Jump to content

Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic data

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Legobot (talk | contribs) at 07:01, 21 April 2020 (Removing expired RFC template.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 5←Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15

US 1Point3Acres deaths

So recently 1Point3Acres (1p3a) has this little button next to it's death count for the United States. Upon clicking it, it shows a "probable deaths" figure. 1p3a says this probable death count is included in the overall death figure that most 1p3a visitors see upon loading the page.

What do we do with this new figure? Subtract it from the overall death count?

Cheers, u|RayDeeUx (contribs | talk page) 00:18, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

RayDeeUx, that seems to be the way to go for now, unless we're able to find another reliable data aggregator. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:25, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
RayDeeUx, WHO Situation Reports do not include these additional deaths. The values for most other countries do not include them either. I would say subtraction is the way to go. --MarioGom (talk) 07:37, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Can I work as editor from Bangladesh

I can infrom you so fast Sahabuddin2383 (talk) 08:46, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

If you can verify stats to a reliable source, ideally a government source or health agency, absolutely! BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 09:30, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Sahabuddin2383, the template is semi-protected, so new users cannot edit it directly. You will have to post your edit-update request here, on the talk page (I think). We also need the link toward your source for Bangladesh number. Yug (talk) 09:56, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2020

{{subst:trim|1=


change hong kong death toll from 4 to 5

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ToThAc (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2020 (UTC)


Countries and territories count

Is it possible to align different sources for the number of countries and territories affected? At time of writing, Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data gives 235, whereas Template:Territories affected by the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic and the infobox at 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic give 210. It Is Me Here (talk) 19:04, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

It Is Me Here: I'm not sure how to do it. We do not use Worldometer for this template and there is an ongoing discussion to stop using it in any COVID-19-related article (WP:WORLDOMETER), but {{Territories affected by the 2019-20 coronavirus pandemic}} uses it. We'll have to check where it is used. But anyway, it will be hard to align since other places use the number of territories from JHU CSSE, which is also different from the number used in this template... --MarioGom (talk) 19:10, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
There's a discussion about this here: Template talk:Cases in 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic#Proposed merge. I'll give it a try. --MarioGom (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

IMPORTANT : Update cases/deaths France

Hello, Indeed, there is an error about the number of cases and deaths that you report to us via Wikipedia.

As of April 18, 2020, according to the source you use (the French government site), there are 111,821 cases tested in hospitals. But also 22,163 tested cases confirmed and 39,972 cases not tested in “EHPAD” and “EMS” (these are retirement homes). All that remains is to add: a total of 133,984 cases tested with COVID-19 in France and 173,956 cases in total.

Regarding the number of deaths, there are 19,323 deaths in hospitals and 7,481 deaths in “EHPAD” and “EMS”. A total of 26,804 deaths in France.

Thank you and good luck in this difficult period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.13.214.175 (talk) 19:28, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

You can check on "Santé Publique France"[1], the number of cases of COVID-19 in France: 111,821 cases in hospitals and 62,135 cases in EHPAD and ESMS. It's just ! --Wikiliz972 (talk) 19:58, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
Wikiliz972, check here for the full breakdown: [1]. 111,821 is the total number of confirmed cases (not in hospitals, it includes confirmed cases in EHPAD). 62,135 is the total number of confirmed and probable cases in EHPAD. Both figures overlap. --MarioGom (talk) 22:07, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Santé Publique France".

RfC: Criteria for territory listing

From 27 to 30 March, we ran an RfC that resulted in the split of some territories (Link to RfC). While the decision did lead to a more stable situation, it did not cover all possible territories. These were deferred to a future discussion but no agreement was reached so far (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). After the implementation of the decision, we also faced some implementation problems such as the lack of reliable sources for overseas France after 26 March (example discussion) or that our criteria for some territories such as Åland Islands and the Akrotiri and Dhekelia was completely unique and not backed by any reliable source. Further discussions did not lead to any clear consensus to solve these disputes, and the original RfC did not provide enough guidance to solve them either. The goal of this RfC is to agree on more comprehensive criteria for territory listing. --MarioGom (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Proposals

Proposal A (MarioGom)

This proposal consists of using the World Health Organization as a baseline with some exceptions based on other reliable sources (WP:RS).

