Jump to content

Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2020

Jamaica now has 36 cases. https://twitter.com/christufton/status/1244431775553720321> https://twitter.com/christufton/status/1244477325712019456 72.252.112.184 (talk) 07:45, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Twitter is not considered a reliable source. Nguyen QuocTrung (talk) 07:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Nguyen QuocTrung: Note that tweets from official accounts (e.g. Ministry of Health) are perfectly valid. --MarioGom (talk) 08:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Linked tweet is not by verified account—updated to 34 cases as per https://www.moh.gov.jm/covid-19-update-jamaica-now-has-34-cases/.--17jiangz1 (talk) 09:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Cruise Ships

The addition of the Zaandam raises an issue. We started with the Diamond Princess, even though its passengers have mostly? been repatriated and in many cases subsumed into their country totals. But there are many cruise ships out there that have cases, and which are not included in any country’s total. Some are looking for a port to accept them. How should we deal with them? Have a category Cruise Ships, total them, and footnote the names? Omit them? There are two ships turned away from Western Australia in the past 2 days. I know of another off Peru. There must be dozens more. I don’t see that they should each be added to the country list. Ideas? Ptilinopus (talk) 20:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Let's see what reliable sources report. The Diamond Princess case is still reported separately by the World Health Organization even today. It seems the MS Braemar is still counted in Cuba since they were evacuated (as opposed to the Diamond Princess). --MarioGom (talk) 22:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
The people from Diamond Princess who are Australians, and have repatriated are counted in Australia, so need to be subtracted all the time. I wonder if this is true for any other countries? But I was referring to ships like Zaandam which are not in port but still at sea, and not being counted anywhere. Ptilinopus (talk) 01:27, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I notice that the numbers on the Diamond Princess have changed. There are 40 less cases, 1 less death and 2 less recovered. I can find no reference where these numbers have been transferred to, or that the original figures were an error. Ptilinopus (talk) 12:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The correct death toll from the Diamond Princess is 12. One evacuee died in Australia on 1 Mar[1] and 11 passengers died in Japan:

References

  1. ^ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/01/dutton-says-extending-travel-ban-not-possible-and-defends-coronavirus-response
  2. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  3. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  4. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  5. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  6. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  7. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  8. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  9. ^ "横浜港で検疫中のクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).
  10. ^ "横浜港で検疫を行ったクルーズ船に関連した患者の死亡について". Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (Press release) (in Japanese).

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2020

Please update San Marino counts according to official source http://www.iss.sm/on-line/home/artCataggiornamenti-coronavirus.49004093.1.20.1.html as follows: 230 confirmed, 25 deaths, 13 recovered. 😷 garyCZEk 📢 ✍ ｛🧒👧👦🚲💻🚗🍣｝ 13:01, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

@Garyczek:  Done. Thanks! --17jiangz1 (talk) 19:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Denmark

Following the New Consensus on territory/dependency splits, I note that the figures given for Denmark include the figures for the split dependencies of Faroe Islands and Greenland. The figure for Denmark (cases) in the table is 2,755. The article on Denmark (see table "New COVID-19 cases in Denmark, including Faroe Islands and Greenland") specifically states this figure includes Faroe Is (178) and Greenland (10). Removing these entities leaves Denmark with 2577 cases which is what the summary box "2020 coronavirus pandemic in Denmark (mainland)" in Denmark states. Ptilinopus (talk) 23:24, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Update: Panama

Panama has 1075 confirmed cases, 27 deaths and 9 recovered. Source: https://www.laestrella.com.pa/nacional/200330/panama-suma-1-075-casos-endurece-cuarentena-frenar-covid-19 190.219.162.190 (talk) 23:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Updated, thank you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:37, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Update Kosovo

As per the source for Kosovo [1], it now has 106 confirmed cases, and still remains at 1 death and 1 recovery. --Ratherous (talk) 00:10, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Updated, thank you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Beijing's specious numbers

See also: fr:Wikipédia:Le Bistro/30 mars 2020 § Appel à un peu de prudence vis-à-vis des sources, see also, and Talk:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic_in_Hubei § Claims_of_huge_(factor_of_30)_underestimate_of_COVID-19_death_count_in_Wuhan

Can we finally stop treating China's numbers (especially deaths) as anything other than unvarnished propaganda?[1]--2601:444:380:8C00:459B:B2B0:DC04:92DF (talk) 03:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

We just put in the numbers reported. The same applies to other countries that may have limited testing, or no reporting, we put in the numbers reported. If you have a better source of info for China, please let us know. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:02, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
The addition of a superscript note indicating that Beijing's data is considered unreliable will do. Skeptical RS is bountiful, runs the gamut of the political spectrum, and dare I say even constitutes a consensus view among those who broach the subject. [2][3][4][5][6][7]
--2601:444:380:8C00:459B:B2B0:DC04:92DF (talk) 04:42, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately we can only use what reliable sources tell us. Though I wouldn't call anything from the Mainland reliable... --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Boy, aren't we in luck! There's a big, fat list of 'em right down here. Swipe all you want.--2601:444:380:8C00:9415:9BA6:C82A:F63F (talk) 05:41, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Same concerns apply equally to a lot of countries. No thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:13, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Other countries lynching negros too is not an excuse for Wikipedia to shirk its duty to promote reliable data. If multiple countries are malfeasing, then multiple superscript notes may be required, perhaps leading to entire new articles.--Froglich (talk) 19:53, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
We go with what reliable sources says. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Which of the source below do you consider to be unreliable, and what is your criteria?--2601:444:380:8C00:1DDA:35CC:396A:A484 (talk) 04:46, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
I stopped checking your source list after a few of them. None of them presents any claim against Government figures. Al Jazeera actually seems to give full credibility to them. They collect different criticism to China's crisis management, not their statistics. If you really want to make the case for a footnote on China, please, provide proper sources and, if possible, concise quotes. Thank you. --MarioGom (talk) 15:03, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
"None of them presents any claim against Government figures." ...meaning that no reliable sources are as reliable as government sources, even should said government be a prevaricating communist regime with a record of world-trophy-class lying over seventy years long.--68.63.214.165 (talk) 05:11, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://web.archive.org/web/20200328022919/http://shanghaiist.com/2020/03/27/urns-in-wuhan-far-exceed-death-toll-raising-more-questions-about-chinas-tally/
  2. ^ https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-03-09/china-boasts-abroad-of-victory-over-coronavirus-as-quarantine-hotel-collapses-and-domestic-anger-simmers
  3. ^ https://www.propublica.org/article/how-china-built-a-twitter-propaganda-machine-then-let-it-loose-on-coronavirus
  4. ^ https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/03/china-coronavirus-propaganda-push-ties-worsen-200325085419818.html
  5. ^ https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/chinas-devastating-lies/
  6. ^ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/23/life-after-lockdown-has-china-really-beaten-coronavirus
  7. ^ https://time.com/5804136/china-coronavirus-quarantine-new-normal/

Well, we need to include "unreliable" statement to US numbers as well because US only tests the most severe cases and those hospitalized. I've been personally denied a test myself due to the widespread shortages of tests. Also, there are reports that US is underestimating the death numbers by misreporting them to other causes. https://www.gq.com/story/american-coronavirus-deaths-undercounted https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nidhiprakash/coronavirus-update-dead-covid19-doctors-hospitals Rwat128 (talk) 22:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Test scarcity is a known issue for every country. That's why we do not include a note for every country. There is a general note that says Cumulative confirmed cases reported to date. The actual number of infections and cases are likely to be higher than reported. --MarioGom (talk) 23:05, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Turkey numbers on 30 March 2020

