User talk:Joplin201017

This user is a member of WikiProject COVID-19, a WikiProject which aims to expand coverage of COVID-19 on Wikipedia. Please feel free to join us.

Joplin201017, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Joplin201017! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Keelan (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in Argentina

Hi. I just wanted to let you know some things about the Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in Argentina page that you do not seem to follow. There are some aspects to take on account for the reported information. First, the total numbers must have (so far until today) a subtraction of 63 cases and recoveries from the Falkland Islands that are included on the Argentina's official reports. Second, the government lately has been "reclassifying" some duplicated or misinformed deaths on some days due to delayed reports, leading to a discrepancy between the number of the reported deaths and the final count. This is addressed on the chart that is included in the main page. The reason that number of daily deaths is added to the charts and not the one that the government reports is that it would mess with the seven-day moving average, as it was made from the beginning to match the number of total deaths. If you have any other concerns, just let me know. — MrE (talk) 22:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MrE:, thanks for letting me know. I will keep in mind the reclassified cases and recoveries. Joplin201017 (talk) 23:57, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Today you updated the page without taking on account this information. Please, remember it next time. — MrE (talk) 00:56, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MrE: I believe I considered the information on the Falkland island COVID-19 website. Maybe you could provide the direct link where statistics for this territory are provided? Thanks Joplin201017 (talk) 01:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This report includes the 63 cases and recoveries from the Falklands. This means that the total number of cases of today (7/21) is 4,798,788 instead of the 4,798,851 that was reported. The same applies to the no. of recoveries. — MrE (talk) 01:22, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see it now. Thanks Joplin201017 (talk) 01:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please check the info before publishing, you've been mispelling the numbers lately. Plus, you keep forgetting to add the ICU numbers to the last graph. — MrE (talk) 23:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @MrE:. I will keep in mind these suggestions. Thanks for letting me know. Joplin201017 (talk) 03:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just coming by again to let you know that you've been having a few mistakes with the no. of active cases of this page. I've been correcting them lately, but please remember to double check before publishing. — MrE (talk) 22:11, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @MrE: thanks for this reminder. Joplin201017 (talk) 22:42, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COVID-19 pandemic in Uruguay

Please stop adding dates in advance without the corresponding data to the graphs. Also, there is no need to wide up the charts, as they are already visible for desktop version and is already wider for mobiles. — MrE (talk) 16:22, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The dates in advance speed up the addition of data to the graphs for editors editing multiple countries’s statistics. Also, widening the graphs avoids clashing of months names at the X axis as more data is added to the graphs. Hope you understand Joplin201017 (talk) 16:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If that's an issue, just add a xAxisAngle parameter to the chart only. Do not add dates in advance as it may lead to errors. I was asked to keep up to date the Uruguay page by another editor so I've been updating the page daily lately, and it could lead to a confusion when I upload the data. — MrE (talk) 16:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the xAxisAngle could resolve the issue of months clashing. Also, I added the data to Uruguay site as stats were missing but noticed you’re keeping it lately so that’s a good job from your side. Apologies for confusions. Thanks for the effort. Joplin201017 (talk)| ~

August 2021

Hello, I'm Flix11. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Flix11 (talk) 09:54, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Flix11: the source I used came from CNBC Indonesia, with data matching The Ministry of Health today. Joplin201017 (talk) 10:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then write on the edit summary, for the sake of check and balances. Flix11 (talk) 10:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies as I forgot to include an edit summary on my edit today, will do next time if editing Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Thanks for letting me know about this issue with referencing (talk) 10:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Joplin. Same question as the above, only more so, in regard to your edits to the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland article. Where, o where did you get your data? I've reverted, so please feel free to revert my reversion and add some source citations when you do. Thanks,— JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 07:46, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JohnFromPinckney: The data to make the two graphs came from the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health and Github COVID-19 Switzerland. Thanks for reminding referencing. Joplin201017 (talk) 07:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, again. Thanks for your response, but the addition of two URLs in a single edit summary is insufficient. First of all, the sources need to be cited in the article, and secondly, the URLs you provided don't help me verify anything. I started to add the URLs from your ES into the page myself, but I could not tell what source goes with what info. The bag.admin.ch URL is a page with at least 30 links to possible sources, and the first file I looked it was 23 pages long (and still didn't seem to match the values you're using). The rsalzer.github.io page won't even open for me; it loads data forever, then times out, then "loads" some more but times out... And anyway, who the heck is Rob Salzer? Why is he a reliable source?

