Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in India/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 October 2020

(contrib) 15:48, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Part 1

"India's case fatality rate is among the lowest in the world at 2.41% as of 23 July and is steadily declining."

Please put this into the past tense ("was" for "is"), since data from July shouldn't be reported in the present tense. 2601:5C6:8081:35C0:F1AF:98B:C9E4:B142 (talk) 02:53, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

Part 2

"Till 13 May, 1,225 pilgrims had been tested positive."

"Till" sounds wrong. Please change it to "By". Also, "been tested positive" sounds like a passive voice, which doesn't make sense. Please remove the "been". 2601:5C6:8081:35C0:F1AF:98B:C9E4:B142 (talk) 02:55, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done Eggishorn (talk)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 October 2020

All tourist visas have been suspended, as a majority of the confirmed cases were mainly imports

Please change this to:

All tourist visas were suspended in March, as many of the earliest confirmed cases were individuals who had travelled from foreign countries.

Almost all of the confirmed cases are now domestically acquired, and the source is seven months old, so it's not good for anything that's close to the present tense. 64.203.186.113 (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:34, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 23 October 2020

On 2 March, Delhi-NCR reported its first case of COVID-19 which rose India’s tally to five. As a precautionary method, the central government suspends visas of foreign nationals from several countries including China the following day. Ganekarbhaskar (talk) 09:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

References

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:27, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Request for comment - cases change metrics

Please take part in discussion here: Project COVID-19, Medical cases charts - change type — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kohraa Mondel (talk • contribs) 22:49, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

In the Section 'Timeline', the text

"On 31 March, a Tablighi Jamaat religious congregation event in Delhi, which had taken place earlier in March, emerged as a new virus super spreader event, after numerous cases across the country were traced back to it. On 18 April, the Health ministry announced that 4,291 cases were directly linked to the event"

should be followed by -

"On 21 Aug 2020, Mumbai Highcourt ruled that “A political Government tries to find scapegoat when there is pandemic or calamity, and the circumstances show that there is probability that these foreigners were chosen to make them scapegoats,...The material of the present matter shows that the propaganda against the so-called religious activity was unwarranted.” (https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/covid-19-bombay-hc-strikes-down-cases-against-28-foreign-tablighi-members/story-Ux4qS1ouqyGS7JZNjOjqiJ.html) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.82.7 (talk) 02:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Page performance

Please see Module talk:WikidataIB#Out of memory error for a discussion on improving the performance of this page, which has been experiencing rendering issues and slowness due to, among other things, fetching a lot of data from Wikidata. — The Earwig ^talk 19:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I have made two changes in the Lead section:

• Removed 2nd and 3rd paras discussing the Response of Govt of India ( Reason: there is a dedicated wiki article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_government_response_to_the_COVID-19_pandemic
• Removed last para discussing the impact (Reason: there is already a section in the same article talking about Impact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic_in_India#ImpactWisdomwiki 40 (talk) 19:23, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Impact on movie theaters

In Telangana movie theaters opened with 50% occupancy.

Later, Center government of India, allow 100% occupancy to theaters from Feb 1 2021. Please mention it. Rizosome (talk) 02:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2021

Please remove

resulted in the recovery of three patients in March.

and add

resulted in the recovery of three patients in March 2020.

March 2021 is now in the past, so this reference is ambiguous. The source dates from last year, so it's clearly not talking about last month. 2603:7080:E807:C300:806D:90B3:9B6D:1E04 (talk) 11:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done ViperSnake151 In the future, please close edit requests once you have acted upon them. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I did not even see that this was specifically requested, it's just something I wound up doing via my own boldness :) ViperSnake151  Talk  15:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Highest daily new cases in lead

I sense that this might turn into an unnecessary edit war when clear data is available out there. Putting some links here for other editors (especially those already involved with these edits in particular) to review and put the correct info in lead (that India now has the highest new infections detected per day).

• CDC chart for US - [1]
• NY Times (basically a mirror of the CDC chart) - [2]
• WHO data for India (select daily on the graph) - [3]
• GoI data for India (showing me an increase of 3,52,991 for today) - [4]
• Independent media sources noting the global record in daily new cases - [5][6]

- Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 14:11, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

See WP:CITESHOT. In this case it is not relevant because you can find many sources for either claims. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 00:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I disagree with your tagging this as a WP:CITESHOT - since there have already been multiple edits of back and forth on this specific piece of information. Moreover these are highly regarded official sources (in line with WP:MEDRS as this comes under population data ) and not just random citations. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@Aman.kumar.goel: This news article you cited is incorrect, and is from ANI/Sputnik, not known for the reliability of their stats. You can see the full historical data from the CDDC on their own site. – SJ + 01:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Enough reliable sources reported that US reported 403,359 cases on a single day in December. It includes Hindustan Times, Xinhua, Live Mint, US News which added that "The CDC figures do not necessarily reflect cases reported by individual states." You can't solely rely on website of CDC website, which itself notes that: "On December 18, 2020, Texas started reporting probable cases, which included 171,505 new probable cases, in addition to 13,253 confirmed cases, for a total of 184,758 new cases reported. This raised the total number of new cases in the US on December 18 to 403,359; without the influx of reporting from Texas, the daily new case count for the US would have been 231,854."[7]

We are allowed to second guess media reports once we have reason to and that reason exist in this case. Your best bet is to find report which dispute 403,359 cases of the US from a single day in December 2020 instead of repeating same sources that have obviously miscalculated the scenario. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 00:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Similar claims can be made wrt to India. So either we compare official figures with official figures or speculative figures with speculative figures. And as you've noted with the last citation from CDC that number (of ~400k) includes probable cases and not just confirmed cases - 171,505 new probable cases. The secondary news sources you have linked to do not make this distinction even though they use the same source data. This is mostly an issue of semantics -> do we represent confirmed v confirmed or probable v probable? In confirmed v confirmed India has surpassed the US count. In probable v probable we don't even have reliable data as far as I know. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Data from Texas can be seen here [8]. If you switch to the trends tab you will notice that the new confirmed cases on 20 December 2020 was ~6k and new probable cases on the same day was 1372. Adding them up brings us to a value of much less than the 170k count - implying that was probably added up over the previous few weeks. I would not be surprised that these numbers have been rationalised in the CDC data with the numbers being backdated and added to the day those results were detected. Again back to the semantics question - which set of data do we represent? Plus now that this data from Texas can be taken into consideration how do we deal with data that represents cases detected over a long time but added on a single day (and then rationalised later). - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Right. That may explain the anomaly - it is a challenge of mixing apples and oranges -- probable cases are always much higher than confirmed, and not reported in any standard way (depends on the model you use for inference, &c). Dec. 20 wasn't the highest day in US history; it was just the day that data of different types was mixed together. – SJ + 10:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Oxygen crisis in India due to Covid-19 pandemic

See Draft:Oxygen Crisis in India. While I think the draft should be accepted with the title Oxygen crisis in India due to Covid-19 pandemic, some others are with the opinion that this article should be expanded instead of creating a new article. So if anyone is interested to expand this article with the new heading as Oxygen crisis, please refer the draft and do the honours. Regards Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 13:51, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Sure thing, someone can surely do it. 103.44.0.232 (talk) 13:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

There is no need of a specific article. If has been already covered on this article. Wareon (talk) 05:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Wareon, this has been not covered in the present article. It needs a seperate section. Since nobody is going to do it, I am going to do the honours soon Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 07:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The oxygen crisis is mentioned in context in the 2021 section of the timeline. It's all kind of intertwined, though if it gets too detailed an "Oxygen shortages" section could be placed somewhere under health care. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

ViperSnake151, I think there should be seperate section or may be a new article for it. Because this is one of the heaviest crisis that India gone through in the several years. Please tell your thoughts on it. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 15:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

No. The summary of these events should be succinct. Unless the issue is long-term (for which we will have to wait for some more weeks), it can be kept limited the way it has been so far. Srijanx22 (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

No timeline for 2021?

There were subpages for 2020, but nothing for the last 4 months? I've been wondering what's causing this recent spike but apparently there was no initiative. I would help but I can't create articles, nor do I know enough from India's data and coverage to know what's going on. - 60.52.104.111 (talk) 12:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, even I was thinking the same thing. There are very few volunteers for the 2021 coverage. I'm trying to do my best. It's not even an India-only problem, but an issue around the world. Sitaphul (talk) 06:09, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

It's heartbreaking what's going on in India right now. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not (or cannot be) the best source to inform yourself about the corona / health crisis currently unfolding in India, because it can only describe the events summarily and retrospectively. I myself try to follow the events via the English-written Indian media, mostly via thehindu.com, which has a good reputation . It is considered reliable and devoid of hyper nationalistic / sensationalistic or paid news reporting (the hindu.com's headquarters are in Chennai, Tamil Nadu). JeanSept (talk) 23:56, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

superspreader event kumbh mela needs seperate sub head and more information Suggestion

very less is written about super-spreader event kumbh-mela. Nenetarun (talk) 05:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I have no dog in this fight, but your assertion that the removal was "unexplained" is patently untrue. The section was removed on grounds of undue by another editor. If you believe that that's not the case, you need to demonstrate that the information is due to the extent of warranting a separate section of its own. Regards, MBlaze Lightning (talk) 06:28, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

• Comment - yes it does need its own section [9]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
• I see it as WP:UNDUE given there have been no independent report whether Kumbh Mela is directly contributing into spread (that is little compared to Tablighi Jamaat) or infections are overall cases of Haridwar the 2nd most populated city of Uttarakhand. We should not rely on speculations. Furthermore I believe that we should get rid of the "Situation" section entirely because it reads like a collection of indiscriminate information. Srijanx22 (talk) 09:12, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
• I agree with Kautilya3.. Abhishek0831996 has left me a baseless edit warring warning on my talkpage..pure case of WP:bullying
  

Request Kautilya3 to re-add kumbh mela event back. Nenetarun (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