The primary criteria for territory listing will be the scheme followed by the World Health Organization Situation Reports (example: 7 April 2020). The following exceptions will be applied:

Also, territories that are not listed at WHO Situation Reports at all, may be listed if all the following requisites are met:

  1. There is at least one reliable source for the statistics.
  2. The counts are not included under any other territory in WHO Situation Reports.

Cruise ships may also be listed standalone as long as they are not reported under any specific country.

Some notes about practical implications of this proposal. Territories that would meet criteria to be listed standalone:

  • The partially recognized states of Palestine and Kosovo both meet all criteria to maintain the listing. Both because of WHO Situation Reports as well as all other cited reliable sources.
  • All British Overseas Territories and Crown dependencies except Akrotiri and Dhekelia (see below) meet all criteria to split them. Both because of WHO Situation Reports as well as all other cited reliable sources.
  • Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands will be maintained split from the United States per WHO Situation Reports as well as part of the cited reliable sources.
  • Greenland and the Faroe Islands meet all criteria to maintain the split from Denmark.
  • Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten meet all criteria to maintain the split from the Netherlands.
  • The Caribbean Netherlands meets criteria for inclusion since they are split by the World Health Organization (listed as Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba).
  • Northern Cyprus currently meets criteria to be listed since it is not counted under Cyprus by any source and reliable sources exist for it. This is additionally backed by Reuters.
  • Donetsk People's Republic and Luhansk People's Republic currently meet the last criteria for listing since reliable sources exist, and they are not counted in Ukrainian or Russian statistics by any source. Note that statistics from Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts published by Ukraine do not include cases in areas currently not under de facto control by Ukraine.

Territories that would not meet criteria to be listed standalone:

  • The Åland Islands are merged with Finland because neither WHO Situation Reports or any reliable source publishing worldwide figures split it.
  • Transnistria is kept merged with Moldova for the same reason as above.
  • Akrotiri and Dhekelia are merged with Cyprus for the same reason as above.
  • At the moment, the only cases confirmed in Western Sahara occurred in areas under Moroccan control (see MINURSO report: [3]). As such, they are reported under Morocco by their authorities and the World Health Organization. Most cited press sources list Western Sahara but it is unclear if cases are double-counted in Morocco's entry. This might change in the future.

Unclear status at the moment:

  • Somaliland
  • Nagorno-Karabakh
  • At the moment, Abkhazia has one confirmed case in its territory. It is still not clear how/if this will be reported by the WHO and other sources.

Proposal B (MarioGom)

Same as Proposal A, but without the French exception. This would mean that the only reliable source for France (defined as metropolitan France excluding overseas France) would be WHO Situation Reports. Updates would need to be delayed up to 24 hours if we want them to be consistent. The text would be as follows:

The primary criteria for territory listing will be the scheme followed by the World Health Organization Situation Reports (example: 4 April 2020). The following exceptions will be applied:

Also, territories that are not listed at WHO Situation Reports at all, may be listed if all the following requisites are met:

  1. There is at least one reliable source for the statistics.
  2. The counts are not included under any other territory in WHO Situation Reports.

Cruise ships may also be listed standalone as long as they are not reported under any specific country.

--MarioGom (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Survey

Add your !vote here. Please, take your time to carefully read each proposal before !voting.

