Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the United States/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

postponed DNI report, add?

• The Trump Administration Is Stalling an Intel Report That Warns the U.S. Isn’t Ready for a Global Pandemic March 9, 2020 TIME.com

The Trump administration, without explanation, postponed the Director of National Intelligence's (DNI) annual US World Wide Threat Assessment intelligence report that warns that the U.S. remains unprepared for a global pandemic. The office of the DNI was scheduled to deliver the Assessment report to the House Intelligence Committee on February 12.

X1\ (talk) 02:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Sounds relevant, probably something to add here #Charges of mismanagement or #Preparedness feel free to add. --hroest 04:11, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done X1\ (talk) 05:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

but not Trump's properties, add?

Trump’s European travel restrictions exempt nations where his three golf courses are located. Trump has two properties in the United Kingdom: Trump Turnberry and Trump International Golf Links, Scotland; plus another Trump International Golf Links and Hotel Ireland in Doonbeg, Ireland.

• https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/12/trump-coronavirus-travel-europe-resorts-126808
• https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-trump-europe-travel-ban-exclude-uk-ireland-golf-courses-2020-3

X1\ (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I think that's a reasonable inclusion. --valereee (talk) 11:14, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Past tense now: On 14 March, Trump administration extended the ban to include United Kingdom and Ireland.

So,  Not done. X1\ (talk) 05:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

Change table "2020 coronavirus pandemic by United States state" Vermont # of cases from 4 to 17

Thank you Mattastiles (talk) 03:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Updated this here. FYI the source for those numbers is from the Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/U.S. cases by state template, not this page. :) Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 04:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

Delaware cases now at 25 total 100.11.185.40 (talk) 19:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 21:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2020

Update the Coronavirus map of the United States, namely WY, NY, HI, and KS. Quincey Brendars (talk) 18:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Good call! It looks like @Matthewberns: (thank you!) took care of these. See File:COVID-19 Outbreak Cases in the United States (Density).svg. I'm marking this as answered. Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 05:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2020

Add a local section about NYS (sourced from main article):

• March 7 - State of Emergency declared by Governor Andrew Cuomo.
• March 12 - Gatherings with over 500 people will be banned and only medically necessary visits would be allowed at nursing homes. Broadway theatres have been closed until April 14. Cuomo waived the requirement that schools be open for 180 days that year in order to be eligible for state aid.
• March 13 - drive-through testing began in New Rochelle, Westchester County.
• March 15 - Public schools in Westchester, Suffolk, Nassau and New York City have been closed.

References

CoronavirusPlagueDoctor (talk about the coronavirus/Contributions about the coronavirus) 21:45, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done This request had been setting here for a while and things have drastically changed since then. I decided to implement this request on the split page U.S. state and local government response to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic#New York Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 06:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 March 2020

Add Under Timeline, for March 15th: "North Dakota: Governor Burgum (R) closed all schools from March 16 to March 20. The state lab has tested 112 individuals for COVID-19, with one positive case from an individual who had travel history." Reference [1] 140.186.141.164 (talk) 22:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

This source has the direct language "The state lab has tested 112 individuals for COVID-19, with one positive case from an individual who had travel history." I would suggest that the suggested language be changed as to not plagiarize the source. Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 00:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done: I implemented the request however I re-worded the request so the language doesn't copy directly from the source Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 06:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2020

Change "Both Villa and John Burroughs cancelled classes following the announcement, and the Ritz-Carlton was to undergo substantial cleaning" to "Villa cancelled classes following the announcement, and the Burroughs students in attendance at the party were asked to stay home from school until further notice; they were ultimately cleared by medical professionals in consultation with the school later the same week." 70.135.149.248 (talk) 00:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

This is done  Done SunDawn (talk) 01:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Map in infobox (number or rate)?

The map in the infobox shows the number of cases in each state. Would it be more informative to show the number of cases per capita, i.e. the rate? Knowing that there are over 100 cases in California and nine or fewer in North Dakota doesn't tell me too much. The population of California is much larger, but I can't control for that off the top of my head. Fcrary (talk) 21:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

I've been frustrated by this. I made my own spreadsheet to get percentages, but it's VERY hard to get good case counts. CDC is deferring to states, and states vary widely as to what exactly they are counting as a case. Here's my spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1L3oo-npuTeyuBGiyxCWHM2oC1_iSQv6-vo7sbGIQtxk/edit?usp=sharing 2601:2C4:C780:8420:4151:B7:9255:2B9B (talk) 13:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject COVID-19

I've created WikiProject COVID-19 as a temporary or permanent WikiProject and invite editors to use this space for discussing ways to improve coverage of the ongoing 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. Please bring your ideas to the project/talk page. Stay safe, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:51, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

New info about testing locations, test quantities, and the first drive-through location

At the end of the "Testing" section, it can say:

In a press conference on Friday, March 13, the Trump administration stated that there will be tests conducted in retail store parking lots across the country, with participating franchises including Walmart, Target, CVS, and Walgreens, and that the results would be sent to labs to complete testing in partnership with local health departments and diagnostic labs. President Trump said: "We therefore expect up to a half a million additional tests will be available early next week. We’ll be announcing locations probably on Sunday night. [...] The FDA’s goal is to hopefully authorize their application within 24 hours [...] which will bring, additionally, 1.4 million tests on board next week and 5 million within a month." On March 13, drive-through testing in the U.S. began in New Rochelle, Westchester County, as New Rochelle was the U.S. town with the most cases at that time.