See the messages above. You haven't explained why you are removing info about Tablighi Jamaat event which contributed 1/3 of the cases that time, more than any other minor events you are talking about. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 17:01, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• Support - I think it needs its own section/sub-section - there are several Kumbh related Covid positives that have been reported in the media, some of these are quite significant. [10][11][12][13] I think apart from mentioning the spread of Covid at the mela we should also provide some background on the special arrangements that were made, the rules that were initially proposed and then partially reverted [14][15], requirement for returning devotees to self-isolate in several states [16], etc. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 18:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

See WP:NOTNEWS. As for the Kumbh Mela, I must note that no scientific study or evidence has come out yet to prove that Kumbh Mela and rallies were superspreader events. Dubious and raunchy headlines or news reports are not enough especially when dealing with this subject which is a victim of poor reports. You need to familiarize with WP:MEDRS when you are making claims related to medical science-related events. Otherwise you can find reports about Farmer protests, weddings, etc. to have been bigger superspreaders but that would again look dubious without actual confirmation. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

In my understanding WP:MEDRS does not apply to this section at least as long as claims aren't made tagging it as a super-spreader. Those rules are specific for Wikipedia:Biomedical information and a section on Kumbh mela activities (including arrangements, rules, etc as I proposed) would not qualify for that definition. As far as WP:NOTNEWS goes I believe that large enough events surrounding the 2nd wave should all get a mention here as and when they get covered within context in other sources - be they articles, news, books or more. That would mean that as and when we get more coverage on say the election campaigning in Bengal specifically related to Covid-19 it would merit at least a mention. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

The "mention" already exists at "Timeline" section. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 02:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

!vote - clarifying that the Support refers to the overall direction of the answer and focus should be on the reasoning. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:41, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

• Support: According to my opinion, there should be a seperate article on this topic similiar to 2020 Tablighi Jamaat COVID-19 hotspot in Delhi. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 02:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

• See WP:FALSEBALANCE. Tablighi Jamaat involved 30% of the total cases but Kumbh Mela (which lacks enough conclusion) has not contributed to even 000.1% cases of entire country. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

• Aman.kumar.goel, how does this even make logic? Tablighi Jamaat happened during a time where the virus had just started spreading and daily cases were very few. It only involved less than ten thousand people. Procedures like tracing the route map of infected people and making the list of primary and secondary contacts were quite easier back then and was stricly followed. But things has changed now. Its like three lakhs people are getting infected daily. Nobody is going to make the route-map and they dont have the time to do it. People are dying. Also Kumb Mela is participated by millions. So will the government go make a route map of these much people.? So its unclear that how many people from Kumb Mela might have spreaded the infection. I think there is no logic in applying WP:FALSEBALANCE here. Regards Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 05:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

You are creating a false balance between the two events. Tablhigi Jamaat contributed to more than 30% cases of that time and resulted in 22,000 people to be quarantined. Being participated by millions is irrelevant. Information about 1700 - 2000 infections in Haridwar over a week or more, cannot be attributed to Kumbh Mela alone because Haridwar is a big city as already explained above. Officials and scientists have all the necessary details and they haven't provided a thing as of yet to indicate that Kumbh Mela was anywhere near Tabhlgi Jamaat event but in fact looks too tiny in comparison. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 05:50, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

• Support: Better accommodate both events under "religious congregation" section or alike. I see Kumbh mela as a more severe violation of social distancing guidelines that were developed after one year of covid related learning. AdithyaKL (talk) 12:39, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

• Support: There should be separate section for Kumbh Mela because of following reasons:

1. Many news article have mentioned it as a super spreader event [17][18] including some doctors [19]

2. Visuals of Kumbh Mela make it very clear that Covid rules were being flouted in it [20][21]

3. Numbers are also high (atleast 1700) [22]. Some news articles have mentioned it till 5000 too [23][24]

4. Many state governments have come up with guidelines regarding isolation and quarantine for Kumbh returnees. It clearly means their health departments found some basis to reach to such a decision.[25][26]

5. Last but not the least. India's Right Wing Media bias is clearly visible regarding how they covered both the Tablighi Jamaat and Kumbh events. While Jamaat members were called "Covid Jihadis", people participating in Kumbh were being called "devotees". But, wikipedia is not a place where such biases should hold their ground. So, in all fairness, there should be a separate section (and even page) on Wikipedia for Kumbh Mela super spreader event. A very good analysis of this bias on The Print.[27] Jasksingh (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

• What is with all these bold marking Support for inclusion of grossly problematic content? Are you even aware of WP:NOTAVOTE? Anyway, there are 100s of superspreader events by now but none of them other than the most significant one has got a section. Your news links (see WP:NOTNEWS) are weeks old and don't reflect scientific view but only speculates. Your own analysis which is WP:OR does not help in making it look anymore authentic. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 02:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

• Then are you suggesting that the Tablighi Jamat event also be reduced to a single statement of mention linking to the main article? Because that also works for me and I do agree that it would be quite practical given that we should be seeing more coverage of all these events in the near future. Said coverage should at the very least result in a sub-section of the article of the event and should be linked here. For instance the impact of Covid-19 on the WB election warrants a section on the article, which it already does here 2021 West Bengal Legislative Assembly election#COVID-19 outbreak. As far as I understand WP:NOTNEWS asks us to consider the enduring notability of events before inclusion. The continued measures by various states in quarantining Kumbh returnees does seem to meet that criteria. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Can someone please do the needful and create a page on "Kumbh Mela super spreader event". Nenetarun (talk) 14:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

All the reports mentioned here are opinions not facts, no data-based authentic report supporting it. Shatbhisha6 (talk) 18:01, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

No mention of COVID at all in either India or Healthcare in India

... nor I think any links to this article. Could someone please fix this. Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 15:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Timeline - 2021

@Wareon: and @Nguyentrongphu:, you both seem to think that my edits on the section 2021 seem to be against WP:UNDUE. As far as I can see, I am sorting the section into logical paragraphs, and adding more proposed reasons for the spike in cases. Can you specify why you feel that my edits are giving undue importance? Alternately, can you suggest changes to any parts of my edit you object to? - Jose Mathew (talk) 03:57, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jose Mathew C: The surge is one of many surges during the covid pandemic in India. The causes of the latest surge are not justified to have an entire paragraph on their own. My suggestion is that you should condense the causes into 2-3 sentences max. One sentence can list multiple factors such as A, B, C, D and... Nguyentrongphu (talk) 04:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Nguyentrongphu:, please note the following points:-

• This is not just one of many surges. It is the biggest surge so far in India, and, if I remember correctly, the second biggest in the world.
• The points I have added myself can be condensed into a sentence. However, the article already has about 3-4 sentences about the 2021 Kumbh Mela, which I feel should be included in this section.
• I assume you have no objection to the rest of my edit?

Nevertheless, if you feel that the causes paragraph is too long, I can suggest something like this:-

Multiple reasons have been proposed for the sudden spike in cases - undercounting of cases leading to models underestimating cases and deaths, economic woes putting the government under pressure to reopen the economy, a feeling of exceptionalism based on the hope that India's young population and childhood immunisation scheme would blunt the impact from Covid-19, variants with increased virulence, such as the B.1.617 double mutant, lack of preparations (temporary hospitals were often dismantled after cases started to decline, and new facilities were not built), and state and local elections in several states, often without necessary precautions. In addition, social distancing was poorly enforced at festivals, sports events and public places; the Hindu spring festival of Holi on 29 March saw large crowds with many people flouting health and safety guidelines. The Haridwar Kumbh Mela was described as having become a superspreader, being linked to at least 1,700 positive cases between 10 and 14 April alone, and 68 cases among Hindu seers between 5-14 April. Normally four months in length, the festival had been shortened to a single month due to the pandemic. On 16 April, Prime Minister Narendra Modi asked residents to "keep Kumbh Mela symbolic" in order "give strength to India's fight against the virus", and Swami Avdheshanand urged devotees to avoid large gatherings and follow health guidance while participating in the Mela.

References

Note that only the first sentence is mine, the rest is from the existing section. - Jose Mathew (talk) 06:28, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Jose Mathew C: It is no doubt the biggest surge so far, but it's still one of many surges. It would make sense if this article is only about the new surge (for example "COVID-19 Surge in India (2021)"), but the scope of this article is much bigger than that. Plus, there is no guarantee that there won't be a bigger surge in the future. In any case, I like your new proposal and support it. Please feel free to add this paragraph to the article and remove repetitive sentences elsewhere. Nguyentrongphu (talk) 07:06, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Sure. I am also editing the rest of the section to combine logically related points. Please take a look when possible. - Jose Mathew (talk) 12:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

By the way our style has been to capitalize COVID-19. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:56, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

ViperSnake151, the Timeline section is meant to be a quick summary of events, not a detailed analysis. Please feel free to create a separate section on the 2021 surge, where you can cover the issues in more detail. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:03, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

To be fair, the brunt of 2021 right now has been this surge. If it does eventually end, then we can talk about it. Implement that paragraph and I can streamline it further. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:11, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Criticism of Modi holding campaign rallies

Per WP:BRD I am taking this to the talk page. There have been disputes with multiple editors removing material that states that there has been criticism of Prime Minister Modi holding crowded campaign rallies, with arguments that it is a violation of WP:BLP, "dubious information", and "mudslinging". One user who reverted me most recently used a one-sided editorial, suggesting that the criticisms were invalid because there was no data actually supporting arguments that the rallies had caused cases.

The most recent version of the text was as follows:

Alongside the Mela, Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party have also faced criticism for hosting campaign rallies for the West Bengal Legislative Assembly election despite the severe state of the pandemic in India, which have similarly featured large crowds flouting guidance such as social distancing and wearing face masks. On 24 April, Chief Minister of Maharashtra Uddhav Thackeray stated that he was unable to get in contact with Modi to address shortages of oxygen and Remdesivir because he was busy campaigning.