Cum. confirmed cases: 10827, Cum. deaths: 168, Tot. recovered: 162. [1] I believe, it is important to cite English language references. ---Caner Guclu talk 16:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Turkey: Death toll from coronavirus rises to 168 Health Ministry data shows 1,610 new cases in past 24 hours, bringing total to 10,827". Anadolu Agency. Retrieved 30 March 2020.
User:Canerguclu let me give you extended confirmed and than you can take care of it. Just no more than two references at a time. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! --Caner Guclu talk 18:18, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
You are welcome :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

America's CCF

May someone amend America's CCF to 164,658 as stated in the 1point3acres website. https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/en BlackSun2104 (talk) 05:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done. --MarioGom (talk) 08:15, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Germany's CCF : Slow to update

Germany's CCF is now 66,125, please update accordingly. [1] BlackSun2104 (talk) 21:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/corona-virus-karte-infektionen-deutschland-weltweit/
We are currently using Zeit Online for Germany. It is up-to-date now. --MarioGom (talk) 08:16, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Spain : slow to update

Spain's CCF has risen to 87,956, please update accordingly. [1] BlackSun2104 (talk) 22:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.rtve.es/noticias/20200329/mapa-del-coronavirus-espana/2004681.shtml
 Done --MarioGom (talk) 08:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Google's COVID stats sidebar, with data from Wikipedia

Hi all – wanted to give you a heads up that Google is using several template pages (as of this writing, this template and Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/United States medical cases by state) to create a statistics table/visualization that appears at the top of Google search results for COVID-related terms. You can see a screenshot of this to the right or see it in action by Googling "covid," "corona," "coronavirus," etc. This isn't a formal partnership between the Wikimedia Foundation and Google (Google made the decision to use this data on their own), but we're communicating about the feature and their upcoming plans for it. As the community gathers more granular stats on cases, deaths, and recoveries, Google is interested in potentially making use of these additional pages to expand the feature.

I'm cross-posting this notice to the talk pages of the relevant templates and T:WikiProject COVID, and I'm watching this page and other COVID content via my volunteer account. If there's a new discussion about moving, deleting, or making major changes to the structure of this template, I'd super appreciate a quick ping either to this account or my volunteer one so I can let the folks at Google know and they can adjust where the feature points accordingly.

If you have any questions about this, please let me know! MPinchuk (WMF) (talk) 15:21, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

MPinchuk (WMF): Thank you for the update! They probably noticed already, but it is worth noting that our totals are currently not consistent, so they may want to either sum the column themselves or get data from elsewhere. Also because of #New RfC on countries/dependencies, we are splitting overseas territories, dependencies, etc. So today the list of territories is changing significantly. Best, --MarioGom (talk) 15:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, MarioGom! Noted & will let them know about both. MPinchuk (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
To MPinchuk (WMF) Holy s@%$, the impact of this table has grown larger than expected! Thanks for the update, but how exactly will Google handle the new rows for territories as per the new consensus? Cheers, and thanks once again! RayDeeUx (talk) 16:55, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
RayDeeUx, yes, and it's also a big vote of confidence in your work! This was not a decision they reached lightly or without considering other potential data sources. RE the territories RfC, I think that should be fine as long as they're aware of it (which they are now) and can plan for making some tweaks to their scraping scripts. The things that they're more worried about breaking the feature are deletions, moves without a redirect, or big changes to table formatting (e.g., going from vertical to horizontal data display). I'm assuming 1 & 2 are unlikely and will be looking out for any community discussion on 3. (Not to say no one can/should change the table formatting if needed! Just something to consider, similar to how mobile formatting has been taken into consideration in various RfCs.) MPinchuk (WMF) (talk) 19:44, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
It seems like they just added a disclaimer in the about this data popup: "This data changes rapidly, so what’s shown may be out of date. Table totals may not always represent an accurate sum. Information about reported cases is also available on the World Health Organisation site." --17jiangz1 (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
We quickly need to separate Greenland from Denmark as per the consensus above. Google clearly uses an automated system that detects Greenland as a separate entity, so it has not coloured Greenland as an infected 'country'. This may create a false sense of security, especially to those who rely solely on Google's information. JMonkey2006 (talk) 09:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

Germany 67,051 652 6,552 Brazil 4,661 165 WikiChata (talk) 09:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiChata:  Done. Thank you! --MarioGom (talk) 09:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Locations that may require an update (31 March)

The following locations have a lower number of cases than Worldometer or BNO News. Please, do not update directly. Look for reliable sources and verify that figures are correct. I have excluded some countries that are already known to use wrong figures on these sources. --MarioGom (talk) 08:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Outdated report.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Austria : 9618 -> 9705 (WOMC)
  • Bahrain : 515 -> 530 (WOMC)
  • Barbados : 33 -> 34 (WOMC)
  • Bolivia : 97 -> 107 (WOMC)
  • Brazil : 4330 -> 4661 (WOMC) | 4630 (BNO)
  • British Virgin Islands : 2 -> 3 (WOMC)
  • Bulgaria : 359 -> 379 (WOMC)
  • Cameroon : 139 -> 193 (WOMC) | 142 (BNO)
  • Central African Republic : 3 -> 6 (BNO)
  • Chad : 5 -> 7 (WOMC)
  • Chile : 2139 -> 2449 (WOMC) | 2449 (BNO)
  • Cyprus : 225 -> 230 (WOMC) | 230 (BNO)
  • Czech Republic : 3001 -> 3002 (WOMC)
  • Democratic Republic of the Congo : 81 -> 98 (WOMC)
  • Denmark : 2577 -> 2815 (WOMC) | 2745 (BNO)
  • Djibouti : 18 -> 19 (BNO)
  • Dominica : 11 -> 12 (WOMC)
  • Ecuador : 1890 -> 1966 (WOMC) | 1962 (BNO)
  • El Salvador : 30 -> 32 (WOMC)
  • Equatorial Guinea : 12 -> 14 (BNO)
  • Finland : 1308 -> 1384 (WOMC) | 1313 (BNO)
  • France : 43973 -> 44550 (WOMC) | 44550 (BNO)
  • French Polynesia : 35 -> 36 (WOMC)
  • Haiti : 8 -> 15 (WOMC) | 15 (BNO)
  • Hong Kong : 682 -> 683 (WOMC) | 683 (BNO)
  • Italy : 101739 -> 101991 (BNO)
  • Japan : 1866 -> 1953 (WOMC) | 1989 (BNO)
  • Kyrgyzstan : 94 -> 107 (WOMC)
  • Laos : 8 -> 9 (WOMC)
  • Latvia : 376 -> 398 (WOMC)
  • Mali : 25 -> 26 (BNO)
  • Mauritius : 128 -> 143 (WOMC)
  • Mexico : 993 -> 1094 (WOMC) | 1094 (BNO)
  • Montenegro : 91 -> 105 (WOMC)
  • Northern Cyprus : 61 -> 69 (BNO)
  • Republic of Ireland : 2615 -> 2910 (WOMC) | 2910 (BNO)
  • Seychelles : 8 -> 10 (WOMC)
  • Zimbabwe : 7 -> 8 (WOMC)

Best, --MarioGom (talk) 08:13, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Update:

Outdated report.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Bangladesh : 49 -> 51 (WOMC)
  • Barbados : 33 -> 34 (WOMC)
  • Belgium : 11899 -> 12775 (WOMC) | 12775 (BNO)
  • Bolivia : 97 -> 107 (WOMC)
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina : 386 -> 411 (WOMC) its really 408
  • British Virgin Islands : 2 -> 3 (WOMC)
  • Bulgaria : 359 -> 379 (WOMC)
  • Central African Republic : 3 -> 6 (BNO)
  • Chile : 2139 -> 2449 (WOMC) | 2449 (BNO)
  • Czech Republic : 3001 -> 3002 (WOMC) | 3002 (BNO)
  • Djibouti : 18 -> 19 (BNO)
  • Ecuador : 1890 -> 1966 (WOMC) | 1962 (BNO)
  • El Salvador : 30 -> 32 (WOMC)
  • Equatorial Guinea : 12 -> 14 (BNO)
  • French Polynesia : 35 -> 36 (WOMC)
  • Germany : 67051 -> 68355 (BNO)
  • Hong Kong : 714 -> 715 (BNO) We don't count probable, only confirmed
  • Iran : 44605 -> 44606 (BNO)
  • Isle of Man : 49 -> 60 (WOMC)
  • Italy : 101739 -> 101991 (BNO)
  • Japan : 1866 -> 1953 (WOMC) | 1989 (BNO)
  • Kuwait : 266 -> 289 (WOMC)
  • Laos : 8 -> 9 (WOMC)
  • Latvia : 376 -> 398 (WOMC)
  • Lebanon : 446 -> 463 (WOMC) | 463 (BNO)
  • Mali : 25 -> 26 (BNO)
  • Malta : 156 -> 169 (WOMC)
  • Montenegro : 91 -> 105 (WOMC)
  • New Caledonia : 15 -> 16 (WOMC)
  • Northern Cyprus : 61 -> 69 (BNO)
  • Oman : 179 -> 192 (WOMC) | 192 (BNO)
  • Pakistan : 1865 -> 1876 (BNO)
  • Republic of Ireland : 2615 -> 2910 (WOMC) | 2910 (BNO)
  • Slovakia : 336 -> 363 (WOMC)
  • Switzerland : 16016 -> 16176 (WOMC) | 16176 (BNO)
  • Vietnam : 204 -> 207 (WOMC)

Best, --MarioGom (talk) 11:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

Germany 67060 6710 658 WikiChata (talk) 10:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done --MarioGom (talk) 11:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

67.078 bestätigte Fälle 7.403 genesen* 659 gestorben — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiChata (talk • contribs) 11:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Recovered people in Argentina

This page shows the current number of recovered people in Argentina. The number shown on the template (51) is pretty outdated. And also the death count: it sits at 23 right now. TheTrueGilben (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

thanks. M nurhaikal (talk) 14:09, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Count for Finland

Does the cited gov source actually include cases at Aland Islands, the autonomous region? M nurhaikal (talk) 14:08, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

M nurhaikal: It does in this map ([2]), the total of 1,384 includes 5 cases in Ahvenanmaa (islands in the bottom left corner), which as far as I can tell, is the Åland. --MarioGom (talk) 15:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

Please update San Marino counts according to official source http://www.iss.sm/on-line/home/artCataggiornamenti-coronavirus.49004093.1.20.1.html as follows: 236 confirmed, 26 deaths, 13 recovered. 😷 garyCZEk 📢 ✍ ｛🧒👧👦🚲💻🚗🍣｝ 13:12, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done. RayDeeUx (talk) 16:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

1 new death from the Diamond Princess on 28 Mar. The death toll is either 11 or 12 depending on whether the one fatality in Australia is counted. I have listed all the references in the Cruise Ships section above.[1] Bluesky398 (talk) 13:56, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Template talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data".
This is either  Partly done or  Done depending on the one mystery death for the evacuee in question. Since the case has been diagnosed on the Diamond Princess, I have included the fatality under Diamond Princess. RayDeeUx (talk) 16:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

The source for data for India is reliable but is not updated. Union Health Ministry has updated the total cases in India stands at 1,397 and Number of Death is 35. Please update. 103.5.135.71 (talk) 16:03, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Amkgp (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

Hi. Colombia just reported 108 new cases bringing the total to 906. There are also 16 deaths and 31 who recovered. Source: https://twitter.com/MinSaludCol/status/1245067284550385664 Juan C. S. H. (talk) 19:25, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

@Juan C. S. H.:  Done. Thanks! --17jiangz1 (talk) 19:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2020

Please set netherlands recovery to 250. [3]https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ Humiebees (talk) 14:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Humiebees, please read the following footnote for the Netherlands (not to be confused with the Kingdom of the Netherlands):
The Dutch Government agency RIVM, responsible for the constituent country the Netherlands, does not count its number of recoveries. [Cited source: https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/03/coronavirus-in-the-netherlands-the-questions-you-want-answered/]
The more experienced editors of this template feel that WorldOMeters is not the most reliable source for recoveries in the Netherlands (again, not to be confused with the Kingdom of the Netherlands).
Hope that answers your question. RayDeeUx (talk) 18:27, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

RayDeeUx (talk), the post was made around 20 days ago so it may be outdated. Humiebees (talk) 19:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Totals

Centralizing the totals

We have this template {{Cases in 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic}} that does a nice job so may aswell use it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I think at this point it might be worth to automate our own totals for the table. Whenever I checked during the last 48 hours at different times, there were 10-15 territories where we had more recent data than Worldometer and 20-30 were we had older data. Right now it is quite difficult to claim that either Wikipedia, CSSE or Worldometer are more up-to-date than the others overall. --MarioGom (talk) 08:23, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
It gives us consistency within our articles however. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Doc James: Fair enough. --MarioGom (talk) 17:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello, does anyone have link for the Cases in 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, which is used to bring total confirmed cases, deaths, etc.? Thanks, Luke Kern Choi 5 (talk) 08:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking. Can you please be more clear? Mgasparin (talk) 08:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Luke Kern Choi 5: Maybe this is what you are looking for? Template:Cases in 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic --MarioGom (talk) 09:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom Yes! Thank you~! Luke Kern Choi 5 (talk) 10:50, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
It is not keeping up to date with the numbers in the table, so I have temporarily replaced it with new totals. How fast does it add up our columns of numbers? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:21, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
The totals here Template:Cases_in_2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic are from JH. Our totals often fall behind. So have restored. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Template (world) sums are broken

I am making a daily spreadsheet based on this template, and there are always some inconsistencies. It is better now than when it was summed manually, but still there are problems that the sums don't match the total of the rows.

The scale of these inconsistencies are far smaller than the uncertainty of the published data, so it may not be a major issue, but I have grown accustomed to that the total of a column is actually that total.

So, to take this snapshot

Value Locations Cases Deaths Recoveries
Stated 183 732,153 34,686 152,314
Actual 186 725,021 34,129 147,922

jax (talk) 16:21, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Totals are coming from here[4] Or else we do not have consistency within the article itself. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:23, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Also discussion

Panama, update cases and deaths.

Panama has 1181 confirmed cases, 30 deaths and 9 recovered. Source: https://www.telemetro.com/nacionales/2020/03/31/panama-registra-30-defunciones-por-covid-19-y-1-181-casos-confirmados/2733982.html 190.219.162.190 (talk) 23:15, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done United States Man (talk) 23:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 March 2020

change the australia confirmed case count to 4711, and death to 20 - source https://www.smh.com.au/national/coronavirus-updates-live-covid-19-cases-surpass-800-000-worldwide-nsw-and-qld-border-force-officials-test-positive-20200331-p54ft0.html

Josh Joshua.paul1300 (talk) 23:34, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Urgent updates for Germany

Germany's CCF had already risen to 71,690, please update accordingly. [1] BlackSun2104 (talk) 22:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/corona-virus-karte-infektionen-deutschland-weltweit/

America's death toll

America's death toll is now beyond 3700, please tally with 1point3acres website. [1] BlackSun2104 (talk) 21:29, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/

Done. Thanksa M nurhaikal (talk) 08:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