74.101.202.221 (talk) 17:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Rcul4u998 (talk) 17:34, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

References

Ohio closes bars and restaurants, speculation for Il/NJ/NY to follow suit: 03/15/2020 2:17MST

REF: https://www.wxyz.com/news/ohio-governor-orders-all-bars-restaurants-closed-in-the-state-due-to-covid-19

Seeing as this page is locked. 67.174.117.131 (talk) 20:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Trump Speech video

President Trump's speech on March 11, 2020.

Video is here if anyone could use it.

Victor Grigas (talk) 13:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Is it wrong that I am ashamed of that president? What a mockery, a slapstick policy.

I think we should ensure that opinions are not included on this.SunDawn (talk) 03:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

• Professor Lawrence Gostin, world expert on how governments respond to pandemics → “There’s a fine line between the president’s pro-US, anti-internationalist position where he thinks that he can restrict his borders on things like trade or immigration.” − “That doesn’t work with a germ — particularly with a germ that’s already here.”

• on President Trump's "pointless" travel ban and why America isn't ready for the coronavirus → 'America's not safe' → His travel bans is incoherent. Counting cases rather than seeing COVID19 spreading widely in most countries. Travel from highly functioning health systems like Switzerland or Germany banned, but not weak systems like Romania or Albania. "Shocking disregard for science and evidence" --87.170.197.61 (talk) 01:23, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Trump

1. By my count there are 8 images of Trump on this article. Can we not?

2. Also, I'll ask again, should this page be added to WikiProject Donald Trump? Searching "Trump" on the page currently yields 70 returns.

Thanks, ---Another Believer _(Talk) 13:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus is not about Trump, it is about the country. Yes, his actions shape US responses, but so are other leaders of the world. SunDawn (talk) 03:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Lead improvements

I've done some changes to the lead to emphasize recent developments. Per WP:LEAD the lead must summarize all key points across the entire article, hence I would like to request the addition of content relating to

• Other economic impacts of the pandemic within the United States
• Criticism over the handling of the pandemic by the Trump administration.

ViperSnake151  Talk  15:18, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

It appears that the article is already over-saturated with criticism of the Trump administration in a number of sections, with much of the detail and cites in them outdated. So I'd suggest against using the article for that purpose any more. This is a new disease which has become pandemic, with no treatment or vaccine yet. Nothing could be simpler than criticizing any of the 100+ countries that now are trying to fight it, as opposed to what many are doing properly and logically. Just my opinion. --Light show (talk) 16:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree with criticism to Trump, but overloading this article should not be done. If we see other nation leader's responses we would easily see things we could criticize anyway. This article alone has more criticism to Trump than similar articles criticizing their other leaders.SunDawn (talk) 03:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Company that benefits

Is it possible to list companies that is making money from this crisis? SWP13 (talk) 21:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

It's certainly possible, but it would require reliable sources. My bet is on Netflix, since people in self-isolation are going to get cabin fever and download any sort of entertainment they can. But that is speculation, and it doesn't belong in a Wikipedia article. Fcrary (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Likely candidates benefiting from this crisis would include grocery stores, Purell, toilet paper manufacturers. & Thermo-Fisher Scientific. -- llywrch (talk) 07:37, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Lots of companies could be making money. Even Pornhub could get increased subscription because people are locked in their homes. However, I think we can make a special section if there are companies/entities that are going out of their way to get extra profit: such as those boys from TN who hoarded hand sanitizers and sold them at crazy markup.SunDawn (talk) 09:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Responses by the Federal Reserve

As the Federal Reserve is also responding to the coronavirus crisis, should their response have their own section? Preferably in the federal government sections? Right now their responses are buried in Economic Impact section.SunDawn (talk) 07:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Likely a good idea given their notability and the actions they have taken over the course of the outbreak/pandemic. --Super Goku V (talk) 10:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Help needed to keep case details on U.S. state articles

Please, I could use help keeping case updates to U.S. state (+Washington, D.C.) articles when applicable:

• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Arkansas
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in California
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Colorado
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Connecticut
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Delaware
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Florida
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Georgia (U.S. state)
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Illinois
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Kansas
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Kentucky
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Louisiana
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Maryland
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Massachusetts
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Michigan
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Minnesota
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in New Jersey
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in New York (state)
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Ohio Valereee
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Oregon
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Pennsylvania‎
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in South Carolina
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Tennessee
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Texas
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Utah
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Virginia
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Washington (state)
• 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Washington, D.C.

I keep having to trim redundancies between the U.S. article and subpages, but hopefully the recent page protection will help. Thanks for any help moving claims to appropriate subpages. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer I was thinking it might be helpful if we noted the state article we're working on keeping updated; that way if a change is made here that needs to be made in the Ohio article, someone knows who to ping. --valereee (talk) 15:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

color coding

several of the charts on this pandemic have shades on some content, green, for example in the number of reported recoveries. i could not find a definition of these codes. i'd recommend adding one on each page which uses a color coded chart.

thanks

jb 2601:601:9800:2F2E:B518:E771:2171:A9E7 (talk) 15:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Miscount on March 14 timeline

The total deaths seem to have a math error in the second sentence: "Six additional deaths were reported by state health departments: three in Washington, one in Florida, and one in Louisiana."

That should be 5, not 6, based on the individual state numbers. Changing it to 5 also agrees with the number 7 in the fourth sentence when the two from New York and New Jersey are added. Msigmond (talk) 16:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Sacramento Kings game postponed, 2020-03-11.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Arithmetic error in case count chart?