This article, in my opinion, is too positive. There needs to be more critical reception to India's response to the pandemic, especially during the second wave. I had got rid of the person accusing him of being a "superspreader", and instead put in reference to a state chief minister who had criticized Modi for focusing more on campaigning than managing the response. The disputed section is cited to multiple reliable sources, including two multinational news agencies (Bloomberg, Reuters), and is written neutrally. It is clear that this is a notable aspect of the situation. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello ViperSnake151, be bold and go ahead. If the content are added are supported by reliable sources, it should be definetely added in a neutral point of view. Regards Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 14:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

ViperSnake151 You are supposed to link the message made by the "person" which can be found [28]. You haven't addressed the issues raised there i.e. how these baseless speculations that election rallies spread covid-19 are any valid. Modi or any prominent politician gets criticized for everything he has done thus you need to read WP:UNDUE and avoid distracting the article's focus from the main subject. Wareon (talk) 05:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

So you're saying per undue weight we cannot include any negative coverage because it is considered a "distraction from the main subject"? Even if covered by the worldwide press? In fact, the mere fact that these aspects of the pandemic have mainstream coverage means that it is not undue weight to include because it is no longer a minority viewpoint. In fact, the version you reverted no longer includes the now-disputed claim that the rallies spread COVID-19, and instead placed a larger emphasis on Modi campaigning at all. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

It is not merely 'negative' but grossly misleading because contrary to what you are adding, facts say that election rallies aren't superspreader. Since you also consider it "disputed" then you must avoid spewing the half baked assessments. Wareon (talk) 05:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Do you have high quality secondary sources that support your argument? ViperSnake151  Talk  06:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The para added mentioning a certain chief minister was unable to reach out to the PM because he was busy campaigning, what encyclopaedic value does it hold in relation to the context of the article ? It's an accusation that one person made against the other does it qualify as a valid NPOV addition ? I propose the the sentence by rephrased to better suite the wikipedia guidelines.

All political parties were doing campaign rallies and how come just the BJP is pinpointed, isn't it against WP:NPOV singling out only one party ?AnM2002 (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@AnM2002:, it isn't POV to blame BJP. All the mainstream western media are doing so. BJP currently controls both the houses of parliament and 17 out of 28 states. If it doesn't share a large blame after this, that is POV editing. Roller26 (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Roller26 don't know if you inferred correctly but it's totally fine to blame the BJP but doesn't make others free of blame. I was talking specifically in the context of rallies and don't know if you understand what a "multi-part democracy" is! but if Modi was out campaigning so was Mamata Banerjee(CM of WB- tasked with running the state of WB), Rahul Gandhi and others. It's completely against WP:NPOV to just single out one party just because the so called "unbiased and forever Pious arbiters of truth"-the western media is saying so, had you done some NPOV research the very same western media also mentioned about other parties as well. If this is not POV don't know what is! Happy editing. AnM2002 (talk) 11:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

and just so you know BJP doesn't control the Rajya Sabha nor does it rule the worst affected states of Kerala, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Punjab, Delhi where the second wave started initially so it's better to broaden restricted perspectives and avoid singling out a specific group. AnM2002 (talk) 11:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@AnM2002:, your patronizing tone, your cherry picking of facts to single out non-BJP states, your limited knowledge of who controls Rajya Sabha makes your biases in your editing lie pretty bare. Roller26 (talk) 11:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Roller26 wow! so putting up facts that are not aligned to your POV is cherry picking and writing a one sided story isn't ? The very fact that you so vehemently ignore to acknowledge that even other parties held rallies and the opposition ruled states are in an equally if not more dire state very clearly lays out what your inherent POV is. It's ok to have an inherent POV but you must acknowledge it yourself and try addressing it before making edits! and don't worry I expected that you would make such preposterous statements and the subsequent "BJP supporter peraphernalia" in the Darth of facts! Rest assured i adhere to NPOV not that I can say the same for you! AnM2002 (talk) 11:58, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@AnM2002:, lets dissect your "facts" shall we? You went all the way down to Punjab and very conveniently forgot to mention Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana - all states with higher active cases than Punjab, and expect for Bihar (where while CM is non-BJP, BJP has much higher MLAs), the CM is from BJP [29]. You mentioned Delhi. Hospitals in Delhi are at 3 tiers - central, state and municipal level. 2 of them are controlled by BJP. In RS, NDA controls 118 seats, UPA + all others control 118 seats and 9 seats are vacant. For more than a year, even Indian media has declared that RS is in BJP's hand. Go read [30]. And don't just throw WP:NPOV around without understanding it, go read and try to understand WP:VALID and WP:DUE and then put in context with reliable sourcing about the topic. Roller26 (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

What your are doing goes exactly against WP:DUE and WP:NPOV. If you are going to derail the subject with criticism about politicians then the list will never end. What really matters is that the specifics of the criticism are unfounded because there is no significant spread of coronavirus related to election rallies. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 13:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Roller26 Dude the way you are writing all this i seriously doubt you understand what this discussion was about and what is NPOV. Let me get down to some not so convenient dissection do read it carefully!

1. You proved my point when you accused me of conveniently ignoring the “BJP-ruled states” , I never said BJP should not be blamed but as should be the others. The discussion was about election rallies which all parties did but and even your “pious arbiters of truth”(the unbiased western media!) have made mentions of the same. But it’s convenient to blame “Modi” as it suites concocted narratives. So it’s alright to vehemently blame the central government but a crime to question the response of state governments who are actually tasked with maintaining healthcare, quite convenient!

2. Delhi really hit the nerve! Before distorting the governance mechanism I think you should enlighten yourself as to whose responsibility it is to micromanage the health and education of Delhi, this will help[31] this Delhi government document clearly proves whose responsibility it is! where did all that talk of world class healthcare and Mohalla clinics go ? I guess all the budget went into ads! Now don’t respond by bringing in GNCTD act and all that here’s a clarification for that as well[32], still centre government is conveniently blamed right ? Here’s some court observations for the oxygen crisis that I am sure you’ll jump to in your next reply [33], [34]. Even the court has observed the centre alone cannot blamed for the mess Delhi is in, but that’s not convenient is it ?

3. Coming to the paraphernalia about only BJP ruled states being in mess have look at the following[35], [36] here it’s clearly indicated most opposition ruled states including Delhi are not even testing enough but ignoring that conveniently just blame the “BJP” or Modi ! Out of the 11 states with highest case loads 7 are opposition ruled but that too is conveniently ignored[37].

4. The Rajya Sabha has a simple majority of 123 here is the source[38] yours is outdated so there too you have resorted to suiting your POV rather than cross verifying.

I’ll only say this my whole point was that yes it’s alright to blame the BJP but completely singling out and turning blind to the role of other sides is neither in accordance to WP:NPOV nor the ethos of this encyclopaedia. This concocting is best suited to tabloids/newspapers and not wiki because [[WP:NOTNP]. Cheers! AnM2002 (talk) 14:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@AnM2002:, you have accused me repeatedly of being "this" and "that" while I only commented on your remarks nature, your “pious arbiters of truth”(the unbiased western media!) statement clearly shows who you are. Read my comments properly and try to absorb what I have really said. And go show your support for BJP on the street and not here. Roller26 (talk) 16:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Roller26 Well clearly it was you who distorted the whole intent behind the discussion which was Rallies and and Maha CM's remarks, the hard truth is you have failed to understand what Wikipedia is truly about. And here starts the "BJP supporter" paraphernalia. I support NPOV not some hubble bubble hypocritical pov pushing. Good luck writing for some tabloid/newspaper because as I said earlier Wikipedia WP:NOTNP or some AAP advert! May good sense prevail! AnM2002 (talk) 17:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@AnM2002:, you shoo off and go work for BJP IT cell or you probably already do so. Roller26 (talk) 17:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Roller26 lol! look at the fuses going out, I can feel the sheer sense of dejection, but it's understandable for someone with not even an iota of idea about What Wikipedia is or What Wikipedia is not to make such remarks! AnM2002 (talk) 17:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@AnM2002:, you have barely written content here on WP, but seem to have far more superior sense of WP is and isn't. You entire argument and sourcing used is flawed. I have much more precious things to do with my time then argue endlessly with a editor who themselves have no idea and isn't willing to listen to reason. Roller26 (talk) 17:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, so all you have got as counter is edit count comparison and a serious dearth for logic and facts ? of course my entire argument and the sources cited are flawed because they expose your POV pushing. Rest assured I have 'read' and written enough for Wikipedia to know to what it is and isn't!(though I got a fairly good idea about tabloid and newspaper writing from this exchange) AnM2002 (talk) 02:03, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I support with Roller26 and without clear any consensus, the well sourced facts from the article should not be removed. Kichu🐘 ^{Need any help?} 14:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Given the comments, I'd like to make some amendments to at least clarify other parties' responses, and maybe mention the fact that posts on social media showing the flouting of guidelines at Modi rallies was what set off this controversy;

On 16 April, the Election Commission of India (ECI) pushed up its nightly curfew on campaigning from 10 p.m. to 7 p.m., and stated that those organising in-person events would be responsible to provide face masks and hand sanitizer to all attendees, and ensure their usage. Indian National Congress (INC) leader Rahul Gandhi criticised Modi for praising the turnout of a rally on 17 April, and announced the next day that he would suspend the party's rallies. Gandhi, who had only held two rallies, advised political leaders to "to think deeply about the consequences of holding large public rallies under the current circumstances." On 20 April, Gandhi tested positive for COVID-19. On 22 April, the ECI enacted restrictions on in-person campaign events in West Bengal beginning that evening. This included restricting meetings to a maximum of 500 people with social distancing enforced, and prohibiting any rallies or roadshows. Chief Minister of West Bengal and All India Trinamool Congress (AITC) leader Mamata Banerjee subsequently announced that she would suspend all further in-person campaign events in favour of virtual meetings. Modi also cancelled a planned visit to West Bengal on 23 April, and announced plans to hold meetings via videoconference with oxygen manufacturers and the chief ministers of current hotspots respectively.