  • I prefer A. Heitordp (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • I find A better. Amkgp (talk) 19:50, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A: Mainly because it would be more maintainable and falling back to WHO Situation Reports for France would cause an avalanche of complaints because we would be +24h delayed on France updates. Reliable sources are quite split on this one anyway. --MarioGom (talk) 19:51, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: French overseas territories are completely different than metropolitan France.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 19:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A seems to be the best option here. A good compromise, a decent balance of the reality of the situation regarding the differences between British and French dependencies, and ensures clarity in a rapidly changing situation. I support option A. doktorb wordsdeeds 20:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: I am for the maximum separation possible. For me the geographical spread is more important than political considerations or ease of sourcing. Having the French territories included in metropolitan France means those remote islands/territories apparently have the same epidemiology as European France, which of course they don’t. Incidentally the above does not address New Zealand dependencies, which while they have no current cases, certainly could. Ditto Australian external territories. Ptilinopus (talk) 22:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A. France is France. Most cases in the overseas territories were people who came back from France, and then only local spreading appeared. Infected people in these territories rarely or never come from neighbouring countries and territories, but from mainland France. It is no more different than Corsica and other parts of France. When people think about France and read numbers for France, it is obvious that it is France as a whole. Separating areas of France is misleading. Indicating "France" but actually removing parts of the country is factually wrong. Geographically on a map, this is not more different that putting the whole Canada and Canadian archipel in the same colour whereas only some cities in the south have significant number of cases and there is absolutely nothing in the North ; or using the same colour for all the islands of an South Asian or Oceanian country. NemesisIII (talk) 23:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC).
  • A: French regions are neither autonomous territories nor dependencies. Therefore I consider this to be more of a clarification on the current RfC rather than anything else. As a matter of fact, they are the only integral parts of their own country which are currently listed since it's not the case for African autonomous cities and communities of Spain, Portuguese autonomous regions or American non-contiguous states (despite all of those being administratively far less integrated than are French regions in the French unitary state). This fact explains the difficulties to maintain an artificial separated listing which can only lead to either double counts (as it is the case currently) or artificial figures substracting of different updates. As a matter of fact, option A is the only factual one. Metropolitan (talk) 23:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: Most people would not consider overseas territories as part of "France", and physical separation by borders or distance should be a factor in considering the distinction between territories. --17jiangz1 (talk) 03:30, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A: France's "overseas territories" are more like Hawaii than they are like Guam from a legal standpoint, so it makes sense to count them as part of France, seeing as we don't count Hawaii (or Alaska) separately from the rest of the US. The France coronavirus epidemic page can show separate tallies by region. Titanium Dragon (talk) 06:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A would be my preference. —Formulaonewiki 08:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A will be easier to maintain, as it is easier to add together what WHO reports than to try to subtract from a french report or, even worse, rely on everyone to hold their feet (or keyboards) still until the WHO has published. Agathoclea (talk) 09:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B As maps that uses this article data, such as this one or this one, with French oversea territories colorized the same color as France would be strange and inaccurate. As well as 17jiangz1 arguments. I am in favor of a compromise where French Overseas department cases could listed in the footnote, as it was the case a few days ago. Raphaël Dunant (talk) 09:43, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: Politics aside, Google is using this specific table to power their sidebar results as seen here as an example: [4]. It's better to keep things as they are and footnote the 24 hour delay that results when necessary. Cheers, u|RayDeeUxcontribtalk page 14:13, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A: I would be for the French exception, but I agree with User:MarioGom's argument on update delays. This said, I hope we can find a solution for having B, as well as separating Åland Islands, Transnistria, Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Western Sahara. --Checco (talk) 17:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: The French overseas regions are geographically distant, and so represent distinct populations susceptible to infection. KolyaSchaeffer (talk) 00:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: Separation of territories is important. That data for France overseas will be delayed 24 hours is a small issue as Wikipedia is not a real-time news service. Long term accuracy and presentation is more important than having the most recent figure for France, and this can be explained in a footnote.--Eostrix (talk) 08:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
  • B: The magnitude of the outbreak is such, that there is a lot to say about the French oversea territories. Also most of the territories are acting and functioning semi-independent given the lockdown and the strain of the outbreak on Metropolitain France. If you join them together just as on fr.wikipedia, they will only be a sidenote in the story despite many of the territories being large enough to qualify as small nations. KittenKlub (talk) 21:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC) Also French Guyana has just updated it's website in the last hour, but even though there are complaints about some territories, this is an example of a territory whose data will not be processed until tomorrow, because it's close to midnight in France. KittenKlub (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Either, leaning towards A: I'm not versed in French territories or any disputes that may have arisen from them to deliver a well-informed answer in regards to that. That being said, if there will be shorter update delays, I'd go with A. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:10, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A: There is no reason that French overseas departements should be treated separately of France especially when France numbers already includes the data from overseas departements. Or Hawai should be seperated from mainland USA in this list. Minato ku (talk) 18:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A: For ease of updating, and to follow accepted administrative divisions. There's no reason to separate these far-flung parts of France that wouldn't apply to deaggregating Hawaii. buidhe 01:08, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
  • A: However, I think it would be a good compromise to put a note in the France section mentioning the numbers for the overseas territories and mentioned they are updated only each 24 hours. Zoozaz1 (talk) 03:26, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

Discuss here.