Based on the delta, 504 cases were added today, 16 March 2020. The total has 3 extra cases included. Only on the last day. Is the new case count for today correct? Or is the cumulative total correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F2C0:E2A6:FB:F9FE:CD99:7EE7:8019 (talk) 21:34, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Better source for statistics

We need to find a better source for number of cases, recoveries and deaths because JHU has been unreliable about it at best and the recovery numbers are probably higher than what it is showing. BattleshipMan (talk) 17:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

https://ncov2019.live/data is an aggregator of publicly available data, but as an amateur project it may not be reliable. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

There has been lots of discussion on not using sources that are self-published (https://ncov2019.live/data) or where we are not able to match sources with numbers (https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/). This is not a ding on those sources. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ is one of the better ones that I have seen and is well-established for world statistics. But we can't link sources to numbers; just try for any one date and you'll see what I mean. Some sources there, not all, and some sources are news reports not government numbers. Seatto23 (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

The state tables (bottom of page for cases and death) are the most official set of numbers that we have besides the CDC. This is what the individual state health departments are releasing. However, no one is reporting recoveries. That data simply doesn't exist yet--based on what state health departments are reporting. Seatto23 (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I think CDC should add recoveries on their statistics just to attempt to reassure people to be honest. BattleshipMan (talk) 23:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

For cases in the US, recovery figures are not reassuring because most (surviving) patients are still sick. Only cases from a month ago (or more) who are fully asymptomatic now are likely to be classified as "recovered". This is why China reports almost 85% recovery, but the US is at only seventeen (which rounds to 0%). -Jason A. Quest (talk) 23:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Kushner directly involved

Where did Trump get his corona strategy anyway? Where he got his Middle East strategy. Jared Kushner. And where does Jared Kushner get his corona strategy? He got it from a Facebook group:

• Ref one
• Ref two --217.234.73.211 (talk) 11:36, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Not much of a strategy... just greed. There is a controversy about Trump trying to buy some German company: CureVac! WELL, even this fiasco about delayed proper tests or tests that are unreliable all has to do with greed. Someone is trying to outdo the Germans since the current reliable tests by WHO use German technology. But with "America First" millions of test kits just cannot be German. America too. You need to note that if 180,000 positive coronavirus cases are picked up... there are millions upon millions of test performed since not all of us are infected (at least not yet). PROFITS!

... any investigative journalist to entertain this?

Appreciate the gravity of this: without proper testing, USA is flying blind! Rangoane Mogosoane (talk) 23:48, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Timeline

The Timeline section is become cluttered with randomly listed state measures, which don't provide much general information except maybe suggesting the scope of the response. I think it would make sense to migrate most of this information – except perhaps first-in-the-country or measures affecting large populations (the biggest states) – to U.S. state and local government response to 2020 coronavirus pandemic. -Jason A. Quest (talk) 16:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Case timeline chart shows deaths and total cases, but should it also show recoveries, since that information is also known? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:98A:4100:20C0:7554:626A:7160:E74A (talk) 00:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Template for collapsing the split/attribution templates at the top of this page?

Is there a template for collapsing the split/attribution templates at the top of this page? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:07, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

This, copied and modified from the banner shell:

almost works. I can't get the color or centering.

—WWoods (talk) 16:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

What about just the collapse top and collapse bottom templates, like so:

"Split" templates
Template 1 Template 2

---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

"Split" templates
Template 1 Template 2

Is still off on the bg color, and maybe the width. But maybe close enough?

—WWoods (talk) 17:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Wwoods, I'm fine with you implementing what you think is best. Someone else can improve/update as needed. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 19:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

So I did that. The color isn't quite the same shade as the others, but darn if I can find the right one.

—WWoods (talk) 21:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Wwoods, Works for me! Thanks for your work here. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 02:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

NASCAR Update

As of March 16, 2020, NASCAR has announced that they are postponing all events until May 3, 2020, in alignment of CDC Guidance. I know this is for another article/page, but can it be added to this page as well? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_2019%E2%80%9320_coronavirus_pandemic_on_sports

References

NASCAR is already mentioned in the "Other leagues and sports" section. I added your update to that same section. Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 06:31, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

already mentioned on (state) page

Hey, Another Believer, you seem to be saying that anything that is worth mentioning on the state page is not worth mentioning on this page? --valereee (talk) 21:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, I think our goal should be to add state details to state articles, for sure. This article should be a summary of info pertaining to the nation as a whole, with overviews of major developments about specific states. I do apologize if I'm being too restrictive, I'm just working hard to try to sort the many claims being added to so many articles rapidly. I am fine with reverts, and I mean no offense. Just trying to reduce redundancies and encourage the fleshing out of state articles when possible. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, no worries, just wanting to make sure we're on the same...er, page. :) I think some stuff on the state pages is worth including in the overall article, but probably only the more important things. The problem is that we can't know what's going to be crucial and what's going to be trivial. For instance, I've been adding to the Ohio page a lot of stuff about Ohio closing stuff down WAY earlier than most other states did; will Ohio end up looking like it was really smart or like it totally overreacted? Who knows?  :) --valereee (talk) 10:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Cases in the US by state template total

Currently the template's cases do not add up to the total at the top (3487, the official CDC number). Should the total be the official CDC count and mismatch the rest of the template or should it be the total of every state's cases? This would bring the total to above 4200. BloopyBloop (talk) 15:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to move this discussion to the template talk page and discuss there Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 16:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

see alsos in timeline months

Hey, Another Believer, March would be very unwieldy if we listed every state that has a significant outbreak, and April would probably be ridiculous. Maybe we should list these in a See also subsection instead? --valereee (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Pay attention to the daily totals template

This article is semi-protected, but the daily-totals template itself is not, and there's not a lot of activity on its talk page. As I type, this edit is most recent. Earlier today I asked the user, on their talk page, to explain a similar suspiciously large increase, but got no response. These could be good-faith edits from some obscure source I don't know about, but if it's vandalism it's a pretty nasty variety. --Amcbride (talk) 21:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

File:COVID-19 Outbreak Cases in the United States (Density).svg should be modified to use a text editor editable format.

