Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Shortages is Impact + Socio-Economic?

Shouldn't the Shortages related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic page also be placed under "Impact --> Socio-Economic"? This change does highly impact businesses too, especially supermarkets. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 09:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Or should there be only one instance of Shortages related to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic page as "Shortages", placed only in the "Health issues --> Problems and restrictions" section? Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 09:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia's response to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic

Should Wikipedia's response to the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic be added? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:21, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Update: I've added to the Information subsection, alongside media coverage and misinformation entries. ---Another Believer (Talk) 16:08, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
Aren't we all in a conflict of interest writing on our own response to COVID?--Pestilence Unchained (talk) 05:46, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
Pestilence Unchained, Well, who else is going to write the entry? If you have specific concerns, please share on the response article's talk page. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

RfC on linking to template namespace

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus: Option B

!votes (stolen from @Can I Log In:): 8/13/7 (7/9.5/4 adjusted for dual votes).

Arguments for option A primarily were based on utility (or, in one case, perhaps personal convenience). Supporters of option C mostly also supported option B, and there is not a consensus for option C at this time.

Ultimately, the consensus reached was in favor of Option B. The data should be preserved, but current links to templates should be retargeted, either to (sections of) newly expanded articles or (sections of) existing articles that transclude the templates. If the link's topic is not sufficiently notable to have an article or a section, the link should be removed. It is worth noting that the scope of this RfC did not include, and no consensus was reached as to, whether any template linked to should exist at all.

(non-admin closure) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 23:17, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

The "Data and figures" section of this navbox links either exclusively or almost exclusively to the template namespace. Here are three options:

  • Option A: Keep as is and continue to link to template namespace.
  • Option B: Expand the linked templates into standalone articles.
  • Option C: Remove the linked templates from the navbox.

I look forward to reading your thoughts. 06:17, 22 March 2020 (UTC)  Bait30  Talk? 05:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Discussion and !votes

