name= of the new reference,
  • generate a new archival copy (go to e.g. https://archive.today or https://web.archive.org and follow the instructions, and wait),
  • update the parameters of the reference that have changed (such as date, archiveurl, archivedate, title, trans-title).

This will make it easier for people to check the use of the reference.

This is an encyclopedia: a reference should be useful in the long term. Think of someone coming here in 3 days' time, or 3 months' time, or 30 year's time, who wishes to check if the text matches the references, for example. Boud (talk) 22:59, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Toom682 and Shen233: If you make the data disagree with the references, then please generate a new archive and create a new reference (if the old one is still useful) or modify the existing reference (if the old one is no longer used). See the paragraphs above if you don't know how to do this! Boud (talk) 12:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You can see an example of how this was done in this sequence of edits. Boud (talk) 12:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed cases for 8 February 2020

Great work by whoever is collating all this data. I have two comments. Firstly, the confirmed case figure for Hubei on 8 February should be 2147 if it is to agree with the source for that row (reference 21 at present) and then the final column becomes 768. Secondly, in each table in this template should the final row be labelled just "Total" (the word "Net" suggests to me that something is being subtracted). JonH (talk) 23:48, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source of data for province-level cases?

I do not see any source of data for province-level cases. I see a cited source for total cases, but that does include only a few provinces. --221.121.29.157 (talk) 03:27, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Data calculation 12-13 Feb: Hubei & Wuhan

Clinical diagnoses: Hubei subtracted 1043 cases from its 12 Feb total. Now, by a sheer fluke, it appears that, by cross-checking the increase numbers on 13 Feb, all the 1043 subtractions happened to clinical diagnoses. So it is possible to calculate the number of confirmed cases in Wuhan on 13 Feb. Thus one finds Wuhan's CD on 13 Feb based on its daily total. Finally one finds the corrected 12 Feb Wuhan CD number by subtracting this number from Wuhan's 13 Feb CD total. Data for the rest of Hubei follows. Rethliopuks (talk) 04:39, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Death numbers: by cross-checking the numbers released for 12-14 Feb both in Hubei and nationally, it appears that all the 108 double counting happened to clinical cases in Wuhan on 12 Feb, which was an incredible sheer fluke, again. Still, this has allowed for calculating all the data as has been published. Rethliopuks (talk) 11:39, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-checks against data compiled by Johns Hopkins University

A comparison of confirmed case incidence data for selected provinces with equivalent data compiled by Johns Hopkins University is available in this the analysis at https://cbdrh.github.io/NovelCoronavirus/on-COVID-19-v1_6.html#obtaining_data, in the Obtaining data section, scroll down and select the 'Checking the data' tab to see the comparison. A few spot checks suggest that wikipedia (that is, this page) is correct where there are significant differences. Tim C (talk) 06:01, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Summary table merged from external template

The summary table Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/China‎ template page ← is now a redirected page to Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/China medical cases by province#Summary table.
This will ease inclusions into in articles and update of the data. Update of the data can be done very easily via visual editor's edits.

  1. Open page in 2 of your web browser tabs :
  2. TAB 1: New Cases detailed table > click "Show" > on bottom bold row "Total" : select all cells from Hubei to National Inclusive > COPY
  3. TAB 2: Summary table in visual editor mode : Paste > Review > Save.
  4. Repeat and factorize for CASES, DEATHS, and RECOVERIES.

Yug (talk) 09:48, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is the current template included (template inclusion) anywhere ? The tags are many, it will need a clean up before proper inclusion within articles. Yug (talk) 12:50, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One single inclusion found : Timeline_of_the_2019–20_coronavirus_outbreak. Yug (talk) 15:02, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is problematic, not all 3 tables are updated daily, yet there's only 1 timestamp for the summary table.Wikilucki (talk) 04:01, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Thanks for pointing out....... Each row of the summary table cite it's source. Maybe should we neutralize the absolute date (ex: 2020-02-17) and just be relative "Recent data from [source]" ? Yug (talk) 13:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject COVID-19

I've created WikiProject COVID-19 as a temporary or permanent WikiProject and invite editors to use this space for discussing ways to improve coverage of the ongoing 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. Please bring your ideas to the project/talk page. Stay safe, --Another Believer (Talk) 18:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why in Template namespace?

Talk moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19#Why in Template namespace? --Mezze stagioni (talk) 22:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Provinces in rows

The variant with provinces in rows (21 March 2020) made much better sense to me; it was rather tall and narrow. It was against this version that I wrote a script grabbing data from here. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:57, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page is inactive

This page is not updated for 1.5 years and now it's too outdated. Thingofme (talk) 10:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Template_talk:COVID-19_pandemic_data/China_medical_cases_by_province"