At the current time, it seems the only way of updating the colors is with Inkscape. Master of Time (talk) 22:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Tri-State Area Closures

Several news articles recently have been talking about all schools, restaurants, and bars (except for those with takeout or delivery) to be closed in the tri-state area. New Jersey is sending in the national guard and is calling for a voluntary curfew from 8 PM to 5 AM. Can someone add these details to the article if possible? MJVAccount (talk) 11:48, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I have found the following states have issued orders closing bars & restaurants. This is not a complete list, but no one source lists every state. (Source follows)

• California
• Colorado
• Connecticut
• Illinois
• Indiana
• Kentucky
• Louisiana
• Massachusetts
• Maryland
• Michigan
• Minnesota
• New Hampshire
• New Jersey
• New York
• North Carolina
• Ohio
• Pennsylvania
• Rhode Island
• South Carolina
• Washington
• Wisconsin

References

---llywrch (talk) 23:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

March 5th row missing from deaths table

I noticed that the March 5th row missing from "Deaths from non-repatriated COVID-19 cases in the US by state" table. Vandalism? Baltakatei 23:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

West Virginia Has Its First Case

[2] - WV just confirmed its first case. FYI. If someone could update the graphic and article info. -- Veggies (talk) 00:15, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I have been aware of this for some time now but am unable to update it because it is an Inkscape SVG rather than a text editor SVG. Hence my section above. Master of Time (talk) 00:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Remaining cases—original research?

Washington state for example does not list number of recovered cases on its official website. [3] Number we are listing has stuck at 1 for weeks. For any information on recovered and remaining cases, where is this info coming from? buidhe 01:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The US no longer seem to report cases to the WHO

The WHO data contain no case numbers for the US after March 14: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/685d0ace521648f8a5beeeee1b9125cd. Do the US no longer report new cases to the WHO? Other countries are up to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DF:970C:1854:FD1A:1E0D:B2AF:B30F (talk) 05:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

While the US data is not updated, there is no factual evidence that US is not reporting to WHO. SunDawn (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding splitting of content

I believe that there has been too many articles created when they do not need to be split off from the article. Normally, the guidelines are GNG which can easily be passed, but also the potential size of an article. However, I am noticing that articles are being split too early. The D.C. article was created when there were 10 cases and Maryland for 12 cases. The first three articles created were reasonable, if delayed a bit too long; Washington with 70, New York with 89, and California with 109.

I propose waiting until a the number of cases has reached 40 within a state/territory or, more importantly, has 40 sources since that would show evidence of needing an article. Otherwise we will ended up with a bunch of articles that need managing. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

That's a good point, and I guess some threshold is appropriate before splitting off a separate article. But I'd prefer a ratio rather than a number. In California, which you consider worth a separate article, 109 cases is 2.75 per million people living there. In Colorado, 2.75 per million would mean 16 cases, but the severity of the situation there would be the same. Fcrary (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Honestly, the California article could have been made likely sooner. I just want to make sure that there is a likelihood of the articles being able to support being split, especially given the D.C. article already being in 4 maintenance categories and with only one sentences dated from today. --Super Goku V (talk) 23:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Another Believer: Please respond here before you split off another article. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:12, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Super Goku V, I am watching this discussion. There are currently pages for states with 20+ cases, most of which (if not all) I forked. The ones for less than 20 were created by others. I've been moving details over the state articles, regardless of author. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd also keep in mind, even in some states with low case numbers there may be millions affected by economic downturns, cancelled events, school closures, etc. There may be plenty of coverage about the pandemic in specific U.S. states even with lesser confirmed cases. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:35, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, and that is kinda why I am saying this now, though I only just realized how much of it was from one person. According to my stats, you have forked 12 of the 16 articles and have removed over 80,000 bytes from this article in the last 24 hours. Can I please ask you to consider waiting a bit longer? It helps make sure that they can stand on their own and helps reduce maintenance categories of which there are 22 in the 14 that have hidden categories. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Super Goku V, Sure, but I'd like to think most of the state articles demonstrate their value, especially now that editors have learned to update them instead of just this U.S. page. The way this whole thing's unfolding, I'm sure more state pages will be created. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, maybe I am too worried and this article is shifting to the non-state government response and reaction to the government response. --Super Goku V (talk) 10:33, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

I am still in favor of having an article 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States by State where we can collect smaller states updates for now. --19:35, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Also see Category:2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States by state. X1\ (talk) 03:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

What happened to the table that shows number infected per state?