ViperSnake151  Talk  15:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Sounds better though it may require a new section called "Political events" or something than addition into "Timeline". Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 16:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Though the amendments proposed are apt, the initial statement about some social media posts singling out only Modi rallies again misses the whole point of the discussion hope you'll accommodate it accordingly. Also, what about the Maha CM's remark I don't know how an accusation made by a CM that PM didn't pick up his phone because he was too busy addressing rallies even when the latter has denied, is of any encyclopaedic value to this article concerning COVID-19 ? Please share the rationale behind these two. AnM2002 (talk) 17:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

The rationale is the accusation that Modi was focusing more on holding large rallies rather than placing as much weight as possible behind the response as per his job as prime minister. Also where did he deny this? You keep bringing up bits and pieces of detail without sourcing them. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Here is your source [39] which clearly says PMO refuted these allegations which were made by some MAHA minister Nawab Malik, even the CM himself has not said anything of this sort. So it would be better to keep this chatter out of the article as it's merely an accusations.

And again you are missing the whole point if you are to blame one politician for doing rallies in a multi party democracy at least make mentions of the others too, it would be better to write the following- "Political parties including the BJP were criticised for holding large rallies amidst the pandemic without following the SOP's issued by Election Commission. AnM2002 (talk) 01:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

So it's undue to mention this because I have failed to provide sourcing demonstrating similar criticism of all other parties? Is there even criticism of other parties for doing so? I think Modi was getting singled out because A. he is prime minister, and B. he personally bragged about one of his rallies being bigger than the last time he was in that particular area. ViperSnake151  Talk  03:11, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

ViperSnake151 you clearly have some serious level POV, had it not been the case you wouldn't have distorted the point of discussion here. Though it is "futile" to discuss when you continue to conveniently circumvent the discussion but I'll try one last time please READ carefully:-

1. I am not against you blaming the PM for handling the COVID-19 crisis but just so that you know "Prime Minister is not in-charge of Micromanaging things at state level" had it been the case states would not need Chief Ministers. Now don't say BJP is running most states that would be against NPOV too because opposition ruled states are in a bigger if not equal mess. See,[40]

2. You continue to single out Modi for holding rallies, yes it's true he was holding rallies but so were the others, India is a Multi-party system and it is both an NPOV violation and UNDUE contrary to your believes. Here are the sources [41],[42]. All these sources have clearly mentioned all parties doing the same but ignoring those mentions and cherry picking excerpts to suite a particular point of view is not a good editorial ethic see 5P2

3. Your whole narrative is based on a comment by the PM where 'He bragged about crowds at a rally' but you conveniently chose to ignore the fact that the same article the following line too "Large crowds at election rallies by major political parties - including the BJP, the Congress, and the Bengal's ruling Trinamool - where social distancing is absent are being viewed with increasingly greater concern by experts, particularly with more aggressive variants of the virus in circulation." See[43]. So Modi wasn't the only politician bragging about crowds in election rallies, election rallies irrespective of the party usually have crowds same was the case during the "BLM protests" when the pandemic was raging in the US and West. That time it was the mainstream media itself which bragged about the crowds.

4. When I produced reliable sources countering the "PM was busy in rallies and didn't pickup" accusation which has no "Encyclopaedic value" you conveniently chose to ignore it. These kind of things really put a question mark on NPOV.

I don't think it is worth the effort because you'll just ignore all this and blame me of being one thing or the other but still in the interest of a more neutral and unbiased Wikipedia I tried. Oh and that would be a violation of 5P3 specifically NPA! AnM2002 (talk) 05:24, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

I am no longer participating in this discussion. As someone who is not from India and not attuned to its political norms, I should not attempt to write any information on political issues relating to the country. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Note on revamp

I have revamped the article in Special:Diff/1020305654, primarily in terms of sectioning. Since it is a big change, I'm leaving this note on the talk page. Before the change, the article had sections called Government response, Relief and Situation. The first section contained a listing of sub-sections on the impact on various sectors, I have moved most of them to a new section called Impact. I've moved the second section and the starting paragraphs under the first section under a new section called Response. The third section was an arbitrary and ambiguous listing of sub-sections which I have either moved to one of the two sections, where-ever appropriate or removed them. In terms of removal I've removed the sub-section called Tablighi Jamaat event and Breaking quarantine; the first sub-section is a repetition of a paragraph under the Timeline of the article and the second sub-section consisted of two lines which highlight specific instances of breaking quarantine which are too minor in the greater scheme of things to be due in an article at this level, this could be re-added if and when this article is well developed.

An additional note, the article as it stands consists mostly of listing of events, occurrences or actions by various ententes and lacks broader overviews, which needs to be amended in a high level article like this one. The article also needs an update, most of the occurences are in reference to events of early to mid 2020. I've added an update template in this regard. Tayi Arajakate _Talk 10:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

In case you're wondering, I was trying to adjust things based on work I had done for COVID-19 pandemic in Saskatchewan. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for this, it looks like a fine improvement. – SJ + 16:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposal for Splitting

I propose that sections Impact be split into a separate page called [[Impact of COVID-19 in India]. The content of the current page seems off-topic and these sections are large enough to make their own page.

• This proposal seems to have received no attention in the several months it has been open; I am therefore removing the proposal tag from the page. An impact article will likely be necessary at some point, but likely not as a split, but a more detailed piece of this parent article. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:26, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2021

This sentence is extremely long.

A number of countries announced that they would provide emergency aid to India, including European Union member states—which are sending oxygen supplies, medicines and ventilators through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism,[80][81] the United Kingdom—which is sending oxygen concentrators and additional ventilators, and the United States—which is sending personal protective equipment, and lifted export controls on vaccines and their materials in order to send raw materials for producing the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine (with President Joe Biden considering it to be in return for having received assistance from India earlier).

Please replace it with:

A number of countries announced that they would provide emergency aid to India.  European Union member states announced that they would send oxygen supplies, medicines and ventilators through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism.[80][81]  The United Kingdom planned to send oxygen concentrators and additional ventilators.  The United States offered to provide personal protective equipment and to lift export controls on vaccines and their materials in order to send raw materials for producing the Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine; President Joe Biden made this offer in return for previous Indian assistance.

Thank you. 108.39.223.134 (talk) 09:06, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done. That was indeed a very long sentence. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 08:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Numbers, cases, and calamity

I haven't kept track of the data for several months, but looking at it now, it looks like the Government has been faking data on a massive scale.

The growth rate in daily cases at the beginning of 2021 was 6% according to the covid19india.org data. But our charts show, based on the Health Ministry data, a growth of rate of only 0.2%. That is a factor of 30 difference! So, the cases have always been growing at the more-or-less their standard rate, while the Government has been claiming that it was all over.

But that was yesterday.

Today, we have a new variant of the virus, which grows faster and spreads faster, sending more people to the ICU. The current growth rate of cases is about 10% 6% (averaged over 10 days ending 3 May 2021). If it stays at that level for a month (without going up, which is a tall order), then the case load in a month's time will be 17 times 6 times what it is now. If we can't produce enough oxygen for the current cases, what will be the case in a month's time? If we think we are in a crisis, we haven't seen nothing yet!

The immediate order of the day is an immediate lockdown, as Antony Fauci recommended yesterday. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC) Corrected figures. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 22:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

References

I have updated the figures after checking the raw data. These are national figures. It is possible that places like Delhi and Bombay have experienced higher figures. But since they are under lockdown, the current growth rate should have been dampened. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

• I haven't looked into the veracity of numbers in detail, but we're certainly at the point where the triumphal tone of the Wikipedia article makes it look plain stupid in comparison to the news. Some rewriting is urgently in order. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• Agreed, and (see 3 sections up) at least some mention of Covid at Healthcare in India, and India. Johnbod (talk) 15:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Where is the tone triumphal? Is this comment about this article or related articles that link here? – SJ + 16:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

@Sj: It would appear I was reading an older version of this page. The present version, particularly in the lead, is considerably better, but some concerns remain. When discussing the post-September decline in cases, it needs to be in the context of the present increase, and use contemporary sources to frame the material. Relying on older sources has allowed some triumphalism, and some material that's just newscruft, to persist; see bits about herd immunity; initial isolation of the virus; expansion of tests; information from September about India having the largest number of tests (maybe still true, but we need a newer source); the absence of widely-reported vaccine shortages in the vaccination section; etc. I may purge some of the worst NOTNEWS material later today. Vanamonde (Talk) 18:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

That wouldn't be a bad idea. – SJ + 14:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

• I agree that we need more reliable sources talking about the validity of the statistics. I had found some earlier relating specifically to death counts and added them under the statistics section in this place COVID-19 pandemic in India#Undercounting of cases and deaths. Would some of this also qualify for the COVID-19 misinformation by governments article? It is completely missing an entry for India which seems very dubious considering what we've been seeing recently - including Dr. Harshvardhan's presence at the Patanjali event and the overall downplaying of the calamity till at least a few weeks back. The lead on that article suggests that these things would qualify India for an entry - Some downplayed the threat of the pandemic, and made false statements about preventative measures, death rates and testing within their own countries. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I agree with you Ujwal.Xankill3r. Other than that, the following article also mentions about how Ministry of Ayush spread misinformation about Covid 19 cures [44] which should be covered in the article as Ministry of Ayush is part of Indian Government. One of the point is already covered on Ministry of AYUSH wikipedia page. Jasksingh (talk) 20:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

• The article is in a sorry state for ~22,000 pageviews per day. Doesn't really do justice for the readers. Perhaps worth asking for help from the COVID WikiProject? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 09:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

A fine idea. – SJ + 14:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Oxygen shortage created by Modi Sarkar?