  • Option C or B We should not be linking to templates. It is against usual Wikipedia practice. Current links to templates can be dropped, replaced with links to article sections, or, where appropriate, the linked templates can be expanded into standalone articles. Bondegezou (talk) 07:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Before making a decision, it would be good to know why it is linking to templates. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 08:11, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment: +1 to Pbsouthwood, and another question: does the navbox already link to the pages, which transclude these templates? Do these pages have captions and/or prose describing the transcluded content? —⁠andrybak (talk) 09:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
    I assume that each template is transcluded into at least one article within the scope of the navbox, but have not checked, and it is technically possible that I may be wrong. In most cases I would expect at least two transclusions, into two articles, otherwise why bother to make it a template. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
    Here's list of translusion counts:
Transclusions counts
Template Transclusions
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data 2
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/International medical cases 1 — Timeline of the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/WHO situation reports None
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/China medical cases by province 1 — Timeline of the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/China medical cases chart 4
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Iran medical cases all location-related templates are transcluded once on pages "2020 coronavirus outbreak in X"
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Japan medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Japan medical cases chart
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Diamond Princess medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/South Korea medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/South Korea medical cases chart
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Philippines medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Singapore medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Thailand medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/United Arab Emirates medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Europe medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/France medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Germany medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Italy medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Italy medical cases chart
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Poland medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Sweden medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Switzerland medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/United Kingdom medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/United States medical cases
Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Map (dots)
Most templates have a single transclusion. One has no transclusions at all. And two templates have more than one transclusion. —⁠andrybak (talk) 14:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option C or B per Bondegezou rationale--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B based on what Bondegezou said. Idealigic (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Since there seems to be a suitable article using all except one template, I see no added value to the reader in having an extra link from the navbox to each table. I would be interested to know the rationale for having these tables as templates rather than the more usual practice of simply including them in the text. I can see the point when a table is used in more than one article, but not when it is in only one article.· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 18:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A or B. These data are extremely valuable. Most readers don't know or care what a MediaWiki namespace is. If someone wants to turn these into articles in mainspace, that's great, but I think a link to the data should be preserved in any case. 72.209.60.95 (talk) 01:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
    I have not seen anyone contest that the data are valuable, just the way they are being used is unusual and not covered by any manual of style guidance that I am aware of. As tables in a regular article they are plainly encyclopeic. As naked tables without context the case is not clear.
    What is the specific usefulness claimed for them as stand-alone tables, beyond their obvious value in articles where they are given context and explained? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 15:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
    Now that you mention it, maybe there's no need to link to the templates specifically instead of the articles which transclude them. For example, instead of linking to Template:2019–20 coronavirus outbreak data/Switzerland medical cases, we could just link to 2020_coronavirus_outbreak_in_Switzerland#Statistics. I'm fine with doing that. 72.209.60.95 (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A the navigation to all the relevant pages is useful to quickly jump around to edit or read. I expect our readers will also appreciate it. So WP:IAR is applicable if an rule is an obstacle here. Removing the links does not add to the encyclopedia and would be slightly disruptive. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:34, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A. It is useful, WP:IAR. I also cannot find any policies or guidelines that explicitly discourage linking to templates. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 03:51, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
    Useful in what way? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 15:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A Works well the way it is. We can innovate and do what makes a better encyclopedia. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A The templates provide useful encyclopedic, sourced information and in this context including them in the navbox seems appropriate. The context in each template is provided by the {{main}} headers in the <noinclude> header sections. This context may not make sense for more typical Wikipedia navboxes. Obviously, a navbox for functional templates like {{t}} or {{citation needed}} would not make sense in the main namespace. Boud (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
We have a guideline on this. It's WP:NOTSTATSBOOK. Shouldn't we do what it says? Bondegezou (talk) 07:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment. I do not know if you are all aware that transclusions can be done from main space, in the same way that templates are transcluded from template space. If these tables are so generally useful that they should be used as stand-alone content, why are they not in main space as articles? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 07:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B: While there is nothing wrong with option A, I find option B to be a better choice per 72.209.60.95. I just think it would be better to avoid linking to other namespaces as much as possible. It might confuse many newcomers who might think of it as a template with example numbers or something. Side note: I am officially no longer an uninvolved editor in this RfC so I will not be the one closing the discussion. I recommend waiting a week before requesting a closure per WP:ANRFC  Bait30  Talk? 08:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC).
  • Option A Keep it as is and expand given their usefulness. Accesscrawl (talk) 16:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A or B I think they are useful as is and provide valuable information, although I would be fine with expanding them into articles as well, particularly if they become larger. ~ HAL333 20:42, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B or C. We should not be linking to template namespace from mainspace. Navboxes in mainspace are for navigating between articles. If the template is already transcluded to an article, then the material is already navigable. If it isn't, then it should be, otherwise it defeats the purpose of the template namespace. 212.135.65.247 (talk) 10:31, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B or C. Wikipedia often has too much trouble maintaining a firm line between content for readers and maintenance content for editors. My interpretation of WP:TMP is that templates are firmly on the maintenance side of that line, and we should not blur it. If the data is useful, find another way to present it. Sdkb (talk) 06:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B. It makes it easier to navigate it for most Internet users. Most users of modern Internet are not interested of technicalities and inners of many services. Fortunny (talk) 12:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option C. The relevant guideline here is WP:TG which states that Templates should not normally be used to store article text, as this makes it more difficult to edit the content. Additionally, template pages do not show up in search results by default (most users will not use any "Advanced search" option, nor are navboxes visible on mobile, which is at least 50% of our readers. That means that whoever is creating these templates, are creating it for themselves and a small group of editors, and not for the wider community. Option B is irrelevant here, if the topic is notable for an article, expand, if it isn't add it to an article. If both aren't an option, that means that the template has no reason to exist. --Gonnym (talk) 06:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B The data are very useful and current the CDC does not publish a daily report of cases and deaths by state. Not like other countries. Link to page with the statistics (table of state cases and deaths) from main page would be fine. Seatto23 (talk) 19:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B Seems less confusing for users and allows us to maintain useful data. MosquitoBird11 (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option A/C. These templates are used in other articles, if we make standalone articles out of them this gets awkward. We could reduce the number of links here, however. Link to a list of these templates. --mfb (talk) 02:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B. Length of the template is getting out of hand. gidonb (talk) 00:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)
  • On the wall, templates are more for the 'behind the scenes' part of WP, as opposed to general reading. However, I still think that we should have the links there... Perhaps I am biased towards what would be more useful to me, as an editor. >>BEANS X2t 11:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Option B or C, a lot of the arguments for option A are WP:ILIKEIT. I think the arguments given for the other options are better. Swordman97 talk to me 22:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Outdated/updated templates

Why does this main template link to outdated templates such as Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/International medical cases and Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/Case fatality rate, and not to Template:COVID-19 testing by country which is updated and includes per capita info? Thanks, WikiHannibal (talk) 10:05, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Asia

I propose removing "East", "Central and North", "South", "Southeast", and "West", and just having subheaders for Mainland China, India, and Philippines. The Africa and Europe sections do not have regional subheaders, and splitting Asia into so many section makes finding specific locations more difficult, especially for editors who may not have a strong sense of geography. Thoughts? ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I'd be fine with keeping subheaders for North Asia and South Asia since there are Wikipedia articles specific to the regions: 2020 coronavirus pandemic in North Asia and 2020 coronavirus pandemic in South Asia. I prefer removing the subheaders for regions without articles specific to the pandemic. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Adding the WHO six special envoys on COVID-19

Should we add the WHO six special envoys under people?