United States source

Given the decision to split autonomous territories (see #Current consensus) it is going to be quite hard to maintain consistency if we keep updating the United States figures from multiple aggregate trackers. I would propose to stick to 1point3acres, which can be used to get United States overall figures, Puerto Rico, Guam, etc. This ensures that we can subtract the right amounts from the United States total. What do you think? --MarioGom (talk) 11:17, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Or... maybe we have to stick to one that includes split recoveries figures, like Worldometer or Johns Hopkins University. --MarioGom (talk) 11:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
I cannot find split recoveries in any of these sources. We might need to just report the overall United States recoveries and add a note. --MarioGom (talk) 11:24, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom: it seems like me and United States Man are the main people who edit the USA values. I stick with 1Point3Acres, so I can't split the recoveries between the the 50 states of USA and its overseas territories. If I remember correctly, United States Man uses WorldOMeters, which until recently reported cases/deaths/recoveries for overseas territories separately from the mainland. In either case, neither me nor United States Man can split those numbers solely from the sources USA's numbers rely on. The USA figure on JHU also merges the 50 states of the USA with its overseas territories, and unless if someone is on JHU 24/7 to look at the sidebars for deaths and recoveries by USA territory there's no practical way to split the numbers of the overseas territories from the 50 states of the USA. A footnote indicating this issue might be the only option. RayDeeUx (talk) 13:19, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
RayDeeUx As far as I see, JHU has no split numbers for recoveries in the US. Note that for confirmed cases and deaths, you don't need to sum all 50 states, you can just put the overall total and then subtract overseas territories with Template:Sum, since it accepts negative numbers. --MarioGom (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure I really understand the point of #Current consensus. Is it that, since Britain counts its territories separetely whereas Denmark, France, the Netherlands and the US do not, then it enforces everyone else to do it the British way? And this even for regions which are integral parts of their country? If the US official data includes its overseas territories, then let's follow the move and report official data as they are. All Wikipedia's credibility relies on the fact it reports official data, I can't see the benefit in manipulating those. As for waiting for WHO updates, those intervene a day later than national reports, which in the current crisis represents a significant amount of time. Metropolitan (talk) 10:33, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Metropolitan: No, it is not the Britain way. The World Health Organization also splits most overseas territories in their situation reports (example). Grouping of territories varies from source to source, so we had to choose one scheme. That was the purpose of the RfC. --MarioGom (talk) 13:17, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom: Thanks for the reply, I appreciate the time you're taking for this. WHO situation reports don't mention Taiwan, Macau and Hong Kong which are included in China's figures, whereas it isn't the case on Wikipedia. Don't worry about that, I'm old enough to accept unsubstantiated decisions without needing false excuses. I wish you the best to sustain the effort in the long run. Metropolitan (talk) 18:38, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
Metropolitan: Yep, that's why I said most. I think the RfC was a half-way solution. Better than previous one (IMHO) but still not ideal. At some point, I expect that we do another round of adjustment after learning some lessons of the implementation of the current RfC. --MarioGom (talk) 09:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

France note

The third France note "Recoveries only includes hospitalised cases" should state that also only deaths in hospitals are included in the total number of deaths, as this is clearly stated on the government site (Site). So the note should be changed in "Recoveries and deaths only includes hospitalised cases" or something similar.--79.44.25.206 (talk) 09:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks! --17jiangz1 (talk) 09:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Required updates

Germany's CCF has creep up slightly to 71,808, please update and change the global CCF accordingly. https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/corona-virus-karte-infektionen-deutschland-weltweit/ BlackSun2104 (talk) 00:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done. Updated numbers as per [[5]]. Global numbers are directly from JHU as per prior consensus. Thanks! --17jiangz1 (talk) 09:51, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2020

I want to change some cases and deaths as they are not updated PewDiePie Gamer (talk) 10:00, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

PewDiePie Gamer: Feel free to tell us here which country should be updated and what is the source. --MarioGom (talk) 10:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Consensus

We may need something like THIS here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:16, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Doc James: Yes, please! Even before the two ongoing RfCs are closed, I would include two items: 1) no new columns and 2) cases are "confirmed cases" (not suspected, presumptive or whatever other definition). --MarioGom (talk) 22:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
Okay will start it in a bit. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:10, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Have the clinically diagnosed cases already been removed from the figure on the table? (for KTC) RayDeeUx (talk) 23:42, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

No idea. They are accepted as confirmed by some. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
It's been over a month since situation report 31. Unless someone objects here, I'm going to remove that footnote tomorrow. -- KTC (talk) 19:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
@Lucky102: Did you have an issue with the removeal of the footnote, or was this from an edit conflict? -- KTC (talk) 15:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
KTC: I'm pretty sure this was just overriding other changes after updating a lot of countries at once. I warned Lucky102 on his talk page. --MarioGom (talk) 10:25, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2020

Luxembourg cases 2 178 and deaths 23 https://gouvernement.lu/en/dossiers.gouv_msan%2Ben%2Bdossiers%2B2020%2Bcorona-virus.html Wimmiden (talk) 07:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Wimmiden  Done. Thanks Amkgp (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

According to cited source, th Govt of Belarus no longer reports total cases

How do we figure out which source to use then? M nurhaikal (talk) 16:27, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

M nurhaikal: We use format and sum templates together, starting with the figures they had when they stopped counting total cases and then adding a new number each day. It's unwieldy for the template's bytes, but it'll have to do. RayDeeUx (talk) 16:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Asymptomatic patients and Japan

I've noticed that asymptomatic cases in mainland China have been excluded. Should we also exclude asymptomatic cases in Japan? Japan has quite stringent testing prerequisites but for some reason it still has a couple hundreds of asymptomatic cases reported. I would support not counting the asymptomatic cases (the MHLW lists them separately), as most of the world do not have such data. Rethliopuks (talk) 09:49, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Actually I'm not sure if that's a good idea, but I'll keep this for discussion. The MHLW always reports positive cases regardless of the symptoms, meaning it also reports cases where it's still being investigated whether the patient has symptoms. Currently the numbers are symptoms 1494, asymptomatic 233, unknown 226. Rethliopuks (talk) 09:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
No. We include confirmed cases to the extent that is possible with reliable sources. We might want to include all confirmed cases in China as reported by the WHO Situation Report though ([6]). --MarioGom (talk) 09:56, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
"Asymptomatic case" refers to a case that is confirmed to have tested positive but without any reported discernible symptoms. So are you suggesting that we add the asymptomatic cases to mainland China's total count? On 31 March the current number was 1541, and on 1 April 130 new ones were reported, so the recorded total would become 1671. Rethliopuks (talk) 10:39, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Rethliopuks: What's the source for the claim that China confirmed cases do not include confirmed asymptomatic cases? --MarioGom (talk) 18:25, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Ok. I see: [7]. Asymptomatic cases will be included in China's figures from 2 April onwards. I think there's nothing to do here. On next updates, they will be included. --MarioGom (talk) 18:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2020

Please update San Marino counts according to official source http://www.iss.sm/on-line/home/aggiornamenti-coronavirus/articolo49014204.html as follows: 28 deaths 😷 garyCZEk 📢 ✍ ｛🧒👧👦🚲💻🚗🍣｝ 16:28, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks! --17jiangz1 (talk) 18:43, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2020

Abkhazia reports first coronavirus case https://civil.ge/archives/344935 2601:843:C202:3B10:6DEB:7183:3DF9:A358 (talk) 17:54, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks!--17jiangz1 (talk) 19:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Required updates for Germany as of 2nd April 2020

Germany's CCF has risen to 77,558, please update and amend the Global CCF accordingly. https://interaktiv.morgenpost.de/corona-virus-karte-infektionen-deutschland-weltweit/ BlackSun2104 (talk) 20:19, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Germany : urgent update required

Germany's CCF is 77,558 not 76,544, even JHU arcgis website now reflect the change of figure. https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6 BlackSun2104 (talk) 21:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Updated now.--walkeetalkee 21:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Sources for Germany

I have reverted the recoveries column for Germany to use Zeit Online ([8]). Here's a summary of German sources:

  • Berliner Morgenpost used to be our source when it was the only one. It provided figures for confirmed cases, deaths and recoveries. After Zeit Online came up, we noticed that Berliner Morgenpost included 4,700 recoveries that were not attributed to any region, as they do for the rest of data.
  • Zeit Online provides confirmed cases, deaths and recoveries, with clear attribution to regions. So it looks more reliable than Berliner Morgenpost.
  • Tagesspiegel came last and they outsourced the work to RiskLayer. They publish the list of all underlying sources for their data, which surfaced some errors in Zeit Online figures, which are not fixed so far. However, they only track confirmed cases and deaths. Their figure for recoveries is an estimate and not backed by actual recovery counts.