According to INOX, this is happening because its supplies for Delhi have been cut down by the Centre and the majority of its production has been allocated to Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. From 105 metric tonnes, its allocation to Delhi has further been reduced to 80 metric tonnes, INOX said.... “The Delhi government has issued an order to supply 125 MT to hospitals yesterday while the Centre has also issued an order yesterday, revising our allocation to only 80 MT to Delhi. What should we do?” Siddarth Jain, chief of INOX, told the court.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Kautilya3 what about this [45], [46]. It appears the Delhi HC has an entirely different opinion , looks like it's the AAP Sarkar which is equally responsible, Do go through WP:NPOV once would help a lot! The problem truly lies with logistics and not central allocation, have a read![47] AnM2002 (talk) 06:40, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Please don't start a blame game here. A supplier has testified in court that the Centre had diverted its supply to Delhi to other states. Detailed coverage of the Court's opinion appears in India Today. It says that the Centre had allocated oxygen supply to Delhi from West Bengal and Orissa, which too far away and don't arrive in time. All international newspapers have covered Delhi's oxygen shortage. It is ridiculous for India's elected government to treat its own capital city as if it is some foreign country! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 23:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Confirmed by the Supreme Court that it is Modi Sarkar's doing:

"If nothing is to be hidden, let it come before the nation how allocation and distribution is done transparently by the centre," the Supreme Court said. "The centre continues to be in contempt for not supplying 700 tonnes of oxygen to Delhi," it said.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 05:54, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Data

Weekly cases and trend lines from February and March, 2021

Vaccinations

Ourworldindata.org:

• daily doses adminsitered
• daily doses administered per 100 people.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Cases

• Weekly cases plotted on a logarithmic scale

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

It seems to me that the February trend line (blue) indicated 1 million weekly cases by around now, and the March trend line (red) indicated 2 million weekly cases by this time. So, the pandemic did accelerate between February and March, most likely due to the spread of the new variant of the virus and the mass gatherings such as Kumbh Mela. But both the trends were apparent by mid-March.

“This wave has taken all of us by surprise,” said another Union Minister. “All of a sudden, the case count went through the roof,” said a third Minister admitting, that today, “there’s a fear in almost every family across the country.”

"Surprise" because they never bothered to talk to any scientists. But it was by no means "all of a sudden". February to May is 3 months. Plenty of time for sane people to act.

And "fear" is good. Fear is what is causing the curve to plateau. If only this fear had been present in February–March, they would have done something about it. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Rural areas

Kamal Kant Pandey, a resident of Aidhe village, said he thought the situation in his village was worse than in the city. "If you tested everyone in my village of 2,700 people, at least half would be positive. So many people have cough, fever, pain in the lower back, weakness, loss of taste and smell," he said.

Deaths in Aidhe were not making it onto the official database because "there's no testing here", said Mr Pandey, who was himself sick with the virus but made a full recovery.

"Imagine, this is the prime minister's constituency and even then we are gasping for breath," he said.

In the video, a doctor (from Maharashtra) tells the BBC that in the first wave, COVID did not hit the rural areas. In this wave, it did. For the villages now, this is just the plague. Whoever lives lives. Whoever dies dies. Nothing can be done either way. Doctors there don't even have oximeters, let alone ICUs or Oxygen.

In another BBC report, also in Varansi [48], a villager says there used to be a death once in six months or a year. Now, everyday, somebody is dying.

Karan Thapar interviewed a mathematician from Middlesex, who projected that one million deaths have occurred so far in India. Unfortunately, the calculation was based on last year's data, when COVID hadn't reached the rural areas. Now that that is not the case any more, the real death toll is likely to be many times higher. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Taking cue from this I am starting a sub-section under "Impact" for rural India. I have merged some topics such as sports, entertainment and tourism to make sure the impact section doesn't turn too long. That is I am giving priority to "rural India" in impact as compared to the merged subsections. DTM (talk) 05:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Kumbh mela, part N

The sources describing this as a superspreader event have become steadily more definitive; this is the latest, though it also stops short of using the term in its own voice. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:13, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Taking cue from this, I have expanded the section Impact#Religion and have mentioned Kumbh. DTM (talk) 05:17, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Fix/Update the number of tests for May 8th, 2021

Number of tests conducted on Wikipedia (2021/05/08): 1808414 Actual number of tests conducted ICMR (2021/05/08): 1808344

Source: https://www.icmr.gov.in/pdf/covid/update/archive/ICMR_testing_update_08May2021.pdf Muzicoholicated (talk) 04:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:33, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Addition of China to international support image

A commons editor added China to the international support image. I guess this is technically correct as per this. DTM (talk) 13:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

But I can't find any acknowledgement by the Indian government online. No news article. Does that make a difference? As in does it acknowledgement make a difference to adding or leaving out China from the map in this article? DTM (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

When did tweets become reliable sources? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 13:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Tweets from verified accounts of people/organizations can be used in an WP:ABOUTSELF manner (e.g. as a source for some celebrity/government official having said X, or non-controversial facts about oneself like their birthday), and tweets from verified accounts of otherwise reliable sources are also reliable but are certainly not preferred – if say Reuters tweeted something, it's probably also in an article they published so you should use that instead. Tweets are, however, a bad source for establishing what is due. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 14:39, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

[newschant.com/india/equipment-1-million-covid-19-aid-sent-to-india-via-red-cross-china/ This text] was originally a Hindustan Times story, which seems to have been deleted for some reason. But it is available at ProQuest 2523986183. So I think it is ok to have China in the image. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:44, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

The vaccine mess

Can somebody explain what is meant by "emergency use authorisation"? To my untrained eye, it just looks a license raj. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Emergency use aurhorisation

1. .US FDA-here[49]
2. .ICMR DGCI on EUA-[50]

Will be happy to discuss any further queries and no EUA is not some 'liscense raj' Hubble-bubble, it's an important measure specifically for expedited drugs and vaccine approvals for public health emergencies like the one we are witnessing and also is globally followed by different drug regulators. cheers! AnM2002 (talk) 00:51, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

So, why is the authorisation given to a single company? And, why does manufacture have to wait for EUA? Why does one need "permission for manufacturing"? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:03, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

I think you didn't read the DGCI document clearly, EUA is given to companies who have applied for the same and provided data related to efficacy. Bharat Biotech and Serum Institute were both given EUA and Sputnik V is the third one after Dr Reddy applied for EUA, don't now when EUA was given to novovax because their's no report suggesting they even applied for it.

You can't sell drugs without the approval of the government that's common sense because if things go south it's the government which will be accountable. Pfizer and the big pharma required signing of indemnity bonds and even refused to conduct bridge studies to back the efficacy of their vaccine on Indian population and the conditions. In short it's the job of the DCGI to keep all these facets in consideration while approving a vaccine. You can't let pharma companies to inject people with something that has no statutory approval and thus no accountability that's akin to experimenting with lab rats(that too has to be approved by CDSCO and DCGI!) AnM2002 (talk) 05:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Ok, that answers the first question. The other two questions still remain unanswered. Why did the companies need to obtain "permission" for manufacturing?

Even for the first question, there are still remaining issues. While Covaxin was approved without Phase III trials, Sputnik V wasn't, even though it was already in use in 12 countries. There was also delay. Dr. Reddy's was hoping to release it in March, but it is only happening now in May. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

1. Answer to the COVAXIN related question is that the initial EUA given was in "Clinical trial mode" that is the vaccine was to be given in lesser quantities, with signing of consent form(even the PM had to sign that!) and also a much more complex monitoring system was used to study adverse effects which led to less doses of COVAXIN being administered. In short the vaccine was approved as a backup plan to COVISHIELD of SII as Dr.Randeep Guleria commented. The EUA was also given on the basis of Phase 2 trials which were also peer reviewed in the Lancet and the same was the case when Sputnik V was approved in Russia, they also accorded EUA on the basis of Phase 2 trials and there was alot of unfounded skeptiscism from the west which died down eventually when the peer review of vaccine data happened in journals including Lancet. So the skeptiscism around EUA being given to COVAXIN is unfounded as there is sufficient data now to establish its efficacy. And phase-3 trials of COVAXIN started way back in 2020 and it being a trial with more than 25,000 people they already had enough data to establish efficacy and address adverse effect doubts by the time it got EUA.

1. Coming to Sputnik as I said foreign vaccine platforms are designed keeping in mind the conditions in the native countries and it's only scientifically sound to understand how they will behave on a population which both ecological and genetically different from the one where original trials were conducted. As I said earlier this is the reason why the DCGI asked foreign vaccine makers to conduct bridge trials (not phase three studies) on Indian population(small template group) to better understand how the vaccine behaved in a new geographical and genetic disposition. That too is a general thumb rule while giving EUAs, what works in Mexico or Russia won't necessarily work in India. Dr Reddy was already in process for doing the trials just that they were not in a position to provide data which they did when they applied again in April and got the EUA. I have explained why Pfizer wasn't approve back in Jan. South Africa returned millions of astra Zeneca doses as they found it barely effective against the predominant variant there. Scandinavian and many European countries halted astra Zeneca administration due to higher repots of clotting incidents though it was cleared after some time. So it's only sound to atleast have some idea about how the vaccine will behave and hence bridge studies are conducted. COVAXIN was developed in India and has been found to neutralize the predominant indian strain B1617 as Dr. Fauci commented.
2. Now it's only common sense for companies to start the production only when they have faith in their initial efficacy studies because if they fail to get EUA the huge investment done will just go down the drain. Nonetheless, companies started producing the substrates as well as the vaccines way back in July-August(SII's COVISHIELD). Zydus which is going to submit the data and apply for EUA by mid-May has already started manufacturing their candidate. It's just the production is obviously restricted due to fear of losing on invested capital. SII had to reimburse the full amount the South African government payed it after they returned the astra Zeneca vaccine(was around 5-6million USD). This has nothing to do with EUA or permissions that's just a company managing it's production strategy keeping in mind various constraints after all it's a vaccine they are manufacturing, there's already a huge anti-vax movement around the globe even with so many regulations in place to prevent any mishap. I hope this answers your questions!