Notification to users who participated in last RfC about territories: Checco, Pktlaurence, Formulaonewiki, JMonkey2006, Doktorbuk, Manish2542, Chbe113, Naddruf, Mtaylor848, MrX, Rich Farmbrough, Heitordp, RandomIntrigue, Akira CA, Ptilinopus, Krazytea, Eostrix. --MarioGom (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

  • I realize it might not be clear, but anyone can vote none or add a different proposal. --MarioGom (talk) 19:52, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Also a note on Proposal B: instead of falling back to the delayed WHO Situation Reports, we could continue with the current situation, where confirmed cases in overseas France are counted both in the independent entries as well as in France entry. --MarioGom (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
  • I am a bit confused with Saint Barthélemy and Saint Martin as it seems like they are not included in the French daily updates([5]). They are also overseas collectivities as French Polynesia, New Caledonia, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, and Wallis and Futuna, so this may explain the exclusion. Chbe113 (talk) 23:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Maybe Buisson or Metropolitan can help clarifying this. Somehow I assumed from previous conversations that both were included in France totals. --MarioGom (talk) 23:46, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Chbe113, MarioGom: Guadeloupe, Martinique, French Guiana and Reunion became French departments on 19 march 1946 when was promulgated the Loi de départementalisation proposed by the Martinican Deputy Aimé Césaire. That law made of them integral parts of France. At the time Saint-Martin and Saint-Barthélemy were part of Guadeloupe, therefore becoming integral parts of the country as well. They became their own collectivities on February 21st 2007, however on health matters they remain locally dependent of ARS Guadeloupe, the local body of the Agence nationale de santé publique managing the Covid-19 crisis at French national level. So in a nutshell, yes, they are included in French daily updates. Metropolitan (talk) 00:19, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@Metropolitan: Thank you for the clarification! Chbe113 (talk) 09:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@Chbe113:, @MarioGom:: Until March 25, the French health agency site showed the number of cases by region, and also listed Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy (see archived page of March 25 and click on "Nombre de cas rapportés par région" below the squares with numbers). The total shown there for all of France included those two places despite their being overseas collectivities and not overseas regions. France reported these numbers to WHO, which listed them separately (see the WHO report of March 26 containing those same numbers).
After March 25, the France health agency stopped showing the number of cases by region on its site, but continued to report them to WHO, which continues to list them separately. It's possible to confirm that Saint Martin and Saint Barthélemy are still included in the total shown in the France health agency site by adding the numbers in the corresponding WHO report. For example, on April 6 France reported the total number of cases as 74,390. In the WHO report of April 7, the numbers are FR 73,488 + GF 68 + GP 135 + MQ 149 + RE 349 + YT 164 + MF 31 + BL 6 = 74,390.
The French coronavirus page shows numbers related to hospitals by region (hospitalizations, discharges, intensive care patients and fatalities). It also shows the total number of cases and fatalities (including those not in hospitals) but doesn't break them by region. These totals match the numbers shown in the French health agency site and WHO reports, so they still include Saint Martin and Barthélemy even though they are not shown on the map there. Heitordp (talk) 09:10, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@Heitordp: Thanks for the clarification! Chbe113 (talk) 09:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Answering to Naddruf and Ptilinopus comments in votes: There is no Metropolitan France entry listed in the table, only a France entry. Are you suggesting we should replace the France entry by a Metropolitan France entry? We could as well replace the US by an entry for US contiguous states listing Hawaii and Alaska separately. The same could be done as well to separate European Spain from African Spain. It's not very conventional though. Metropolitan (talk) 00:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Metropolitan You can be as pedantic over that as you wish. I used the term Metropolitan France to refer to France-in-Europe. As I made clear in my vote, and elsewhere in previous discussions, my concern is not the count per political country, but geographical spread of the virus. As such I have consistently argued for separation of overseas entities. It says nothing about the spread and distribution of the virus to have islands in the Caribbean or Indian Ocean or entities on another continent etc lumped statistically with Europe. As far as I am concerned, the political issues are not so significant. Personally I have no problem with Alaska and Hawaii being listed separately - geographically they are separate. Though I don’t think that will happen! Like so many you seem to be arguing political convention, while I am talking of geographical reality. Ptilinopus (talk) 11:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@Metropolitan:. French Guiana and the other places are listed separately, so I would assume that by France they mean Metropolitan France. If you think these are included in the "France" statistics, we would need to verify that's accurate, because it would be very confusing. As for these regions, there is a specific term for them and they are given special rights in France's constitution; I also think it's definitely relevant that they are differentiated in the source you provided (WHO). I don't see Ceuta or Melilla or any other Spanish regions differentiated; additionally they are very close to Spain although they are in Africa.—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 01:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Naddruf: Yes, French Guiana is obviously included in French statistics as you can see it by yourself on Agence Nationale de Santé Publique interactive map website[6]. There is clearly double counting for French figures currently in the table, that's actually the reason why MarioGom triggered this RfC. Subdivisions having special rights is not unique to French overseas regions throughout the world, differences are even stronger in federal countries as it is the case between, US states or German Länder. Madeira and the Azores are autonomous regions of Portugal, Ceuta, Melilla and the Plazas de soberanía are not part of any Spanish province, the United Kingdom consists in four constituent countries, the list is actually endless and hardly relevant here. Metropolitan France is only a part of the country and certainly not the whole of it as well stipulated on the very first sentence of the France wikipedia article lead. That point simply cannot be discussed. Metropolitan (talk) 01:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
@Metropolitan: I wasn't talking about that website, I was talking about the WHO website separating them. I think we should use what's used on the WHO website. Also the Caribbean Netherlands are like the French DROM —Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 02:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Naddruf: The Caribbean Netherlands are overseas countries and territories of the European Union whereas French overseas regions are outermost regions similar to the Azores, Madeira and Canary Islands[7]. EU law doesn't apply in the Caribbean Netherlands and the legal currency isn't even the euro but the US dollar. But outside legal matters, they are not included in Dutch official covid-19 situation reports[8] published by the RIVM (Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu). You're obviously mixing up two different concepts here, which is the fact to belong to either the "Crown" or the "Republic" depending on country's regimes, and the fact to be a constituent part of a country. France is divided in 18 regions, 13 of which are located in metropolitan France and 5 which are located overseas[9]. The French territories which belong to what you assume as autonomous territories do exist and are the overseas collectivities of French Polynesia, Wallis and Futuna and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon as well as the sui generis collectivity of New Caledonia. The collectivities of Saint-Martin and Saint-Barthélemy are in a middle ground due to the fact they used to be part of the French region of Guadeloupe and later consisted in their own administrative bodies, however they still depend on the Guadeloupe region for health matters as already stipulated above. Metropolitan (talk) 02:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Note that I left political status considerations explicitly out of the definition to 1) avoid complex disputes about comparative differences of administrative division systems and 2) focus on criteria that is backed by a significant amount of reliable sources. Also note that this RfC is not exclusively about France. I added two versions of the proposal because the French case was proven the most contentious during previous discussion, but the goal is also providing clarity for territories such as Transnistria or Abkhazia, or rare exceptions such as Akrotiri and Dhekelia and Åland Islands. --MarioGom (talk) 07:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