Can you please add the correct, specific reference citations, including page numbers, to the COVID-19 pandemic in Switzerland page itself? Thank you,— JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 22:28, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @JohnFromPinckney: the data for daily cases graph came specifically from [the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health - COVID Laboratory confirmed cases] and the data for daily deaths graph came specifically from [the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health - COVID Laboratory confirmed deaths]. I will add reference numbers for these graphs in the page. Thanks for your help. Joplin201017 (talk) 03:59, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for yours. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 19:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COVID-19 Statistics

Hello, thank you for your recent contributions to various articles of COVID-19 Statistics of different countries. However, it has been noticed by multiple editors that your edits do not follow set guidelines and/or rules regarding editing on Wikipedia. Most of your additions do not provide any source for the data (reliable citations). Please get yourself acquainted with various policies before making further contributions, as it is cumbersome for experienced editors to clean up after.

Regarding the article COVID-19 pandemic in Japan and various others, I have noticed that you are dividing the Statistics section into various sub-sections. This is not recommended practice, especially if the reasoning behind it is that it "facilitates editing". Subsections are only created when there is enough content to justify their creation. A simple statistical chart does not require its own sub-section, this adds to the length of the page which can cause navigation issues and also adds to the size of the article.

It is evident that you are new to editing and your edits do seem to be in good faith, however, repeat edits like these may cause an issue. Please refrain from adding anymore un-sourced data and/or creating new subsections in the Statistics sections.•Shawnqual• 📚 • 💭 21:28, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Shawnqual: The graphs I have created for several countries evidencing daily statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic come directly from the timeline provided in the website of each page that is updated from other wikipedia editors daily from validated sources. You simply need to use excel to get the daily numbers from cumulative numbers based on subtraction and thus you get a list of daily numbers of cases and deaths, it’s a very simple process to do. In this way my edits for every country’s pandemic statistics come directly from Wikipedia to maintain the consistency across each page. But I will start adding the direct source (the sources provided in the timeline) to the graphs I create on the page.

In terms of subsections, when I started editing individual countries statistics I based the order of subheadings on other pages already created in Wikipedia. Some countries have subsections for the statistics section others don’t. I will try to avoid subsections given that the information in the subsection itself cannot justify a subsection as clarified here from you.

At last, I noticed when you created a new class (class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed) in the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan page in order to collapse the list of festivals and concerts cancelled in Japan due to the pandemic, the addition of this class somehow eliminated the listing of the sections that follow the “Socio-economic impact” section in the main page, including the reference list. I reverted this edit from you but maybe you could find a way to include it again without eliminating the listing of downstream sections in the main page. Thank you Joplin201017 (talk) 00:08, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Joplin201017:, You need to elaborate on 'come directly from the timeline provided in the website of each page that is updated from other wikipedia editors daily from validated sources.' Are you referring to the timeline charts on each country's article? If yes, there are multiple countries whose charts have not been updated in a long while, yet you have managed to get their daily cases. Eg: for Oman. Where exactly did you get the numbers for the charts?

Certain countries do have subsections but that is only when there is a separate article for the statistics of the said country. This is not done on the main article of the country, especially not in the way of giving every chart its own subsection. I thought it was clear enough to you to not do this anymore, but I have noticed that on the page for Malta, you have went ahead and created sub-sections as recent as yesterday! Please also stop increasing widths of the charts. The maximum width you can use for a chart without it going out of the main page width is 950. 800-850 is also good enough. Regarding height, it is best to keep it as low as possible, more height values take up page space and add to the total length of the article.