-- AnM2002 (talk) 18:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi AnM2002, the question is not so much about who got approvals and who didn't. Rather, the issue is that the government was hoping to fill some 80% of its vaccine supply from Novavax, which never arrived. What did the government do to fill this hole? Where is the vaccine that the Indian population needs? India has so far vaccinated about 2% of the population, in comparison to UK and US, which vaccinated close to 50% or more. We don't see anything resembling a plan from the government for doing any kind of a reasonable job. On top of this abysmal performance, the government has also been claiming silly titles like "Vishwaguru" and "pharmacy of the world" and what not. It is all so buffonery. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Kautilya3 I answered the questions which you asked related to approvals and EUA, can't get engrossed in a good for nothing blame game when it's a collective effort to fight the Pandemic.

1. The Novovax thing I have no idea about because it wasn't really that much in news so will have to see what that was about. And it's not a piece of cake to develop a vaccine against a fast mutating virus. BioNtech and Moderna too were upstart companies betting on an entirely new concept in Vaccine development(mRNA tech) can't just say who is upstart and who isn't. Blame games are better suited for twitter and not an encyclopaedia.
2. Secondly, it's a daunting task to vaccinate 1.38 billion people which is practically impossible! The government's strategy from the beginning was to vaccinate the most vulnerable sections which were either immunologically vulnerable like old people and people with co morbidities or occupationally vulnerable like FLWs and HCWs. And it's only logical to protect the one's with higher chances of getting seriously ill with the virus. It's well established that 85% of the infections from covid are mild and treated easily it's the rest 15% we need to worry about. We are still the fastest country of large proportion(more than 160 million doses) to administer vaccine doses when compared to China and US.
3. US, UK hoarded the vaccines in the first place and even resorted to imposing embargos on vaccine raw material(specifically for NOVOVAX). SII doesn't own the IP for NOVOVAX and COVISHIELD so there's nothing much they could have done about the quantities to be supplied. Yes they can make alterations to COVAXIN production and it's already being done(Hefkin).
4. The government said from the very beginning that not everyone will get a vaccine in the first place. The vaccine hesitancy in the initial phases with about 50 million vaccine doses wasted until March only deepened the crisis coupled with reckless and totally bizarre comments made by leaders like Akhilesh Yadav and et.al. Now everyone's in the eye of the storm so they start rushing to get vaccinated. This is really a collective effort blaming just the government is running away from one's duty as a citizen.
5. And UK, US's population is miniscule when compared to India's so it's better to find solutions rather than faults. And well it's good that rather than wasting the Vaccine we gave it to others in need and not hoarded them like the learned West don't know who should be called Vishwaguru those who hoard or those who help. If there are anymore questions apart from the blame game do let me know! Good day!AnM2002 (talk) 02:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Well, defending the government is also meant for Twitter, not Wikipedia. Here we take an objective view. Objectively, the fact that there was an 80% hole in India's vaccine supply and the government moved so slowly in securing Sputnik V supplies don't gell. That is not a sign of a responsible government. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

[51] AnM2002 (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

References

The backstory

The backstory of vaccine procurement apparently happened last year. India Today wrote "India moves fastest" to procure vaccine supplies. But it turns out that India was betting hugely on Novavax, an upstart company. Serum Institute was licensing both Novavax and AstraZeneca vaccines, and these were the only vaccines that India booked. Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket. Something like 80% of the procurement was going to be Novavax and the rest was AstraZeneca.

Come 2021, and Novavax is nowhere here. So the country had to fall back on Astra Zeneca. It looks like the Serum Institute was mostly planning AstraZeneca for export and private use (read expensive), while the cheaper Novavax would be for ordinary Indians. With Novavax having bombed, the country is having to fall back on Astra Zeneca. The Serum Institute is being squeezed and its exports have been blocked. The Left is crying that it is charging too much money. Adar Poonawalla gives all indication of being fed up and he is moving his production abroad. What a mess! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Addition of images

Before placing the images in which the Defence Minister and Prime Minister are visible, I had a glace through related COVID-19 articles for other countries. Some of them have heads of state and other dignitaries relevant officials. Some are completely absent of such images. (This explanation as per this edit in which a image was removed). DTM (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Please discuss and obtain WP:CONSENSUS before adding any images of Narendra Modi or any other politician. While all the reliable sources are hammering the government on what an abysmal job it has been doing, trying to tom-tom their achievements is a serious violation of WP:NPOV. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 10:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I have no idea why an image of the PM of India talking to a bunch oxygen manufacturers is puffery or an NPOV violation. It's a very innocent illustration of a bunch of private sector representatives getting together in one photo. The image is fine – we should try to be an encyclopedia, not a battleground to continue IRL disputes and make sure the world knows which politicians we dislike and understands "what an abysmal job" they've been doing. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 11:40, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

An encyclopedia summarises what the reliable sources state, in due proportion to their preponderance. I suggest you start by explaining what reliable sources you have surveyed. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 12:35, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I am fine either way. Both sides have their reasons. I have added two more images, neutral ones, healthcare workers in PPE and a priest with a mask; hope these are fine. Why are we not removing the defence ministers image? DTM (talk) 13:11, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I really don't understand what you're trying to say. It's just an image of a bunch of private sector representatives in a zoom call. What do you think is being stated by that picture that conflicts with the preponderance of reliable sources? It's a picture, it's not really stating much. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

WP:ONUS rests on those who want to include content to demonstrate that it is worthy. If it is "just an image", why are you going on about it? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

See MOS:IMAGES, images are meant to be illustrative aids to the content of the article, in this case the efforts of private companies to come together and donate resources/labour to help with the pandemic described in that section. You seem to think the image is making some statement about Modi not supported by the preponderance of reliable sources, which is not the case. There's no policy based reason to institute the standard of No pictures of Narendra Modi for an article, if you don't like someone Wikipedia is not the place to grind your axe. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 14:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

There is. It is called WP:NPOV and WP:DUE. So far you have't produced a single source to justify the inclusion of the image. These are not the ways of a Wikipedian. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:31, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I still don't understand what you're actually trying to argue. For a random example, this featured picture: [52] is the first image in the article Bridge. Do you think this image is undue, or in violation of WP:NPOV? Do you think we'd need a preponderance of reliable sources to come out and say that the Wiesen Viaduct is the most bridgiest bridge that ever existed before we can put an image of it in the article? I mean... it's just a picture of a bridge. The point of it is to serve as an illustrative aid to the content in the article, which it does.

MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE is the relevant guideline here. What do you mean when you say that you need to establish that there exists a preponderance of reliable sources (saying what, exactly?) before any image in this article can include Modi? What actual claim do you want to see reliable sources make before you'd no longer support a ban on images of the Prime Minister of India in an article about the COVID-19 pandemic in India? This specific image illustrates what this section of the article is talking about (private companies coming together and donating/collaborating/etc), and its not unsourced, it's sourced to the Press Information Bureau. What kind of source do you think would justify the inclusion of the image that you don't think exists? I don't really understand what you're trying to say. ‑‑Volteer1 (talk) 19:30, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Preponderance of reliable sources saying what exactly? That the Prime Minister Narenda Modi has been doing a brilliant job of managing the pandemic. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

The section itself does not even name Modi - I don't see why we need a picture of him there. It would be completely out of place, and as Kautilya3 pointed out WP:NPOV and WP:UNDUE. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

So inclusion of the image of the defence minister means he is doing a good job? Why can't inclusion simply mean "this event has happened"? Further, there is an entire line already in the text related to the image in consideration "On 23 April, Modi met via videoconference with liquid oxygen suppliers, where he acknowledged the need to "provide solutions in a very short time", and acknowledged efforts such as increases in production, and the use of rail (with the Indian Railways transporting tankers via "Oxygen Express" trains)[83] and air transport to deliver oxygen supplies" signifying that previous editors have considered that this event is important enough for this much of detailing. DTM (talk) 00:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

The image was added to the section for Private Sector and not to the section on the 2021 timeline that includes the text you have quoted. Even there including that image may not make sense as the event (the meeting) is a very minor part of the whole section. As far as the image of the defence minister goes it is attached to the section on the Military and is therefore far more relevant to the section. It may still be a bad fit for the article and I would invite other editors to make an argument for its inclusion/exclusion. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 04:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Event happening is certainly not enough grounds for advertising it via an image. Many events have happened since the pandemic began. If Modi's management of the oxygen supply gets evidenced and acknowledged by secondary sources, then we might consider it, not until then. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

• A good summary of Modi's accomplishments can be found here:

• Tanishka Sodhi, Why is Modi getting such bad international press?, Newslaundry, 11 May 2021.

-- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

18+ vaccination

@AnM2002: you have apparently changed the text:

Critics viewed this as a politcal decision because the requisite vaccine supplies for this range of population were simply not available.

to

The decision was criticised as adequate vaccine supplies for this range of population were simply not available at the time.

Can you explain why? -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:59, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Ye sure, how is a policy decision on immunization a political decision ? If it had been political it would've been done quite a while back. I think it's more appropriate and neutrally sound to mention that the decision didn't go well because of lower vaccine supplies. There is no need for terming policy decisions as political gimmicks. Such vagueness is better suited to newspapers and tabloids. The politically influenced thing is just a probable accusation that a person made(according to the source you cited), it's just giving undue weight. If you have any problem with the current phrasing please go ahead and discuss.AnM2002 (talk) 02:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

And for the time it's written with the rationale that vaccine supplies for the age group have been limited but doesn't mean they'll remain so down the road. This is an encyclopedia, people are going to read these articles even 10 years from now, I don't know what objective does it fulfill to generalise the statement like this. AnM2002 (talk) 02:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I didn't call it a "political gimmick" even though it is obvious to all sane people that that is what it was. But political decision it certainly was. The cited source said:

It has been an issue of hurried and arguably, politically influenced planning, while this should essentially be a public health decision. That’s why a written plan with details on various aspects, such as supply forecast, could have made the difference.

And there is a lot more info available if you dig:

It remains unclear why the Centre chose to open up to 18+ – unless the leadership was simply giving in to political pressure.

