Talk:Human metapneumovirus

Viruses High‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Human metapneumovirus be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Modulation of immune response

doi:10.1128/CMR.00081-15 JFW | T@lk 08:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive cites

The 'Epidemiology' section has some pretty massive overciting. While there's nothing wrong with that, I know that it is generally discouraged. Can someone with expertise in these matters either expand the section to spread out what each specific ref is citing, or trim them down to the most relevant cites? I have zero expertise in these disciplines, so I can't make an informed judgement as to what is most relevant. Anastrophe (talk) 22:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Post Covid respiratory response to to this virus

Post Covid patients respiratory response and length of illness to this virus seems much more severe than to those never infected with Covid 2600:6C40:1300:5BE1:564:19E8:99C4:27D1 (talk) 01:41, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source? Citation? Anything more than just a random claim? Anastrophe (talk) 03:20, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we justify a "this article has at least one issue?"

Afaik, Wikipedia does not speak in terms of first person pronouns. Several sections have "We ..." passages. I am in to place to correct this myself. Ellenor2000 (talk) 22:18, 3 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you're willing, yes please. They're probably the result of just broad copying from the original papers without rewording. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:14, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vacillation between "hMPV" and "HMPV"

The article should stick to one or the other in my opinion. I don't know which one is the 'official' designation. There are 59 iterations of the character string in the article (including in refs). 25 are "HMPV", 34 are "hMPV". cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 03:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]