Thank you for bringing the issue on Japan's article to my attention, I will be looking into it and solve it.•Shawnqual• 📚 • 💭 09:35, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shawnqual: I take the data from the timeline of the page yes. As for countries with no data on their timelines in a long time, I directly get the data either from the country statistics dashboard site (and reference the website it was taken from) or from other sources such as JHU, our world data or world meters in case of countries with no regular statistics updates such as Cameroon and others. In terms of subsections, I edited the Malta statistics page to divide the graph combining recoveries, cases and deaths into separate graphs as deaths aren’t comparable to cases. However, I apologise as I did not take into account our discussion into sub sections and how they enlarge the page content without adding anything to them. At last, I usually limit width to 1000 but I can do 950 as you’re suggesting. I never use height above 300 and for graphs in rectangular format like in COVID-19 pandemic in Iran I never include height. Thanks for this message I will keep in mind all your points here. Joplin201017 (talk) 10:08, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joplin201017: Please specify where you got the data for the new cases per day and new deaths per day charts for Oman. I have checked some articles where you have added new charts, and the official sites do not contain those detailed statistics. In that case, you need to pinpoint exactly where the data came from and add it as a reference.

Furthermore, I just noticed that you have changed the type of chart on Oman's article from line to rectangle. This causes a major issue in terms of display and readable information for the viewers. You must have noted that charts on every article are line type and not rectangle type, the reason behind that is what I have stated above. Editors have been contributing to the COVID-19 pandemic articles since January of last year and a sort of consensus has been established in discussions since long ago. Please do not assume that it is up to an individual editor on how things are done on a range of articles. Your contributions can be seen as counter-productive, as they are only increasing work for editors in the future.

I would recommend correcting your contributions, such as removing the redundant subsections, fixing widths and also changing the chart type to as it was before (that is if you have done that on multiple articles already - I haven't checked yet).•Shawnqual• 📚 • 💭 11:25, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shawnqual: I will proceed to add reference to the Oman statistics graphs as you are requesting. I changed to rectangle format in the Oman page as multiple pages have displayed this format particularly for those with weekend data gaps (it looks better); however I was not aware of the previous consensus discussions on the formatting of the graphs. I have updated the data for countries based on the format their pages were set up to and some did not contain the consensus format you are describing here. I will therefore change the formatting for countries statistics to match consensus formatting. Thank you Joplin201017 (talk) 11:42, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joplin201017: The rectangle charts might look better at the top but did you not notice how jumbled and incoherent the dates at the bottom look? I will be waiting to see the reference on the article for Oman, and also for an explanation if it is not evident how the data was gathered. Here is a warning for your unsourced contributions so far.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. •Shawnqual• 📚 • 💭 11:52, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shawnqual: I have added the reference here. I'm not contradicting the consensus formatting established by Wikipedia users early on the pandemic. I just mentioned that I have updated the data for several countries in their respective charts based on the formatting the charts were already set up by editors who stop updating the charts long time ago. I was not aware of the consensus formatting but I am now. I appreciate your point here and therefore will apply these directions in future edits. I believe I am not disrupting any page with my edits as I am updating the pages with sourced information that is directly extracted from the timelines of the countries or the respective government COVID-19 Dashboard site. I have done this given that most statistic charts have not been updated in more than a year (some countries like the vast majority of African countries do not even have statistics in their respective pages). Thanks for your points here. It helps improving the quality of information Wikipedia offers to their readers. Joplin201017 (talk) 12:03, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked indefinitely