This prompted Modi to take a political decision on both these fronts on Monday after marathon meetings with his top bureaucratic team on vaccination and the BJP top brass on the West Bengal elections. There was a sense inside the party that the public sentiment seemed to run afoul of vaccination not being available for the younger working population amidst a strong second wave which is infecting the young more. The government is now describing the new step as starting the “world’s most liberal vaccination program" from May 1.... The course-correction on both the vaccination and the election campaign is a rare occasion when the Modi-led BJP has reconsidered its position with a political call.

"We will be well into 2022 before India has enough vaccine supply. Even with supply, there will be distribution and vaccination challenges. India will have to rely on other public health measures to gain and maintain control over the pandemic," observed Udaykumar.

Concurred John, "The only way out is social vaccine. Universal mask-wearing and non-crowding are key behaviours. This is inexpensive, yet highly effective to reduce infections. But for the leaders, these may look not sensational enough."

The quote from Udaykumar tells you that your "at the time" whitewashing is a bare-faced lie. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 08:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Related to Udaykumar and others saying India will be well into 2022, 2023, 2024 by the time it vaccinates everyone; the center has given a counter recently on 13 May 2021: India to have over 2 billion vaccine doses during August-December. Whether this is just a political statement or not will be decided in December.

As for social vaccines, distancing, crowd control — these are NOT as inexpensive as T Jacob John is portraying them to be. Since when was behavior change inexpensive? DTM (talk) 12:44, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

First of all, the Centre is not a reliable source, especially not in times like this. Second, the Centre's claims have been trashed already.

Even BBC is now on to the Centre's botched job. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:50, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

A close examination of all the complicated deal-making of SII also shows that the current export ban of India is not sustainable. 50% of its manufacture is committed to COVAX because they invested in its production while India was twiddling its thumbs. They are keeping quiet for now because India going through a miserable time. But once the cases come down, they will compel SII to keep to its commitment. India can only get half its production. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Meanwhile Modi is busy arresting people that question him [53]. This is what passes for "democracy" in India these days. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 15:45, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Well the very fact people can complain, question, criticise and rant so vehemently about these things(ignoring all what the government has to say including their own duties as citizens!) is a living testimony to India's Democracy and Freedoms! if this isn't democracy enough don't know what Eutopia is being fantasised for here! AnM2002 (talk) 11:39, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Covid -19

I want to change (edit) something to this wikipedia DNA CLICK (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2021

DNA CLICK (talk) 15:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Quote box related to death count

I want to place this line by PM Modi in a quote box in the section "Undercounting of cases and deaths", "states should be encouraged to report their numbers transparently without any pressure of high numbers showing adversely on their efforts" -PM Modi (15 May 2021). Quote box, or leave it as it is, inline? DTM (talk) 17:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I question whether the quote is necessary at all; I certainly don't think it should be in a quote box. Quotes should be used (in all writing, not just on Wikipedia) to provide illustration of things that cannot adequately be conveyed by paraphrased prose. Further, quotes are worth including when they add something substantive. Here, we have Modi saying states should report accurate death tolls. It's a reasonable thing to say, as a Prime Minister, but it doesn't add anything substantive to the article, and even if it's included, is trivial to paraphrase. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Reasonable. DTM (talk) 13:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Request for new section on → Rise in cases of Black Fungus

There has been a rise in serious fungal infection called Mucormycosis (or black fungus). The cases were reported in patients who had recovered from COVID-19. There is a possible connection with type-2 diabetes and with the use of corticosteroids that would weaken the immune system and promote the black fungus infection. There seems a direct causal link to SARS-CoV-2 virus itself and we can find reliable sources on this and also here a The BMJ news story which confirms a rise in cases of mucormycosis in India in patients who had been recently treated for COVID-19. The BMJ article also mentions that the Indian Medical Association (IMA) has warned people not to smear cow dung and urine over the body or face, a practice which some believe protects against the virus. A BBC article reported that three hospitals in Mumbai saw 40 cases of the fungal infection in April, and Surat, a city in Gujarat, reported 40 cases . It is being reported by the Hindustan Times that in Maharashtra, there have been over 2,000 cases of mucormycosis and 8 deaths. Cases were also reported in Delhi.

I request if anyone well acquainted with this can expand and add at a suitable place in the form of section/sub-section on the page. Thank you. Run n Fly (talk) 17:08, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

@Vanamonde93, DiplomatTesterMan, and Kautilya3: What do you think? Run n Fly (talk) 17:40, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Run n Fly; While deadly and tragic, black fungus doesn't need its own "section" in this article. However a section called something like "Side effects of covid treatments" can be created. The BMJ article doesn't cover Black fungus in detail and the linkage is not scientifically proven as understood by this sentence: Some doctors blame overuse of steroids to treat covid-19, while others suggest the virus itself is the immunosuppressive factor helping the fungus to spread. While this article should remain a summary, and there are a number of sub articles related to the covid pandemic in India, I am not sure which other article could fit this topic. Also, why you have tucked the line related to cows in the middle (?). DTM (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

DiplomatTesterMan, I forwarded the request from this discussion Talk:Lineage_B.1.617#Rise_in_cases_of_Black_Fungus Run n Fly (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

It looks like this problem is ready for prime time now [54]. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Related to placing a table in the article

Under the 'Response' section, I would like to place this table, (maybe in a collapsed/hidden state and aligned to the right). Is there any better format to present this data? Any comments?

Empowered Groups, Task Forces and Committees set up in India to tackle various aspects of the pandemic

Date	Name	Members	Notes	Ref
2020
29 Mar	11 Empowered Groups	Representatives from the Prime Minister’s Office and the cabinet secretariat. Headed by Secretary level officers, Niti Aayog members including Amitabh Kant.	Set up under Disaster Management Act 2005; 11 empowered groups set up to ensure quick decision making related to the pandemic and coordinate response.
7 April	National Task Force for COVID-19	Headed by Randeep Guleria	Set up by ICMR; terms of reference includes "identifying research priorities, review evidence, align research with level of outbreak and response; identify and create protocol; develop concept notes and identify partners for implementation".
14 April	Vaccine Task Force	Co-chaired by VK Paul and PSA K. VijayRaghavan	Set up by the Prime Minister’s Office; until 3 May 2021, 23 meetings of the VTF have been held.
~31 May	National Covid-19 Supermodel Committee	M Vidyasagar, Manindra Agrawal, Lt Gen Madhuri Kanitkar, Biman Bagchi, Arup Bose, Gagandeep Kang, Sankar K Pal.	Set up under the Department of Science and Technology; forecasting and modelling related to the pandemic.
12 Aug	National Expert Group on Vaccine Administration for COVID-19 (NEGVAC)	Headed by VK Paul	Vaccine delivery strategy.
14 Sept	6 Empowered Groups (reconstituted)	Headed by V.K. Paul, Guruprasad Mahapatra, Amitabh Kant, Tarun Bajaj, Ajay Bhalla	The 11 empowered groups set up on 29 March 2020 were reconstituted into 6 EGs. The groups had also undergone modification in May 2020.
2021
9 May	National Task Force	Devi Shetty, Gagandeep Kang, Naresh Trehan, Saumitra Rawat, Shiv Kumar Sarin, Zarir Udwadia	Set up by the Supreme Court of India; "to facilitate a public health response to the pandemic based on scientific and specialised domain knowledge" and oxygen related issues.
Other bodies include the 'Indian SARS-CoV-2 Genome Sequencing Consortia'.

DTM (talk) 04:42, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

References

• It can be made into a bullet list but I think the above table is more informative and easier to comprehend. Shouldn't NTAGI be included too ? AnM2002 (talk) 08:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

AnM2002; I have not included the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (NTAGI) since it was established in 2001. While NTAGI is playing a role during this pandemic, the table currently only consists of bodies formed during this pandemic. So maybe it can be placed inline rather than in this table. Lets see. DTM (talk) 13:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

I concur, that seems reasonable given the table deals only with the current crisis at hand. But Group of Ministers on CoVID-19 should definitely be included here being the apex grouping below only the Union cabinet, some info about it[55] :) AnM2002 (talk) 11:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Included. DTM (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

• Table is better. But we also need an explanation of why all this brain power fell down disastrously. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

In progress. DTM (talk) 13:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Operation Namaste into COVID-19 pandemic in India

This page (Operation Namaste) was created during the first wave. Since then India's military has extensively expanded the scope of its relief and assistance. The second wave coverage of the Army does not use widely use the word "Namaste". This can easily find space in the section COVID-19_pandemic_in_India#Military DTM (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Created the redirect. Done. DTM (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Renaming of headers (suggestions sought)

"Health care and testing" is the main response during this pandemic and accordingly it occupies a prominent position near the top of the article. However the content also falls under the subsequent section header titled "Response". I do not support shifting "Response" up, in other words placing "Health care and testing" as a sub header under "Response".

How about renaming the "Response" section as "Other responses"? DTM (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I don't think these divisions make sense. Pandemic is managed mostly by administrative measures. I suggest combining all of them into one responses section. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Hmm. Makes sense.

Before I get to this, are you (anyone else) seeing the error: "Lua error: not enough memory." in bright red? I'm seeing hundreds of them. DTM (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Post-first-wave/ Pre-second-wave quotes

The period between the end of the first wave and the second wave needs a few lines. There are two quotes which have some significance in this regard.