  • Professor Dr Maha El Rabbat, former Minister of Health of Egypt;
  • Dr David Nabarro, former special adviser to the United Nations Secretary-General on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and Climate Change;
  • Dr John Nkengasong, Director of the African Centres for Disease Control and Prevention;
  • Dr Mirta Roses, former Director of the WHO Region of the Americas;
  • Dr Shin Young-soo, former Regional Director of the WHO Region of the Western Pacific;
  • And Professor Samba Sow, Director-General of the Center for Vaccine Development in Mali.[1]

References

  1. ^ "WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 on 21 February 2020". www.who.int. Retrieved 2020-04-28.

Redlinks

Can someone help with the excessive redlinks in the data section per WP:REDNOT? The data section needs a lot of editing per the RfC.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 04:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

will look--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Cell width

I was thinking consistent cell widths would make the template look cleaner. Does someone know how to make the subheaders for Asia, Europe, and North America the same width?

@Mfb: I believe you helped with this before. Do you mind taking another look?

---Another Believer (Talk) 15:33, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Like that. Didn't do it for the separate countries in Asia, but feel free to give them a groupwidth as well if you prefer. --mfb (talk) 00:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Mfb, Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2020

Please add new article about the COVID-19 pandemic-related famines to this template. Thanks. 36.77.94.109 (talk) 08:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

 Already done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 11:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2020

Adding charts that must be maked and other charts such as Barbados, and Poland add statistics, preparations, timeline and others. 186.111.135.164 (talk) 04:38, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Melmann 08:19, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Cell widths

@Mfb: A while back, you had made cells widths consistent, which (IMO) made the template look much cleaner (see this diff). Are you able to do this again? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Just a matter of increasing the width until everything fits. Done. --mfb (talk) 23:50, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Mfb, Thank you! ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding Responses Section

What do you think about adding a section for responses to the navbox? As of now, the responses are sort of scattered, with overall national responses and the list of legislation under impacts, some specific government responses under location, lockdowns under data, medical responses (vaccine research) under health issues and specific legislative responses (CARES act) not mentioned at all. There is a small but significant difference between the impact of the outbreak and responses to it, which I think warrants a new section. Zoozaz1 (talk) 13:38, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

People section needs updating

It's too weighted toward Chinese who were active early on in the pandemic, but might not reach the bar for inclusion now that the pandemic is much wider-spread. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:20, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Covid fan tutte

Where in the template should we add Covid fan tutte? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:00, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

It seems too specific for the current template, but it could be worth mentioning in Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the performing arts. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:59, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2020

Add Hamad Hasan to officials. He is the minister of helath of Lebanon. Fieldering (talk) 20:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello @Fieldering: What has made him notable? Is he part of a COVID-19 Taskforce or any notable events? I know that he is the Minister for Health and in that case we might just add all Health Ministers to the template. If he is notable, feel free to provide reliable sources. Thanks. KRtau16 (talk) 10:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
@KRtau16: The diffrence is that in Lebanon, no special commitee or taskforce was formed during the pandemic, so the ministry of health has been managing the situation. Here are some media news that shows his notablity: [1][2][3][4][5]
 Done KRtau16 (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "1".
  2. ^ "2".
  3. ^ "3".
  4. ^ "4".
  5. ^ "5".

Adding "Long Covid"?

Greetings and felicitations. In my opinion "Long Covid" should be added to the template, perhaps in the "Health issues" group in the "Problems and restrictions" subgroup as possibly the most appropriate place. Can we reach consensus on adding it? I'm open to suggestions, including on putting it somewhere else. —DocWatson42 (talk) 07:06, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Support: I am surprised that it is not added to the template! KRtau16 (talk) 01:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 May 2021

Drew Weissman should be added to the list of researchers Scienceguy52 (talk) 03:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

 Done Zoozaz1 talk 03:40, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

COVAX

Appropriate? Mapsax (talk) 23:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

article looks good...IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 March 2021

Domenico Arcuri and Angelo Borrelli have been replaced by Francesco Paolo Figliuolo and Fabrizio Curcio, respectively. 93.44.108.28 (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:47, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Easy to find in the articles about these people. Arcuri, Borrelli. But we have this endlessly growing list of people again that we nuked before. Can we nuke that list again? --mfb (talk) 01:45, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
Mfb has provided the sources --93.44.108.28 (talk) 17:09, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
 Done Tol | Talk | Contribs 18:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

June 2021 cases and deaths. Links are not showing up in template

I see the links in the template wikitext, but they are not showing up in the template. See links:

I have editing rights, but I added an edit request anyway, because I don't know why the links are not showing up. --Timeshifter (talk) 09:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done Zoozaz1 talk 13:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Zoozaz1! I like the skewing on your user page.
--Timeshifter (talk) 14:44, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Zoozaz1 talk 15:09, 11 June 2021 (UTC)


Adding Vietnam's health minister to "People"

Hello, just FYI adding Nguyễn Thanh Long to "People". Arcahaeoindris (talk) 23:12, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Draft:COVID-19 vaccines

@Zoozaz1: @PK2: @Steelkamp: @Dabaqabad: @Abrilando232: @Arcahaeoindris:
Draft:COVID-19 vaccines is a navbox for vaccines based on COVID-19 vaccine, I plan on moving to live, but perhaps it should be merged here. .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 05:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

0mtwb9gd5wx, I don't think your ping worked, but it's up to you. I'd be fine either way. Zoozaz1 talk 17:36, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
@Zoozaz1: @PK2: @Steelkamp: @Dabaqabad: @Abrilando232: @Arcahaeoindris:
Ooops.. the vaccines are already, deep, in there, but without taxonomy, I think I will add all the vaccines from here to mine, put that on just those vaccine articles, then re-arrange this template. What are the widgets to fix a Navbox? .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 02:26, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I support the merged, Those specific vaccines were entired navbox group, I hope it worked. Abrilando232 (talk) 03:00, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
@Zoozaz1: @PK2: @Steelkamp: @Dabaqabad: @Abrilando232: @Arcahaeoindris:
sandbox test seems to bo ok, so manual copy of COVID-19 vaccines into COVID-19 pandemic. should transclusions be used? .... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 10:39, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

Remove "WikiProject China" tag above or not?

As this pandemic is nowadays world-known, I don't think that list only one country WikiProject tag would have benefits for us? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:31, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Interestingly, articles like COVID-19 pandemic, Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 apps, Severe acute respiratory syndrome–related coronavirus, COVID-19 misinformation, and COVID-19 pandemic cases are also listed as under WikiProject China. --Yair rand (talk) 03:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Probably a leftover from early 2020. I guess we can remove all of these. The other consistent option would be to add all affected countries but that clearly doesn't make sense. --mfb (talk) 04:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
I personally would leave in WikiProject China as the pandemic did start there and because international relations between China and other countries have gotten complicated because of that. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:59, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
Agreed, I think the wp banner should stay.— Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 19:34, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Name sorting

I added some internal comments as a reminder.

  • Chinese names (Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Macau, Malaysia, Singapore, etc) are usually expressed family name/surname first. I had to re-sort many of these.
  • Korean names and Vietnamese names are usually expressed family name/surname first as well. Vietnamese names should be sorted by family name, but remember to in articles refer to Vietnamese people by given names as per the custom.
  • Japanese names in English are usually expressed surname last, although in Japanese itself names expressed surname first, which is why Iwata Kentaro is listed as Kentaro Iwata. Note that NHK, various agencies of the Japanese government, and The Economist have switched to using surname first for Japanese people. (this is why Naomi Osaka was called "Osaka Naomi" in the Olympics 2020 ceremony)
  • Some cultures do not have family names. Ethiopian names (remember Tedros), Icelandic names, and Malay names do not usually have family names and should be sorted by given name.

Please make internal comments when sorting names of people from various cultures to remind users.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 20:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Size

Per WP:NAVBOX, navigational boxes "are particularly useful for a small, well-defined group of articles". I think that this particular navbox should be split into multiple, more specific navboxes on particular topics. At least these come to my mind:

  • Template:COVID-19 timeline
  • Template:COVID-19 in Africa
  • Template:COVID-19 in Asia
  • Template:COVID-19 in Europe
  • Template:COVID-19 in North America
  • Template:COVID-19 in Oceania
  • Template:COVID-19 in South America
  • Template:COVID-19 impacts
  • Template:COVID-19 healt issues
  • Template:COVID-19 vaccines
  • Template:Deployment of COVID-19 vaccines
  • Template:COVID-19 treatment
  • Template:COVID-19 variants

Thoughts? --LoЯd ۞pεth 23:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree on spliting, also we can list in the page of impacts. There are some specialized COVID navboxes by countries, and we should split it, only main content remained here. Thingofme (talk) 14:29, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Red links in Templates section

There are a lot of red links in the Data (Template) section. We should probably remove links to templates that don't exist or have been deleted at Tfd. For section links to the respective articles about the pandemic in the specific country should just have the name of the country in plain text. Any thoughts? --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 17:06, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:COVID-19_pandemic/Archive_2&oldid=1142798547"