Why remove it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scientificaldan (talk • contribs) 18:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

I don't think a table has been removed... There was a smaller one that was updated to a better format and then the super huge per-day one that just defaults to being minimized. Rcul4u998 (talk) 19:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

The table has been removed (Diff). It's unfortunate. Can someone put it back? Coldcreation (talk) 19:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

That was my edit -- I moved it to this template, which is currently holding that data. It is currently in the "Current number of non-repatriated cases by state" section. Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 04:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2020

In the "Controversies" section, either add note that the alleged attempt by President Trump to purchase exclusive rights to a coronavirus vaccine has been denied by both the Trump administration and the German biotech company developing the vaccine, or delete the false allegation.

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/03/16/german-company-curevac-says-no-offer-trump-coronavirus-vaccine/5062072002/ 198.47.204.197 (talk) 16:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

It should be deleted. There is no source in the original article. All parties involved deny the story.

'CureVac doesn’t know the origin of the rumors, which were first published over the weekend in Germany’s Welt am Sonntag newspaper, acting Chief Executive Officer Franz-Werner Haas said on a call with reporters.

“There was and there is no takeover offer from the White House or governmental authorities related to the technology, nor to CureVac at all,” Haas said. “That’s it.”' https://www.msn.com/en-us/finance/news/curevac-denies-reports-that-us-government-tried-to-buy-it/ar-BB11jFSz 2601:243:1180:9660:4414:5D73:AE97:6D14 (talk) 19:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

This seems to be worth including, even if it was ultimately false. I added a sentence that mentions CureVac's latest response. Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 05:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

michigan 110 cases

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/michigan/2020/03/19/coronavirus-in-michigan-heres-where-we-stand-as-of-wednesday-night/ add it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.95.133.169 (talk) 02:03, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

please see Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/United States cases by state Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 03:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

All done. ␄ –Nucleosynth (t c) 03:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2020

The CDC has advised against non-essential travel to China, Iran, Malaysia, and 28 (including the United Kingdom, Ireland, and the 26 European countries that comprise the Schengen Area).

28 -> 28 other countries? 28 European countries?

Although, it seems like all 28 countries are completely enumerated by the parenthetical. Maybe it should be just "...China, Iran, Malaysia, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and the 26 European countries that comprise the Schengen Area." 2602:306:C531:7310:340F:620:683B:B90A (talk) 21:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Outdated already anyway. Rmhermen (talk) 21:13, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

 Note: Closing as this seems to have been resolved. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 08:58, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

White House Coronavirus Task Force initiated.

Information of this group should be added to the article. Date started January 29, 2020. Daily press briefings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:1103:C271:A1D3:78F8:D6E1:716 (talk) 05:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

See White House Coronavirus Task Force article. X1\ (talk) 07:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Multiple sourcing problems

Besides not even remotely covering the territory the article should cover, this article has multiple problems with reliable sources, MEDRS sources, and source-to-text integrity, unattributed opinions, a few of which I have been able to correct, but there is too much to take on. As an example, there are multiple instances of google docs and tweets being used to source numbers of cases, and yet we have this: [4] Even governors can tweet incorrect information; this kind of information should be cited to better sources than a gov't official tweet or a google doc that can be manipulated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Trump administration statements

Any particular guidelines on this section? Right now all of it are just Trump's controversial statements even though he made statements almost daily during the crisis. I can add his less controversial but still pertinent comments, but it will increase the size of the wiki page and other sections may also have covered it.

The other option would be to shift this to "Controversy" section.SunDawn (talk) 06:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Why add banal statements? X1\ (talk) 07:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Simply because the section said "Trump statements". Whether a statement is interesting or banal, that is highly subjective. If his statement is pertinent to the pandemic, that should be in the section. SunDawn (talk) 13:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

And significantly, the article should try to provide a summary of the topic it is about, which it does not do now. It appears that "banal" information isn't making it into this article at all. I have been able to correct only a small bit so far, where surprisingly basic information has been left out,[5] but the overall effect of significant missing and misrepresented content here seems to be an article less about the medical situation in the United States, and more about characterizations of politicians. I understand that editors typically contribute only in their area of interest, and perhaps no one has been interested in presenting information about the status of the public health emergency, but some balance here needs to be struck. Right now, this article is not in a helpful state to provide information to our readers, and is focused instead on characterizing politicians. More medical fact, less political characterization would help towards NPOVing this article, which is in its current state POV.

I support User:SunDawn's proposal and extend it to say that a good deal of the content here might be moved to a "Controversy" section, so that a focus on the needed content can be developed and maintained with a better article organization. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Montana

Montana now has 11 Cases https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/montana-covid--cases-now-at-tested/article_7b6a2a18-7a6e-5fd8-af6f-aadbd873128c.html BreoncoUSA1 (talk) 16:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

The total number of cases for March 17 in the Timeline spreadsheet should be 1261 based on the individual state numbers entered. 2601:240:4980:24E0:F8D9:A89F:A244:63C5 (talk) 17:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

 Note: I took all the numbers for March 17 in the Timeline spreadsheet, imported them into Microsoft Excel and had it add them up and I got 1,284 which is what the table and graph currently shows. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 20:57, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Corona Virus

Wonder how long it's been assumed for us to never leave the house  ? Keith Theakston (talk) 21:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you to the people keeping this article up to date

Thank you to the 926 editors who have worked on this vital article (so far). There's been nothing like this in any of our lifetimes. This article has been edited 4,240 times, with 1.2 million views. You are doing a wonderful service to humanity, and we owe you a huge debt of gratitude. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

+1 Wikipedia editors are amazing. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Map colors / numbers