That's why I left Tagesspiegel for confirmed cases and deaths and Zeit Online for recoveries. See background discussions here: Talk:2020 coronavirus pandemic in Germany § Recoveries: Berliner Morgenpost or Die Zeit? and Talk:2020 coronavirus pandemic in Germany § Semi-protected edit request on 29 March 2020. --MarioGom (talk) 22:12, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

French overseas regions

Moved discussion from the #Current consensus list. --MarioGom (talk) 09:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

If that is the consensus, then it shouldn't include French overseas regions which are totally integrated to France since Aimé Césaire opted for departmentalization in 1946. It's quite a long time ago, puzzling Wikipedia hasn't received the memo yet. Metropolitan (talk) 21:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

The definition of "dependency" used here is broader than in Dependent territory, it also includes anything with an assigned code in ISO 3166-1 alpha-2. Heitordp (talk) 06:15, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
That's not what says the current consensus. Beyond that, "ISO 3166" is an inconsistent criteria considering French regions all have their subdivisional code under the national code "FR" [9]:
  • Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes: FR-ARA
  • Bourgogne-Franche-Comté: FR-BFC
  • Bretagne: FR-BRE
  • Centre-Val-de-Loire: FR-CVL
  • Corse: FR-COR
  • Grand-Est: FR-GES
  • Guadeloupe: FR-GUA
  • Guyane: FR-GF
  • Île-de-France: FR-IDF
  • Hauts-de-France: FR-HDF
  • La Réunion: FR-LRA
  • Martinique: FR-MQ
  • Mayotte: FR-YT
  • Normandie: FR-NOR
  • Nouvelle-Aquitaine: FR-NAQ
  • Occitanie: FR-OCC
  • Pays-de-la-Loire: FR-PDL
  • Provence-Alpes-Côte-d’Azur: FR-PAC
But beyond that, the decision is not practical and lacks of consistency as cutting out a unitary state decorrelates figures published by French official authorities from those published on Wikipedia. As such, we're not able anymore to update French figures once they are issued by national French authorities. The current dubious solution which consists in removing an older update at subdivisionnal level from French officially published figures is obviously flawed, as the French figure still counts regional cases which are not yet reported at regional level. That is a totally inconsistent and unsustainable. Metropolitan (talk) 09:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Metropolitan: I have moved this discussion to the main template talk page, since the #Current consensus subpage is for listing, not discussion. --MarioGom (talk) 09:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
OK, I agree with combining territories that the country includes in its reported total. That was also my initial suggestion in the RfC. In this case, France would include the overseas regions and also Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy (France includes them in the total even though they are overseas collectivities). New Caledonia and French Polynesia would remain separate. To be consistent, we should also include US territories in the US, Åland in Finland, Akrotiri and Dhekelia in Cyprus, and Transnistria in Moldova, as that's how the sources report the numbers. The territories of China, Denmark, Netherlands and UK (except Ak/Dh, combined in Cyprus) would remain separate. We can clarify in the notes which territories are included or not.
However, all other users who commented on the RfC preferred to split everything, as they thought that splitting some territories but not others was inconsistent. I thought that it was consistent if the criterion was to copy exactly from the sources, but eventually I conceded to form the consensus. If you reopen the RfC (or open a new one) I can support your idea. MarioGom: How do you think we should proceed? Heitordp (talk) 10:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
I agree with your suggestion. It indeed seems more factual and consistent to report figures at the level at which they are reported by national authorities. Therefore, if Finland includes Åland in its national total, it should be reported as such, and an optional note could be added if that is unclear to some readers. As for the consensus being to "split everything", it does not seem practical to me considering that there is no such a thing as a universal list of "recognized" territories. I'm waiting for MarioGom advice on how to proceed before taking any action. Metropolitan (talk) 10:58, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Metropolitan, Heitordp: I think we should put forward a proposal with a better substantiated position for each territories. Here's some that I think that could be merged in any case:
  • Åland is included in Finland by the government, the WHO and every aggregate source I checked.
  • Akrotiri and Dhekelia is included in Cyprus by the press, the WHO and every aggregate source I checked. It is not included in the UK by any source.
  • Transnitria cases are reported in Moldova total by both the Moldovan Government and the WHO.
Some that I think that should remain split:
  • As Heitordp noticed, New Caledonia and French Polynesia are splitted by the WHO and not reported by France government. Aggregate sources seem to be inconsistent with this, double counting them, etc.
  • British Overseas Territories and Crown dependencies. Reported separately by their respective Governments and the WHO. Also I think these are the territories that enjoyed the strongest consensus for the split in the previous RfC.
  • Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands are all reported by the Government of the Kingdom of Denmark, but disaggregated ([10]). The autonomous governments of Greenland and the Faroe Islands also have their own reports. The WHO splits them all too.
  • Netherlands' RIVM does not seem to report Aruba, Curaçao or Sint Maarten ([11]). The WHO reports separately too.
  • Kosovo, reported separately by Serbian and Kosovar authorities, the WHO, and generally split by most sources for statistical purposes, even by those that do not recognize Kosovo's independence. Also see {{Kosovo-note}}.
  • China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. A bit tricky. The WHO does not split them. The PRC government reports figures in all four territories but, as far as I can tell, they do not report them totalized.
The most contentious:
  • Overseas France other than French Polynesia and New Caledonia. Until last week, the French government made a clear distinction in their statistics between the total for metropolitan France and overseas France. They don't do it anymore. The WHO reports them separately.
  • The United States... I'm not really sure. The WHO splits them. Disaggregated sources are available, but they rarely report totalized figures for "United States without unincorporated states".
We could also check world trackers by high reputation newspapers from different countries to have some additional data points for the decision.
In addition, I think everything we list that does not appear in WHO Situation Reports as a country, should be italicized.
What do you think? What are other sources we should consider? Do you have a different opinion about some specific territories? Is there any concise definition for this? I don't think a new RfC will work if it is ill-defined. --MarioGom (talk) 11:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm preparing a comparison table of reliable sources that should be helpful for the discussion. --MarioGom (talk) 12:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom: I agree with your proposal. I think that we should clearly state in the RfC that the criterion is to combine or split according to whatever source we're citing in the table for each country. That should avoid any discussion of definition or political status.
  • France: Last week, the main total reported by the French government prominently on its website included the overseas regions, Saint Barthélemy and Saint Martin, in the same way as now. The separate numbers for metropolitan France and each overseas region were listed in a hidden table that was only shown after clicking on its header. I think that we should use the number prominently shown, even if the other table becomes available again in the future.
  • US: The two sources cited in the table combine all territories, as does the CDC. By the way, the CDC has been updating its website every day with the most current numbers so I think that it can be cited as a source now.
In the new RfC, I suggest making a table like I did before, to ensure that no one misses anything. I think that we should also discuss the countries with limited recognition. Below is a table showing how the sources report all of them. Maybe also make a table asking people what to italicize. I agree with italicizing everything that the WHO does not list as an independent country (UN members and Vatican City). Heitordp (talk) 12:47, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
source HK MO PR VI GU MP GF GP MQ RE YT BL MF NC PF GG JE IM XA GI BM TC KY VG AI MS AW CW SX FO GL AX TW PS XK XT XN XS
WHO CN CN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CY - - - - - - - - - - - - FI CN - - MD
ECDC CN CN - - - - FR FR FR FR FR FR FR - - - - - CY - - - - - - - - - - - - FI - - - MD
cited in the template - - US US US US FR FR FR FR FR FR FR - - - - - CY - - - - - - - - - - - - FI - - - MD - -