This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet that was created to violate Wikipedia policy. Note that using multiple accounts is allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that all edits made while evading a block or ban may be reverted or deleted. If this account is not a sockpuppet, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. PhilKnight (talk) 17:43, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Joplin201017 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@PhilKnight: To start off, I admit I’m a sock of Javito1993 and therefore your check user on my account was correct. I sincerely apologize for breaching the WP:SOCK as I now know understand in detail the policies that govern Wikipedia and thus deeply regret my actions and erroneous decisions. I will never violate the WP:SOCK policy if you give me another chance. However, in my defense, I created the Javito1993 editor without knowing in depth these policies (as I was just starting in Wikipedia) and how to effectively communicate with users through the talk page (you can ask @CodeMars04:, @MrE: and @Future Perfect at Sunrise: if you need more evidence on this). By the time I realized that some of my edits were causing distress to other editors by them thinking that I was disruptive editing their preferred pages, I was already blocked (the Javito1993 account), as you can read in this SPI. Moreover, the person who initiated the SPI against Javito1993 and Joplin2010 wanted at any cost to stop me from editing pages he thought he was the only one entitled to, even violating my IP privacy to build a SPI case at any cost and himself was found of breaching the WP:SOCK policy. Back then when my first account was blocked I did not know how to regain credibility and show that my contributions were well intentioned, and therefore this drove me into creating Joplin2010 to start again on Wikipedia. I know understand that this was a clear breach of the WP:SOCK policy and I shall not do it again if you give me another chance. If this helps to change your decision, I have extensively contributed to several Wikipedia pages in good faith, as @CodeMars04: and @Nguyen QuocTrung: can testify to you. As you can appreciate from my contributions record, ever since I created this new account, I have immensely contributed to the update of the statistics section of multiple COVID-19 country Wikipedia pages that were previously out dated such as the COVID-19 pandemic in Iran and COVID-19 pandemic in France pages. I decided to undertake this immense effort after I realized that most regular editors of these pages stopped updating them by mid July 2020 although the pandemic is still raging to date. I have been thanked by several editors for my efforts throughout these few months in Wikipedia. Could you please reconsider your decision? Thank you. Joplin201017 (talk) 19:24, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The user has access to their original account, and requested unblock there; so this request cannot be accepted. All future unblock requests and discussion should take place there. Girth Summit _(blether) 14:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@PhilKnight: I seriously regret not complying with the WP:SOCK policy. What I did was wrong and now understand why this policy was established in the first place and how it prevents article disruption in Wikipedia. However, I believe I can still contribute to Wikipedia with sourced-based information (based on my contributions to Wikipedia) and have previously collaborated with other editors to make the most benefit of Wikipedia articles. Could you please have another look at this unblock request? Thanks. Joplin201017 (talk) 09:02, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should log in to your original account and request an unblock there. PhilKnight (talk) 09:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilKnight: I don’t seem to recall the right password for logging into the @Javito1993: account and Wikipedia doesn’t seem to have the reset password option. It has been more than three months that I have been using the Joplin account. Could you advice on what to do next? Thank you. Joplin201017 (talk) 00:29, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UTC)

@PhilKnight: I tried resetting the password for the @Javito1993: account but unfortunately since this account was my first and only lasted 10 days, I didn’t have the time to link an email account to it. Thus, I cannot complete retrieving a password due to incomplete account information. Do you think I could make a case using my current account, which also has an email address attached to it? Thanks for your help and apologies for inconveniences caused. Joplin201017 (talk) 23:56, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot log in to your original account, then I suggest you make a fresh log in request here. PhilKnight (talk) 08:39, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PhilKnight: I just found out the old password. Already made a request there. Thanks for your help. Joplin201017 (talk) 10:26, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Another Believer: do you think I could make a case on this SPI block? I’m afraid the COVID-19 pages I used to contribute to regularly like COVID-19 pandemic in Ukraine, COVID-19 pandemic in Romania, COVID-19 pandemic in France and COVID-19 pandemic in Iran are quickly falling out of date. I believe although Wikipedia doesn’t have deadlines, my contributions for the past three months have shown I’m capable of proactively contributing to the Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19 if given another chance. I regret my past mistakes and lack of experience on resolving conflicts, and will learn from these mistakes so I can become a better editor. Joplin201017 (talk) 07:52, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of COVID-19 pandemic in Russia cumulative and daily charts

A tag has been placed on COVID-19 pandemic in Russia cumulative and daily charts requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

It may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion under CSD G5

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 23:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]