  • re Raphaël Dunant: How Google displays the map is really up to them. They are post-processing our data with their own criteria, excluding some locations such as Guantanamo Bay or partially recognized states. They can split France territories based on WHO Situation Reports, or our country-specific articles (which they are processing too), or whatever other source. --MarioGom (talk) 09:49, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Good point! Then I think it's better not to list the French Overseas departments and regions in the main list, for clarity sake, but in the footnotes.
@MarioGom:, note that the first case have been confirmed in Abkhazia yesterday, you may want to update the notes of RfC proposals. Raphaël Dunant (talk) 10:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Raphaël Dunant: Thanks for noting. I was waiting to have some further evidence of how/if Georgian authorities include it in their counts and how next WHO Situation Report handles this. If anyone checked any of this, please, share! --MarioGom (talk) 10:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
One problem is that with so many votes already cast, we cannot add a new proposal now. Raphaël Dunant (talk) 10:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
Raphaël Dunant: The proposal is what you see in the green block. All further notes are the status of countries at the time the proposal was written, but the criteria is meant to be applied to new territories when they come up or when their status changes, not to come back at an RfC every week. --MarioGom (talk) 10:49, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
  • re Checco: Note that, as far as I can tell, there is no reliable source that publishes world counts and splits Åland Islands from Finland, Transnistria from Moldova or Akrotiri and Dhekelia from Cyprus (see analysis). Western Sahara, is a different case at the moment: some reliable sources list it independently but apparently they double count cases in Morocco, since all current confirmed cases in Western Sahara are within Morocco-controlled territory ([10]). --MarioGom (talk) 09:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

You have indeed identified the problem caused by using the CIA world factbook list of countries and territories. That list is a mess, and the root of the problem is that the perspective of compiling the list is political. Here Svalbard, Åland and Greenland is considered separate entities. While the truth is that while Svalbard and Åland certainly is firmly part of Norway and Finland respectively.