Quote 1: India "has saved the world from disaster..." (Prime Minister Modi, 28 January 2021)
(PM Modi addressing the World Economic Forum’s Davos Dialogue via video conferencing, in New Delhi on January 28, 2021)

"The country, which comprises of 18% of the world's population, has saved the world from disaster by bringing the situation under control" PM Modi addressing the WEF on 28 Jan 2021

Quote 2: We are in the "endgame" of Covid-19 pandemic in India (Union Minister Harsh Vardhan, 8 March 2021)
(Union Minister Harsh Vardhan speaking at the Delhi Medical Association's 62nd Annual Delhi State Medical Conference MEDICON 2021 on 8 March 2021)

Are these two quotes suitable for inclusion? DTM (talk) 13:24, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

They can even be placed in this one: Indian government response to the COVID-19 pandemic DTM (talk) 13:25, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Quote 3: "I have never ever seen such huge crowds at a rally. Today, in all directions, I have seen such a rally for the first time...today you have shown such a force, such power...wherever I see I just see people." – Narendra Modi addressing an election rally in Asansol, 17 April 2021 (however in this quote he isn't speaking as the PM is he?) DTM (talk) 13:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, all these statements have been quoted numerous times by news reports and analyst commentaries. However, none of them can be made into a quotebox. They have to be used in the narrative. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

And used in memes! DTM (talk) 14:22, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

References

Lua error: not enough memory

As asked over at Village pump technical, to sort out "Lua error: not enough memory" the article will have to be made "smaller and/or less complex" and that "It's not about the raw size of the article, but rather the amount of time the various modules transcluded onto the page take to execute." DTM (talk) 13:54, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

The error starts from citation 59. DTM (talk) 13:56, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

And starts from this revision of the page DTM (talk) 15:09, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia_talk:Lua#Lua_error:_not_enough_memory. the error was created by the removal of the {{Update|date=April 2021}} template. DTM (talk) 08:35, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Transclusion

On a mobile, the transcluded "Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/India medical cases chart" does not show a minimized version of the chart as is shown on a desktop. All the dates are shown. DTM (talk) 14:06, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Duplication of content

Jose Mathew C; the content you added related to Ganges has already been placed in "Impact". Do we keep this duplication of content? Do you want to shift it to one location? Or let it be? (This has happened in a few other places as well in the article and needs sorting, but that aside). DTM (talk) 14:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

My opinion is that it should be mentioned as a single line in the timeline section, and more details given in Impact - Rural and Semi-rural India, since it is relevant in both places. But if we want to avoid duplication, move everything to Impact. -Jose Mathew (talk) 04:30, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion 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.

---

I propose to merge the following pages:

• COVID-19 pandemic in Arunachal Pradesh
• COVID-19 pandemic in Chhattisgarh
• COVID-19 pandemic in Goa
• COVID-19 pandemic in Gujarat
• COVID-19 pandemic in Haryana
• COVID-19 pandemic in Jharkhand
• COVID-19 pandemic in Manipur
• COVID-19 pandemic in Meghalaya
• COVID-19 pandemic in Mizoram
• COVID-19 pandemic in Nagaland
• COVID-19 pandemic in Sikkim
• COVID-19 pandemic in Telangana
• COVID-19 pandemic in Tripura
• COVID-19 pandemic in Uttarakhand
• COVID-19 pandemic in West Bengal
• COVID-19 pandemic in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands
• COVID-19 pandemic in Chandigarh
• COVID-19 pandemic in Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu
• COVID-19 pandemic in Jammu and Kashmir
• COVID-19 pandemic in Ladakh
• COVID-19 pandemic in Lakshadweep
• COVID-19 pandemic in Puducherry

into COVID-19 pandemic in India. These articles are in essence just a list of statistics; there's very, very little actual readable prose– even then the vast majority of the text is copied and pasted onto every article. Note that are there are some article on Indian states that are very well written, with plenty of content such as COVID-19 pandemic in Kerala, but per WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS this should not be an argument to keep these articles. – SɱαɾƚყPαɳƚʂ22 (Ⓣⓐⓛⓚ) 12:58, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

• I support this proposal. They can be redirected here and any important info can be taken from the history of these articles. Srijanx22 (talk) 15:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose - just because they're stubs doesn't mean they shouldn't exist. Given the importance of the pandemic, there is surely information out there on all of these states, as evidenced by Kerala being in such good shape. The main article being 177kb means it shouldn't incorporate any more new content. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 15:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• I think it's better that this article not try to cover everything happening in every city, union territory and state. It would just become overwhelming. Those articles need improvements, but almost certainly they can be expanded with info on the local response. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose the ones I visited all looked fine to me. Wiki is not paper; we need a simple place to attach details about locales -- there are independent data sources for the stats, and local news for relevant news. State or province level pages seem appropriate, even city level for large cities. – SJ + 16:42, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

  I removed the extremely long banner message about this proposed merge; confusing to readers, and this is a high-traffic page. – SJ + 16:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose - This article is already pretty long and complicated, and it is still missing a lot of essential information. We don't mess it up more with the state-specific material, which is of varying quality. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 16:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
• Strongly Oppose. For instance, Goa (where our Wikipedians of Goa User Group is active) is 1/1000th the size of India (approx 1.6 million as against 1.3 billion population). Our issues would get wholly submerged if it was put into such a big pool. Plus the idea is that the Wikipedia allows for specialisation of topics, and going into all the details required. If the logic for merger was right, all of the Wikipedia would be just one giant page. After all, everything is related to everything else, no? Thanks to cyberspace, we have the space, time and interest to go into much more detail now. Let's not forfeit that. Fredericknoronha (talk) 11:38, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. The article is already fairly long. It also had performance issues in the past and editors had to reduce some of that load. It would be best if we prevent that from happening again. You can check the previous discussion here - Talk:COVID-19_pandemic_in_India/Archive_6#Page_performance. - Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 13:05, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose. The individual pages can always be expanded by editors of those respective states' WikiProjects. KyloRen3 (talk) 19:53, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose per all above arguments.--Ankit (Talk with me) 20:10, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

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.

Which section?

Which section do I place this in— "Provision of Rs 35,000 crore made for Covid-19 vaccine in BE 2021-22." (Budget 2021-22).

• COVID-19_pandemic_in_India#Timeline
• COVID-19_pandemic_in_India#Vaccination

DTM (talk) 13:31, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Or maybe we can create a new sub-section under Impact#Health Budget.

"Therefore, the Union health budget still remains at about 0.34% of GDP – a slight increase from 0.31% last year (BE)."

Or could all this including mention of "PM Atmanirbhar Swasth Bharat Yojana" go into the section "Preparations for another wave"?

Or maybe all this is too unrelated? DTM (talk) 13:56, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

This could even go in the section "Response shortages and criticism". DTM (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

It should go into the Vaccination section, along with all other discussion of the government's vaccine procurement. If there is too much of it, we can spin it out into another section. But for now, that is the place. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes. As a side point, the current subsections on vaccination are well written, good to the point summaries. And of course, another section or it can also be added to COVID-19 vaccination in India. DTM (talk) 16:45, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

And I am glad to see your jocular self back again :-) -- Kautilya3 (talk) 17:15, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

References

First confirmed case of COVID-19 infection in India

I just wanted to highlight this reference about the "First confirmed case of COVID-19 infection in India". It surely goes into the article to back up that initial line in #2020: On 30 January 2020, India reported its first case of COVID-19 in Thrissur, Kerala,. An unexpected level of detail! DTM (talk) 14:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Added in Lead -Jose Mathew (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! DTM (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Image placement

India's two waves versus Delhi's four

I have placed an image of a chart at the beginning of the section #Timeline#2021 with a size of 478x478px (larger than the standard thumb).

Q1. Is the placement alright? Q2. Is the larger size alright? Q3. Should the below version be added instead; with wave numbers? (as shown in the image)

India's two waves versus Delhi's four waves in the same time period taking into account daily COVID-19 cases

Q4. Should the image be removed (considering that a lot of charts have been moved to the statistics article)? DTM (talk) 16:38, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

A country to country comparison could also be considered. DTM (talk) 16:55, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

It is all good! -- Kautilya3 (talk) 21:39, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Vaccine hesitancy among health workers?

I have re-written the section for "Vaccination policy and distribution". Phase 1 states (cited in the article):

Phase 1 started on 16 January 2021 and targeted health workers first followed by frontline workers. Phase 1 was to be completed by 31 March. On 3 April, registrations for this group was closed. 67% of health, frontline workers received at least one dose; taking into account registered health and frontline workers, the number of fully vaccinated is 47%.

The reasons given in the Times of India article include "slow mobilisation" and... and "there were still some who remained hesitant and did not come..". I'm not sure if they are talking about health workers or frontline workers, but vaccine hesitancy among health workers sounds so contradictory. The article doesn't elaborate much on why the distribution of vaccines among this group is only ~50% at best for the registered ones. DTM (talk) 12:56, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Quote

Still in search of a quote box to add to the article. This may be a bit too much and unrelated to add to the article. SC has some good ones.

Quotes on the Ganga during the 1918 flu

• The River Ganga was swollen with dead bodies...
• ...numberless bodies were thrown into the rivers of the province...
• ...The Ganga, lifeline of major civilisations, flowed with death in its midst...

Quotes by Suryakant Tripathi (Nirala), Norman White and Chinmay Tumbe on the 1918 Spanish flu,

DTM (talk) 13:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Lacking funeral pyre photos

It looks like Commons and Flickr do not currently contain any photos of funeral pyres in India during the recent wave. These would be strong visuals for this page and COVID-19 pandemic if anyone has taken any and would be willing to upload them. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Shifting template to another section

Is it ok to shift Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/India medical cases chart from #Timeline to #Statistics? DTM (talk) 14:48, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

International Aid

The map here says that the UK has sent support, but it is not listed amongst countries that have sent something. Either the map or the text should be altered so they are both consistent and correct.LastDodo (talk) 15:11, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Auto-creation of Universal Health ID (UHID)

It has been revealed that registering for the vaccine using one's Aadhaar card automatically registers the person for a UHID without asking for their consent. I feel like this is important info that needs to be added to the article but not sure under what section.[56] -Ujwal.Xankill3r (talk) 05:26, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 July 2021

The second wave of COVID-19 in India is India's worst disaster since the Partition of India. Rex2404 (talk) 15:57, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Please provide reliable sources and also indicate the where and the exact wording of your desired edit. --RegentsPark (comment) 16:01, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

A list of COVID-19 stats and responses by state/territory

There are articles about COVID-19 by state/territory that don't seem to connect with anything. I put a link to a list of them in "See Also". I could use a hand making it look nicer. It is here. I think such a directory will improve the article and help people zoom in by territory/state if they don't do a unique search. Nellas Galadhon (talk) 17:42, 26 July 2021 (UTC)