-: listed separately
blank: not included at all
XA: Akrotiri and Dhekelia
XK: Kosovo
XT: Transnistria
XN: Northern Cyprus
XS: Somaliland

I think a transposed table might be more clear. I'm working on one here: User:MarioGom/sandbox/COVID-19 Locations. --MarioGom (talk) 12:54, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Heitordp: The problem with cited in template is that it is a moving target. It can be changed at any time to support one thing or the opposite. I think it is better to check what reliable sources do when they publish world tables or maps. I'll make a summary of my analysis here:
Sources I considered:
  • Two supranational organisms: the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC).
  • One Canadian (or "international"?) news agency: Reuters.
  • Three US media outlets: The New York Times (NYT), Financial Times (FT) and Bloomberg (BB).
  • One British media outlet: BBC.
  • One Spanish newspaper: El País. However, I will not consider it in the rest of analysis because its approach is completely inconsistent.
  • One German newspaper: Berliner Morgenpost. I considered Der Spiegel initially, however, I think it is not useful for this analysis, because it presents some countries like China disaggregated by countries and other countries go just with totals.
  • One French newspaper: Le Monde. I did not include it in the table since it just published Johns Hopkins University data as is.
  • Two academic trackers: the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) and DXY.cn. I will not consider DXY in the analysis because it is completely inconsistent. About JHU, I will only say that it aggregates everything that can be aggregated (sovereign states only). It is worth noting that it is the only source including French Polynesia and New Caledonia and France, and it does so by double-counting the other overseas territories.
Summary of results:
  • British Overseas Territories and Crown dependencies are split by almost every source (WHO, ECDC, Reuters, NYT, FT, BBC, BM) with the exception of JHU. BB does not count them at all (not listed separately, not counted under UK).
  • Jersey and Guernsey are listed separately by some sources (WHO, ECDC, BBC) and grouped as Channel Islands by others (Reuters, NYT, FT, BM). BB does not count them at all. JHU groups them as Channel Islands (within UK).
  • Greenland and the Faroe Islands are split by almost every source (WHO, ECDC, Reuters, NYT, BBC, BM) with the exception of JHU. BB does not count them at all (not listed separately, not counted under Denmark).
  • Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten are split by almost every source (WHO, ECDC, Reuters, NYT, BBC, BM) with the exception of JHU. BB does not count them at all (not listed separately, not counted under the Netherlands).
  • Hong Kong and Macau are split by some sources (Reuters, NYT, FT, BM) and not others (WHO, ECDC, BBC, JHU). BB is inconsistent here and lists Hong Kong but not Macau.
  • Taiwan is split by some sources (ECDC, Reuters, NYT, FT, BB, BBC, BM) and not others (WHO, JHU). BBC seems to be double counting it.
  • Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands are split by all non-US sources (WHO, ECDC, Reuters, BBC, BM) but not in US sources (NYT, FT, BB, JHU).
  • New Caledonia and French Polynesia are split by most sources (WHO, ECDC, Reuters, FT, BBC, BM). JHU lists them under France. NYT and BB not count them at all.
  • Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Martinique, Mayotte, Réunion, Saint Barthélemy and Saint Martin are split by some (WHO, Reuters, FT, BBC, BM) and not others (ECDC, NYT, BB, JHU).
  • Every source counts Akrotiri and Dhekelia in Cyprus.
  • Every source counts Åland Islands in Finland.
  • Every source counts Transnistria in Moldova.
  • Most sources list Kosovo (WHO, ECDC, Reuters, NYT, BB, BBC, BM) and some do not count it at all (FT).
  • All sources list Palestine. It is listed under different denominations (occupied Palestinian territories, West Bank & Gaza, Palestinian authority...)
  • One source lists Northern Cyprus (Reuters). I could not figure out if other sources are counting Northern Cyprus cases elsewhere (help!).
  • It is too early for some territories to be listed in any of these sources: Sint Eustatius, Abkhazia, Somaliland.
Best, --MarioGom (talk) 22:36, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
I'm tempted to propose the following: List locations as the WHO does, except for the split of Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, and list separately any unrecognized territory if the WHO does not count it under any other territory I think the China exception is worth it because China itself does not totalize the counts for these territories and they are split by a fair amount of reliable sources too. The addendum for unrecognized territories makes sense if Northern Cyprus turns out to not be counted under any other territory. --MarioGom (talk) 22:50, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Heitordp, MarioGom: Thanks for your work. This proposal seems a lot easier to keep updating in the long run. With proper footnotes I hardly see how this could be substantially opposed as it only makes reference on how data is officially published. Metropolitan (talk) 22:54, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Metropolitan: The main practical obstacle is still overseas France (except New Caledonia and French Polynesia) since France stopped publishing the breakdown for confirmed cases in their maps. These appear only in the WHO Situation Reports (+24h delay), or scattered around different regional sites which make it difficult to correlate if they correspond to the same time. --MarioGom (talk) 22:59, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Correct data from Jamaica

Been trying to correct the data for Jamaica, but being blocked by editing conflict notification.

Should read: 44 cases 03 deaths 02 recoveries https://twitter.com/christufton/status/1245469030670008326

Please amend.... --Mrsolan22 (talk) 23:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 April 2020

Hi. Colombia just updated its figures to 1065 cases, 17 deaths and 39 recoveries. https://twitter.com/MinSaludCol/status/1245413255574675456 Juan C. S. H. (talk) 18:22, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Someone updated it, thank you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Source change request

can we change the source from a chinese abc website, to https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers Joshua.paul1300 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:45, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I deliberately put in the Chinese ABC site as it is the most up-to-date after the Australian Wikipedia page (which is not a reliable source). www.health.gov.au trails about 24 hours behind. The English ABC site lags the Chinese one, even though it's from the same organisation. Another alternative is to add all the official state references, but that is too many references for this top level. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

CovidTracking data

CovidTracking is maintaining US-state-level case count, testing, and outcomes data. It is transparently curated -- anyone can see the curation worksheet online -- and reviewed by a mix of journalists and individuals. It has a "latest state counts" spreadsheet that may be helpful. @MarioGom: thanks for the pointer. – SJ + 00:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Cruise ship approach inconsistent

We are listing 3 cruiseships currently on the grounds they are not listed elsewhere. But there are numerous other cruiseships in similar situations which are not being counted. For example, there are several cruiseships off Australia currently whose COVID19 cases have been brought ashore for hospitalisation (e.g. the German cruiseship Artania currently docked at Fremantle, Western Australia where at least 39 passengers are being treated in hospital). But these are not included in Australia’ case count. Similar to the Diamond Princesss situation. And the number will increase with other ships, and with crew likely to require the same aid. How will we deal with such cases? Ptilinopus (talk) 06:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Ptilinopus: I agree we need to do something about it, but I have no proposals myself at the moment. Where are these cases counted by the WHO? And where are counted by countries' authorities? --MarioGom (talk) 08:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Åland to be updated

Åland had 8 cases 4 days ago and still to this day. Source: Ålandstidningen | Nyheter på Åland . Raphaël Dunant (talk) 09:27, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Raphaël Dunant:  Done. Thank you. --MarioGom (talk) 09:34, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