The colors on the map were recently changed (for the second time), resulting in many states having the same, indistinguishable light yellow shading. It really doesn't make sense for West Virginia, with only 1 case, to be the same color as Alabama, with nearly 50, in my opinion. Master of Time (talk) 22:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Non-functional coronavirus pandemic template

At the very bottom of the page where the collapsible coronavirus pandemic template should appear, I see only the text "Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic". Is anyone else seeing this? I can't figure out what's going wrong here. Mark Taylor (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Yesterday it broke up, get fixed, and now broke again. SunDawn (talk) 01:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Responses by JB Pritzer

I planned to remove the following sentence:

Illinois governor JB Pritzker addressed the long lines at O'Hare International Airport on Twitter, stating that they were unacceptable and that they needed to "get their s@#t [sic] together, NOW". Pritzker stated that later in the night, he had received an angry phone call from a White House staff member about the previous remarks.[93][94][95][96]

My reasoning is as follows:

First of all, we should focus on the travel restriction, not responses from others regarding the ban. We see the Chinese responding negatively to Trump's ban to China, but their response is not here. I think this should be the norm.

Second, while this comment have potential to violate NPOV, as positive comments to the ban are NOT on the article, while the negative ones are given place.

Third, while he did write the S@@T word it seems like he edited it as the original tweet didn't have the word anymore. SunDawn (talk) 05:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Criticism: International with (one of) the lowest number of tests per 100,000 inhabitants in a country comparison

I watched a report on Servus-TV (Austian Television) about tests per 100,000 inhabitants in an international comparison.

I remembered a few numbers:

Ranking:

1. South Korea with 400 + x tests per 100,000 inhabitants
2. China with 200 + x tests per 100,000 inhabitants

...

...

?!? USA with 8 tests per 100,000 inhabitants.

Then the television-report mentioned that the United States is now ordering test kits from Roche that can be used to perform 4000 tests (all at once / per day?!).

Perhaps a little late and an aspect for 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States#Criticism ???

This ensures a high number of unreported cases and no tracing of the infection chains, because small test numbers have a significant impact on the higher unreported cases.

The differences in the tests between the countries are definitely huge.

Greetings Triplec85 (talk) 09:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I agree. This seems like a legitimate and common criticism, even when considering WP:NPV. The New York Times published an article about this on March 17. This very popular March 10 Medium article also makes this criticism of the US response. Bluegreenmagenta (talk) 14:18, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Medium.com is not a reliable source for this purpose. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

DER SPIEGEL, a reliable source in Germany, reported: Was die Welt von Südkorea lernen kann = What the world can learn from South Korea.

A comparison by the University of Oxford shows that South Korea is far ahead of other countries. South Korea had already carried out 210,144 tests on March 10, compared to 60,761 in Italy, 26,261 in Great Britain and only 8554 in the USA.

The low number of tests in the United States surprised me when I read the article because there are many more people living there than in the smaller states where much more testing was done.

And DER SPIEGEL also reported:

An average of 12,000 people are tested on Covid-19 in South Korea every day.

The tests there in a single day is more than all of the tests in the United States combined at March 10. At this point, however, there were already many infected people in the USA. The few tests at March 10 are precarious because the infection chains cannot be traced.

Greets from Germany... ...and sorry for possible grammatical mistakes. I just noticed another potential criticism in various media that I wanted to share with youTriplec85 (talk) 20:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

It's too soon to start criticizing, IMO, whether enough weapons are being used while we're in the middle of a war. For some ongoing event like this, there's probably nothing easier to do than start armchair criticizing something or someone. And when it's done, it should come from reliable sources, not implied via charts and graphs.

In regards to testing and test kits, the rules and ability for testing varies for different countries. It's fine that S. Korea or China can quickly ramp up production of test kits, and allow anyone to be tested at any time. But it becomes another matter when countries with more advanced medical teams do not recommend testing unless there are clear symptoms first, as in the UK or U.S., per the CDC guidelines. In fact, allowing 200,000 S. Koreans to drive up and test before they had symptoms can be counterproductive, due to false positives and negatives. --Light show (talk) 21:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Valid or not, the criticism about lack of testing is being reported in many RSs, and is even being made by US government officials, so it belongs in the article. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:01, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

If you'd like something to criticize, consider adding this shocker from China, to the UK pandemic site, which somehow chose to ignore the issue. --Light show (talk) 04:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

@Light show:, how is that relevant to this discussion? I agree with Mx. Granger and others here; extremely low testing rates in the US is mentioned in many RSs, and by governmental and medical officials. It does deserve at least a mention in the article. ␄ –Nucleosynth (t c) 04:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I would agree to add them on the article, as soon as the neutrality is maintained and the contributor is not stating whether it is right or wrong. SunDawn (talk) 06:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

The testing issues are both in the lead and in it's own section. The sources, in English, cover the criticisms quite well. --Light show (talk) 04:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

In addition, the three UK sources used were incorrect about the vaccine issue. They were published after the NYT stated in a headline a day earlier: "The United States says it will share any vaccine breakthroughs with the world." The UK's Times article wrote, "apparent hope of securing exclusive control." Speculations about something like that don't warrant a section, nor do they even warrant mentioning. It's safer to use U.S. sources when possible. --Light show (talk) 04:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Deletion

Could someone with privileges please delete all mentions of the state of Franklin and West Florida from the table and text. As far as I'm aware, both are defunct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.224.20.240 (talk) 08:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Illinois

3/19/2020 Illinois Health Dept. today reported 134 new cases (422 total) and 3 more deaths (4 total) http://dph.illinois.gov/covid19 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:240:4980:24E0:B08F:5307:97F8:7886 (talk) 20:12, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Synchronize

Three tables are currently showing three different numbers for the total case count, differing by thousands. Isn't their some way to use a mgic word or template-in-a-template to keep these all with the same number? Rmhermen (talk) 06:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

We might, but we are already past the article size limits which is a problem. Regardless, there is actually an explanation for the difference in numbers.