Greenland, Faroes and Lapland (not found in said list despite having a parliament) indeed all 3 are in the process of going independent.

In the list here interestingly Palestina have gotten their own heading while again Kurdistan with a separate parliament is missing. And while there's political forces at work on how to manage Hong Kong and Taiwan, they are reported separately and should be kept that way for the same reason especially since the numbers are gathered based on different criteria.


But to sum this up: Åland should be merged with Finland, while Lapland (or the Sami nation) currently can be kept reported together with their main countries right now. This since the testing is carried out in one area but not the other and have been split into two parts with a closed border, which cause the numbers to be even more unreliable. Therefore no separation should be done as of this time. As a curiosity the numbers for Lapland (Sami nation) at the time of this post in April: 437 confirmed cases, 64 in intensive care, 11 deaths, 86 new cases. The statistical estimate for the coming months in this area is in excess of 100 000 infected and a CFR of ~6%. While the Danish government have reported Greenland separately, the area should be kept listed as such. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.255.128.142 (talk) 02:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)


Considering it's been over a week now that French regions are double counted on the table, I've temporarily clarified this on France's footnotes untill a result is accepted for this RfC. Metropolitan (talk) 07:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)


  • How hard would it be to add an attached CSV file for each region/jurisdiction, that would include, e.g. the full history of total cases, active cases, and deaths by date in a clean format that could be used directly by others doing calculations and modeling. In other words, the same data that is presented in the bar graphs, just in a more manipulable format. The data presented here is wonderful, but it is often time consuming and difficult to clean it up to enter it into spreadsheets or other models. My guess is that the page maintainers have such tables. The request is to share them with users. Skaphan (talk) 19:42, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
KittenKlub: France global statistics are outdated compared to per-department statistics. However, since we are not reporting daily cases over time in this table, that should not be a problem. Official stats from regional offices are more up-to-date than official consolidated national totals in many countries (e.g. United States, Germany, Spain). --MarioGom (talk) 08:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
It's a little more that "outdated", because the official figures of 10 April are 28 for French Guiana and 35 for Mayotte, while the primary data from the local health authorities are 86 for French Guinea, and 191 for Mayotte. KittenKlub (talk) 08:29, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
KittenKlub: What do you mean by official figures for French Guiana or Mayotte? There is no breakdown of confirmed cases in the national totals. You either have the local authorities and the WHO Situation Reports. WHO Situation Report for 10 April already listed 191 confirmed cases for Mayotte, and these 191 cases were included in the previously published national total of confirmed cases (the one we use as a source). Where are you taking that figure of 35 for Mayotte? I think you are just looking at a different metric, not confirmed cases. --MarioGom (talk) 14:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Spoiler: nothing you can look at Géodes is the number of cumulative confirmed cases ;-) --MarioGom (talk) 14:03, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
I was looking at the 2020_coronavirus_pandemic_in_France. The statistics on that page are way off. I assume that if the WHO report is wrongcorrect, it's a problem of the editors. KittenKlub (talk) 14:09, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
KittenKlub The WHO report is correct and it is correctly aligned with official figures at all levels (just different times of reporting). The table is completely outdated though, and those numbers do not correspond to the cited source. It is a problem to be solved in that page, but nothing to do with the sources that we are discussing here. --MarioGom (talk) 14:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
I opened a discussion to deal with the issue you mentioned: Talk:2020 coronavirus pandemic in France § Wrong/outdated per-territory statistics. --MarioGom (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
  • After 9 days of running RfC, and in the absence of a formal closure, I would like to apply some non-controversial changes: (1) merging Åland Islands to Finland and (2) Akrotiri and Dhekelia to Cyprus. I would defer any change related to France until there is a formal closure. --MarioGom (talk) 13:59, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
Metropolitan: Because even if there are more !votes for A, I'm not an uninvolved editor and the consensus might not be considered strong and unambiguous. I prefer an admin or uninvolved editor determining the closure, which is officially the correct process. --MarioGom (talk) 08:57, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 Done Akrotiri and Dhekelia and Åland Islands. ClockC for France. --MarioGom (talk) 23:10, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:COVID-19_pandemic_data/Archive_12&oldid=952240225"