First cases in Western Sahara

Moved from Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic by country and territory § First cases in Western Sahara
 – MarioGom (talk) 13:15, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Moroccan government announced first two cases in Laayoune Province, which is part of the disputed Western Sahara territory. I don't know how we should handle this. Those two cases are already included in the general numbers for Morocco, as the territory is under Moroccan administration. They shouldn't be counted double. Anyway, the map needs to change so as to report that there are now cases in Western Sahara. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.77.62.233 (talk) 12:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Western Sahara is confirmed but territory controlled by Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic not confirmed. There are maps on site of SADR. Mircea (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Territory controlled by SADR is uninhabited desert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.77.62.233 (talk) 14:57, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Territory controlled by SADR is inhabited. See Tifariti. Mircea (talk) 22:06, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
In 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic by country and territory, the mention: "Part of Western Sahara ocupied by Morocco has confirmed cases." Here is the link to the official Moroccan countdown: http://www.covidmaroc.ma/Pages/AccueilAR.aspx The territory corresponds to the Moroccan regions of Laâyoune-Sakia El Hamra (2 cases) and Dakhla-Oued Ed Dahab (0 case). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.74.111.252 (talk) 16:03, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
  • No reason to list it when it is reported by Morocco, not split by the World Health Organization or by most reliable sources. If any of this changes, we can consider the split. --MarioGom (talk) 16:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected required

Please add extended confirmed protection to the page. Wrong unverified data is presented now and then. Thank you. Amkgp (talk) 12:14, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree. I requested it here too: Wikipedia talk:General sanctions/Coronavirus disease 2019. --MarioGom (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Thanks. I have also requested at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19 and Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection. Amkgp (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Major edits is going on in rapid speed that needs to be stopped. If possible please request to administrators for speedy action. Thanks Amkgp (talk) 14:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 Done. It was protected by El C. --MarioGom (talk) 16:12, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Semi applied per the request: here. If it proves insufficient, an ECP upgrade may also be considered. Thanks, everyone. El_C 16:31, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Iran

I don’t think this should be included in the notes for Iran

“The World Health Organization estimates that the true toll in Iran may be as much as five times higher due to lack of testing.”

Because:

1. The source mentions that Iran is testing only severe cases, and many European countries are doing the same; indeed Italy and Spain seem to be testing only severe cases but the notes for them are differently worded (the sentence can be modified to suggest that)

2. The source (a US government funded website) would not be a reliable and trustworthy source for a country which the US is openly hostile to.

3. The WHO does not mention this as an organisation but an individual does.

4. The statement came over two weeks ago and is dated for such a rapidly changing situation

I would suggest modifying the sentence as: “Dr Rick Brennan, [position] of the WHO, suggested that Iran is only testing at-risk individuals/individuals showing symptoms” — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.70.152.26 (talk) 18:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree. It is definitely a POV imbalance (point 1) and factually incorrect (point 3). I'll remove it. If someone has a more reliable source and a more accurate summary of the point, feel free to propose it or add it. --MarioGom (talk) 19:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
I removed the first note item too because it had no source: Includes clinically diagnosed cases and deaths from 9 March 2020 and onwards --MarioGom (talk) 19:03, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Cruise ships

It seems like someone has removed all the cruise ship entries without seeking consensus from the talk page. Most Diamond Princess cases are not counted in national figures, and are also counted separately by JHU/WHO, while the MS Zaandam and Rotterdam are still in international waters and are also not counted in national figures. --17jiangz1 (talk) 20:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

17jiangz1: They were removed by an anonymous user who spent part of today removing countries, territories and cruise ships, as well as other kinds of disruptive changes ([12]). This was stopped once the page was protected again. Feel free to restore them from an older version. --MarioGom (talk) 20:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
 Done and updated. Thanks for the heads up. --17jiangz1 (talk) 21:11, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Updates for Spain

Spain's CCF has shot up to 112,065 again, please update accordingly. https://www.rtve.es/noticias/20200402/mapa-del-coronavirus-espana/2004681.shtml BlackSun2104 (talk) 21:17, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done --MarioGom (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Update Panama numbers, source included

Panama has 1475 confirmed cases, 37 deaths and 10 recovered. Source: https://www.telemetro.com/nacionales/2020/04/02/coronavirus-en-panama-suma-37-defunciones-y-acumula-1-475-casos/2740455.html Webi0311 (talk) 23:35, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Updated, thank you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2020

Jamaica now has 47 cases. [1] 72.252.112.184 (talk) 00:02, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://twitter.com/christufton/status/1245821184526225414?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Inconsistent Notes: Disputed Territories (Yes, again)

A note for Kosovo says "Excluding Serbia. Kosovo is the subject of a territorial dispute between the Republic of Kosovo and the Republic of Serbia."

May someone please add similar notes to other defacto states, especially ones that already had discussions and a consensus. I discussed Northern Cyprus ages ago, the agreement was to include any territory regardless of recognition as long as they had COVID-19 reports. Along with a consensus by most in the talk for adding notes for NC.

Someone keeps removing the notes that others tried to add to Northern Cyprus on multiple occasions. It seems to be the same individual, I would appreciate if someone could make notes consistent for all defacto states. Instead of nitpicking like others are doing.

This isn't a talk for disputing whether there should be such notes, I am referring only to consistency with notes. ChaoticTexan (talk) 02:22, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

East Timor

This edit on April 2 added 1 recovery to Timor Est (which at the time had just 1 active case). This recovery is not sourced. If you look at 2020 coronavirus pandemic in East Timor there used to be no mention of any recovery, until the last edit which mentioned it in the text but didn't source the recovery and didn't update the template of that article.

I suspect it was a mistake. Does anyone have sources?

--80.181.57.31 (talk) 02:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Diamond Princess removed?

Suddenly Diamond Princess has disappeared - no note, no Talk. Has everyone on it been transferred home and added to home country figures? The only country I know of where that happened is Australia. Ptilinopus (talk) 02:32, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I went back and found it and put it back. It was removed by some random IP user just after 14:00 yesterday when the page protection had expired. I think someone readded the other ship and accidentally duplicated Australia instead of adding back this ship, and the duplicate Australia was later removed. United States Man (talk) 02:54, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

America's CCF does not tally.

It will be kind if America's CCF tally with JHU website or 1point3acres website. [1] [2] BlackSun2104 (talk) 02:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I have updated from the 1point3acres site. Don't forget we subtract off a number of territories, so numbers will not match. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:54, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://gisanddata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
  2. ^ https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/

Update Panama cases

Panama has 1475 confirmed cases, 37 deaths and 10 recovered. Source: TVN Panamá https://www.tvn-2.com/nacionales/COVID-19-cobra-vida-personas-contagia_0_5547195311.html Webi0311 (talk) 07:34, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done --MarioGom (talk) 09:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2020

I would like to edit changing data of the Coronavirus cases worldwide Sam Izmaylov (talk) 12:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Sam Izmaylov: Thank you for your interest. This page is currently semi-protected and cannot be edited by new users. If you find something that needs to be changed, you can post a message on this talk page, specify the exact change and add a link to the source. Best, --MarioGom (talk) 12:36, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2020

Quiero cambiar los Confirmados por Covid-19 (Coronavirus) en el pais de Peru, en estos momentos ya somos 1595 casos positivos en Peru, el presidente lo anuncio hace pocos minutos. Gracias 201.240.4.180 (talk) 18:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Updated. Gracias Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:27, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Algeria won't sort correctly.