• Infobox: The CDC initially went with just confirmed cases only before shifting their model. As noted on their website, "Data include both confirmed and presumptive positive cases of COVID-19 reported to CDC or tested at CDC since January 21, 2020, with the exception of testing results for persons repatriated to the United States from Wuhan, China and Japan. State and local public health departments are now testing and publicly reporting their cases. In the event of a discrepancy between CDC cases and cases reported by state and local public health officials, data reported by states should be considered the most up to date." Thus, the CDC data does not show certain cases, but does show what they have accepted per official tests and cases as determined by state/local governments. Johns Hopkins University does uses CDC data as a source and also uses the following sources for the US: WHO, 1point3acres, Worldometers.info, BNO, state and national government health department, and local media reports.
• Rest of the Lede: The template underneath the infobox is the US medical cases chart template. That template is sourced by official reports from state health officials. Those individual sources come from the US medical cases template which is a table instead of a chart. The table gets its sources from the main state and territory governments (plus the official D.C. website). It also handles daily sourcing, putting the entire table at 500+ citations and currently uses more data than this article by size. Thus, 54 sources are squeezed together to get the daily numbers for the chart template.
• Additional information on cases section: There is an another template in this section. That template is US cases by state (and territories + D.C.) chart. This chart takes most of its info mainly from Worldometers.info with other sources to help. I will admit here that I am not sure why this one is using Worldometers.info. Maybe it is because JHU decided to do so, though I believe there was a discussion on this to not use it as a source for now. Perhaps this template would do better with getting its info from the medical cases table template instead.

Regardless, that is why we have so many different numbers. Different sourcing is producing differing numbers. --Super Goku V (talk) 07:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Trump administration's food stamp requirement to work push, add here or ?

• USDA fights to purge food stamps recipients despite pandemic March 18, 2020 NPR.org

The United States Department of Agriculture is fighting to implement changes to food stamps (SNAP) benefits, despite Federal Judge Beryl Howell’s ruling that it would be “arbitrary and capricious” to move forward during a global health crisis. The new rules were set to go into effect on April 1, but Judge Howell ordered a freeze on the changes in a ruling last week. The new rules would eliminate states’ ability to waive work and time requirements for SNAP recipients in areas with high unemployment rates. The changes are expected to kick roughly 700,000 people off the program if enacted.

See previous Talk page March 12 item in Archive 2.

... maybe at Socio-economic impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic &/or Financial impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, but those are global view, not U.S. specific?

X1\ (talk) 07:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Government response — Preparedness

In May 2018, the Trump administration disbanded the National Security Council directorate for global health security and biodefense.

This add was deleted with the source of following suggested addition in comments:

Former presidential advisor Tim Morrison claimed in March 2020 that, amid a shrinking of the NSC, the office had been consolidated with two other offices into the counterproliferation and biodefense directorate which he had headed.

I re-added it for now, pending discussion here. Wakari07 (talk) 13:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Also see this at Veracity of statements by Donald Trump#Coronavirus pandemic. X1\ (talk) 03:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

The above text by Wakari07 ("Former presidential advisor Tim Morrison claimed in March 2020 that, amid a shrinking of the NSC, the office had been consolidated with two other offices into the counterproliferation and biodefense directorate which he had headed") accurately represents the source cited (Tim Morrison's op-ed); the current Wikipedia text

Tim Morrison, a presidential advisor to Trump in 2019, responded to deny press reports that the staff had been dissolved; he stated that, while National Security Staff had been reduced after it quadrupled during the previous administration, biodefense staff – and the important mission it represents – remained unaffected.

does not. It's clear that the biodefense staff was not "unaffected" - their numbers were reduced and their stand-alone directorate was eliminated, with its functions being combined into a different, multi-purpose directorate. The current text implies a direct contradiction between the AP report and Morrison's op-ed, when in fact they don't contradict each other. I hope someone substitutes Wakari07's text (above), or something equivalent, for the current inaccurate text. 68.9.181.144 (talk) 19:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Combined into 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States#Federal executive and added ref. X1\ (talk) 05:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Now section called "#Preparedness and prior warnings" instead. X1\ (talk) 08:05, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

References

impact on employment, add?

18% of Americans reported that they had been laid off or that their work hours had been cut because of the coronavirus pandemic.

56% of Americans considered the coronavirus outbreak a “real threat,” while 38% said it was “blown out of proportion.”

• https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-03-17/coronavirus-layoffs-work-hours-jobs

X1\ (talk) 01:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

There's a huge difference between being "laid off" and having hours cut in the middle of a global plague. -- Veggies (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

What are you contributing to the conversation, Veggies? X1\ (talk) 02:52, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Besides my charming personality? Just a common-sense note that grouping "laid off" with "hours cut" is an unwise, undefined, and overly broad category. I wouldn't bother adding the assertion with a quantifiable statistic to the article. -- Veggies (talk) 03:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

If they are grouped in the ref and in the edit, I don't see the problem. Broad yes, but economically significant. 18% is a large number even if it were just hours cut. X1\ (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

It could give someone the erroneous impression that 18% of the US workforce has been laid off (i.e. that we've begun the worst economic depression in 90 years). Unless the source breaks it down by category, my recommendation would be to avoid this. -- Veggies (talk) 06:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

If that is the concern, how about 18% of Americans reported that their work hours had been cut or that they had been laid off because of the coronavirus pandemic.? X1\ (talk) 07:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Here is another: 18% of Americans have experienced layoffs and reduced hours due to the coronavirus pandemic. Of those affected, a quarter of households making less than $50,000 had experienced cut hours or a job loss.