Does anybody know how to fix the template so that Algeria will not be sorted just before Zimbabwe in the reverse alphabetical order mode? I have looked at the code and cannot spot any difference in Algeria's entry that might make the template do this. Kelisi (talk) 20:03, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

And it is also sorted to the end, just after Zimbabwe in the alphabetical order mode. Weird. Kelisi (talk) 20:05, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Never mind. I found the problem and corrected it. Kelisi (talk) 20:09, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Required updated

Spain's CCF has shot up to 119,199, please update accordingly. [1] BlackSun2104 (talk) 21:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.rtve.es/noticias/20200403/mapa-del-coronavirus-espana/2004681.shtml

Correction and apology

Opps, I accidentally typed updated, what I means that Spain's CCF has risen to 119,199, it need to be updated, apology for that. [1] BlackSun2104 (talk) 22:13, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

I have updated it. In fact you could update it yourself as you are autoconfirmed. Just make sure the supplied reference support the new number! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.rtve.es/noticias/20200403/mapa-del-coronavirus-espana/2004681.shtml

Update Panama cases

Panama has 1673 confirmed cases, 41 deaths and 13 recovered. Source: Telemetro Panamá https://www.telemetro.com/nacionales/2020/04/03/panama-acumula-41-defunciones-y-1-673-casos-de-coronavirus/2743742.html Webi0311 (talk) 23:18, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Updated, thank you. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:50, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2020

Statistics for Pakistan currently on this table are incorrect. Please change:
Total cases = from 2680 to 2547
Deaths = from 40 to 37
Recovered = 126

Seems somebody input the wrong numbers
Source: (http://covid.gov.pk), Government of Pakistan COVID 19 portal (the same which editors have been using in the past). Regards --2607:FEA8:A380:3173:A048:E968:35FF:B827 (talk) 03:44, 4 April 2020 (UTC) 2607:FEA8:A380:3173:A048:E968:35FF:B827 (talk) 03:44, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Updates for Japan

Japan 's CCF has risen to 2,935 an death toll stands at 69. Please update accordingly. https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/newpage_10694.html BlackSun2104 (talk) 05:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks! --17jiangz1 (talk) 07:21, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Abkhazia is listed as a country?

I don't know the protocol for this but what is the criteria for being labelled a country? Abkhazia is only recognized by a handful of other countries. --Colin dm (talk) 06:48, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Colin dm: We currently have a consensus for some autonomous territories (see #Current consensus) but not for limited recognition states. We are discussing an amendment that includes criteria for all territories, including limited recognization states (see #French overseas regions). Note that the number of countries recognizing a territory is not a very useful criteria and we should be looking at where reliable sources are counting these cases. For example, if Georgia officially reported cases in Abkhazia, or the World Health Organization grouped them under Georgia, or most reliable sources do so, then it would be a good idea to merge it with Georgia. On the other hand, if no one reports Abkhazia cases under Georgia, then it would be a good idea to split it. --MarioGom (talk) 08:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
MarioGom: Even by this standard I think Abkhazia should be included, given it is recognised by most countries as an autonomous territory of Georgia, thus should be included as per current consensus for autonomous territories.--17jiangz1 (talk) 14:05, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Colin dm: Also note that the first column is not Countries. It is Locations and is not meant to imply recognition or derecognition of listed territories as states. This is similar to what the World Health Organization does. They have a footnote stating The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of WHO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. We may want to add something similar to our footnote. --MarioGom (talk) 08:28, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Previous discussions have agreed to include the areas of limited recognition, as long as their data is not double counted. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:18, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Meanwhile, someone has deleted the reports for Abkhazia, Donetsk, and Luhansk. Though there is no indication in notes or talk. Ptilinopus (talk) 11:10, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Ptilinopus: Yes. And the same editor removed Georgia too (!). I restored Georgia, obviously. I'm not going to fight much for Abkhazia, Donetsk and Luhansk inclusion or exclusion until we find out where these cases are counted by reliable sources. --MarioGom (talk) 12:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
I think Donetsk and Luhansk should be counted separately since they are not counted by Ukrainian nor Russian sources, and is not under direct control of either. [13] --17jiangz1 (talk) 21:19, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

While I realise a consensus will be in a flux, I would like a semi-stable enumerated list of countries and territories ("these are the territories we recognize"). I have elsewhere used this list of countries, which DOES include Abkhazia, but not Donetsk, nor the French overseas territories, nor Somaliland. Stick to a scheme for a month, or at least a week. I am making a derivative dataset with all possible territories whether they have confirmed cases or not, and it is a pain to retroactive add new ones (plus you got possible edit wars). jax (talk) 13:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

jax: There is an ongoing discussion here: #French overseas regions. I'll propose an RfC soon with a more clear criteria that considers limited recognition states too. Note that using something like List of countries and dependencies by population will not work. Different lists in Wikipedia use different criteria, and that criteria is not necessarily in line with how reliable sources report COVID-19 cases. --MarioGom (talk) 13:28, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Anyway, I agree we need to adopt a more stable criteria. Also, I think we should not rush to add new territories when a first case appears. We can wait 1 or 2 days and see where are these cases counted by the World Health Organization, official sources, reliable independent sources, etc. --MarioGom (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
In this case I don't think international recognition is a significant factor to consider, but seperate healthcare systems/governments and borders impeding the movement of people between territories that are relevant. --17jiangz1 (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
If I may offer some perspective (as someone familiar with the region, not from a health standpoint): Abkhazia's health system will be separate from Georgia. While largely recognized internationally as part of Georgia, it keeps everything separate, and the Georgian authorities will not count anything happening there in their figures either (they will not for South Ossetia either, if/when a case is announced there). Further, I should note the Abkhazian Ministry of Health did make an [announcement on March 31 about the first case (in Russian only), noting it was a preliminary diagnosis. I haven't seen any official confirmation since then, though that is not unexpected. I will also say I'd support listing Abkhazia separate in the table, though that is not to express an opinion on the status of the region one way or another, but to reflect that the system counts it separately from Georgia. Kaiser matias (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me the point is not to give a definitive list of countries by any definition, but to make sure, as much as is possible, that each confirmed case is counted exactly once. There are disagreements about whether some territories are part of the owning country. For instance, does "France" mean Metropolitan France, this together with its overseas regions, or the whole French Republic? I've come across Greenland considered part of Denmark in one or two contexts. OTOH, the British crown dependencies, although included in the UK's postal, telephone and television systems, are formally considered not to be part of the UK.

Notice also that a few self-declared independent states such as Transnistria and Somaliland are listed separately, although these are generally considered to be part of Moldova and Somalia respectively.

But since a territory being "part of" a country is not always clear cut, I think the criterion that the table is using is to include a given territory or self-declared state if

  • there is at least one case in it
  • it has released its own counts of cases
  • the counts of cases published by the owning country do not include those in the territory or self-declared state

I think this is the nearest we can get to an objective and fully inclusive set of criteria for inclusion. Can anyone think of a better idea that meets the requirements of being objective and fully inclusive? — Smjg (talk) 08:50, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Smjg: I think the main criteria should be how reliable sources report it. I don't mean that a reliable source merely exist for the count, but that reliable sources that publish worldwide figures split it (comparative analysis here). I think all three points you stated are also prerequisites for the inclusion to be practical. I think we should only make exceptions for territories that, even if not listed in worldwide tables, are not counted under any other territory either. --MarioGom (talk) 09:20, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Removing Transnistria

Official Moldova figures include Transnistria, there are no reliable sources (including the WHO) splitting this territory (see analysis at the end of #French overseas regions) and there was no explicit consensus to make such exception. I'll remove it. --MarioGom (talk) 12:36, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

This is official data from the Transnistrian Ministry of Health. But honestly updating Transnistria is very tedious, specially with several people deleting it, so I'm not going to do anything. But I think the note should stay (obviously changing "excluding Transnistria" to "including Transnistria"). Super Ψ Dro 17:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Super Dromaeosaurus: But the point is not that there is a source for Transnistria cases. The data is equally available from Moldova official figures. The point is that there are no reliable sources that report world figures and splits Transnistria from Moldova. You can see an analysis of some sources here: User:MarioGom/sandbox/COVID-19 Locations and a summary at #French overseas regions. Transnistria cases are included in Moldova about... everywhere. --MarioGom (talk) 18:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Meanwhile there is no note on Moldova about where Transnistria’s cases are, and whether or not they are included. So they seem to be in limbo. Ptilinopus (talk) 21:58, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Ptilinopus: Transnistria cases are included in Moldova. Per Moldova official figures, the World Health Organization and every consulted reliable source. --MarioGom (talk) 10:22, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:COVID-19_pandemic_data/Archive_9&oldid=1057708553"