• Camila Domonoske Poll: Nearly 1 In 5 Households Has Lost Work Because Of Pandemic March 17, 2020 NPR.org

Maybe to Socio-economic impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic? X1\ (talk) 03:14, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Maybe to Financial impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, also global article; not U.S. specific? X1\ (talk) 08:15, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Split article suggestion: Economic impact of the 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States

Would it make sense to have a sub-article with the title above or something similar?Farcaster (talk) 03:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

I'd say it is increasingly likely as this article grows in size. X1\ (talk) 04:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

See Socio-economic impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. X1\ (talk) 03:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

See Financial impact of the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic, also global view article. X1\ (talk) 08:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Video from Dr. Fauci

Dr. Fauci PSA

Indeed, just as Dr. Fauci, "Health officials are advising people with mild symptoms to stay home, do not go to a hospital and do not consider getting tested. That means only the most serious cases will be tested." [6]. But there is a question: will the people who stay at home (and do have the virus) be able to receive a treatment with at least some mildly efficient drugs like interferon, ribavirin, chloroquine, or umifenovir (which were used in China)? Chances are these drugs are more efficient at the early stages of the disease. Just sitting at home and waiting until the disease progresses and the person is becoming terminally ill at home, only to be transported to die in a hospital is not really a good strategy. My very best wishes (talk) 03:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

• @My very best wishes: - Fauci did not say stay home and do not consider getting tested. He said, first, call a physician and follow their instructions. starship.paint (talk) 03:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, sure, and they advice people exactly what the cited reference say, i.e. stay at home. As the disease develops, it always starts from mild symptoms, which are then becoming worse, and so on. Under any normal circumstances, the recommendation would be "go to the hospital and be tested immediately". Note that it is also important for the patient to know which exactly disease he/she might have. The only reason not to do it is not having enough capacity (tests, etc.) at the hospital. That might be not so bad, but there are at least some half-measures like the antiviral drugs that could be used, and this is not done, at least not in the USA. For exactly same reason, CDC lied about the masks as preventive measure. They should be used everywhere [7], exactly as it was done in China. Not having such preventative measures in place (a lot of masks, tests, bigger hospital capacities and at least partially efficient drugs distributed to everyone who was tested positive) can increase the number of deaths by ~10 times, according to certain estimates. My very best wishes (talk) 15:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Can recovered cases be added to the "COVID-19 cases in the United States" graph?

This seems to be a very informative graph, but it doesn't include the recovered cases. The data is available in one of the tables at the bottom of the article. Not sure what would be involved in adding it, but the graph gives a good view of the overall evolution of the crisis. (For whatever it's worth, I think this is going to be a really hard article as regards NPV.) Shanen (talk) 06:00, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

The recovered cases are reported in pages of Italy, South Korea, France, Canada, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hopf0605 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

German Wikipedia currently does not give graphs of recovered cases in most of their corona related articles for several reasons:

• The definition of "recovered" varies widely, both geographically and as time goes by.
• The number do not represent much encyclopedic information in the first place. Its size is very sensitive to the exact conditions for testing. Are test performed on everyone who enters the hospital with respiratory symptoms? Or are only persons with severe symptoms tested for confirmation? If the latter, then the mild cases will not enter the group of officially infected and consequently will never be counted as "recovered".
• It is tempting to divide the number of recovered by the number of fatalities and interpret this relation as a "death rate". However, as argued in the previous points, the number of recovered is quite volatile and prone to systematic errors.

Hope that helps you decide, ---<)kmk(>- (talk) 18:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Actually it should be added, the definition of infected can vary as well (via test / via CT / ...), but it is not a reason not to include it to the graph to make it more informative.

Also articles on 2020 coronavirus pandemic for:

• Germany
• Canada
• Sweden
• South Korea
• United Kingom
• Japan
• Australia
• Italy
• Spain
• China

... etc they ALL HAVE recovered numbers, and it is already a normal comparative figure that should indeed be added to this article to improve the transparency and make it as informative as other articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.228.31.159 (talk) 21:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

state vs. federal bidding on medical equipment, add here or ?

Trump’s directed state governors to acquire their own medical equipment, but then the federal government outbid them for protective gear for doctors and nurses, as well as respirators.

• https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-19/trump-told-governors-to-buy-own-virus-supplies-then-outbid-them
• https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-trump-outbid-states-on-medical-supplies-2020-3

X1\ (talk) 00:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Trump’s advisers admit some of failures, add?

Trump’s own advisers acknowledged to NBC News that the failure to focus on widespread testing was a major misstep

• Ken Dilanian, Carol E. Lee, Dan De Luce, Laura Strickler and Suzy Khimm Mismanagement, missed opportunities: How the White House bungled the coronavirus response; Trump’s own advisers acknowledged to NBC News that the failure to focus on widespread testing was a major misstep. March 14, 2020 NBCNews.com

X1\ (talk) 01:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)