Talk:National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic/Archive 1

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

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:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:07, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:36, 11 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) 16:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


Name

The title of this article should be: "National responses to the 2019–20 coronavirus outbreak". "Domestic" means within a country, as opposed to outside of it, but the topic is the response by individual countries, not any one country. Sandstein 14:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Sandstein, Agreed. ---Another Believer (Talk) 11:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

How to be ahead of the spread ? Illustrations

How to cut asymptomatic virus spread.

Please spread these helpful illustration into suitable articles. Korea is the perfect case for one-step-ahead strategy. USA perfect case for one-spet-behind strategy. Yug (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

USBS Waltham Abbey staff

My husband works there at the moment temporarily or should I say for however long this goes on. I'm also working still, but the difference is I'm working pretty much alone and take all precautions. My husband has taken to sitting in his car most of the day and is coming home so mentally drained due to, Nobody there is wearing gloves or masks or sanitizing, and then to top it of they're just letting the stone maisons walk in and out do as they please, (spitting and coughing like sluggish loughts.) Doing as they please and what they please. Even the Rumble brothers don't seem to care. When most of the funerals are hand digs aswell. They are so pathetic and unprofessional. That my husband is coming home in such a bad mental state. They are dealing with the dead Where's the respect. He also does the health and safety reports on the premises in which don't seem to be delt with when his reported them. I can't go to head office and complain because it will just make it worse for him. We've been together this year for 23 years and I can see him walking out of the job. His been at that company for roughly 20 years maybe more. I don't know who to report this to. I do know I love him very much can't imagine life without him, we have worked so hard and for our children. And these most stupid ignorant, arrogant child like behaviour are putting our lives at risk (I'm not exaggerating) There's also no protective clothing or equipment. Spacegirlblue (talk) 06:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Canadian response

Is there someone willing to write up Canada's response? Torfrid (talk) 18:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Why is Australia's quarantine showing as only 3 weeks when the government have been very clear it will be in place for 6 months?

https://www.pm.gov.au/media/update-coronavirus-measures-270320 "We will be living with this virus for at least six months, so social distancing measures to slow this virus down must be sustainable for at least that long to protect Australian lives, to help Australia to keep functioning and to keep Australians in jobs."


& from the date listed as the quarantine start on the wiki page https://www.health.gov.au/news/update-on-coronavirus-covid-19-measures-from-the-prime-minister

"This evening, 22 March 2020, the Prime Minister, the Hon. Scott Morrison MP, announced new measures to protect Australians from coronavirus (COVID-19).

The Prime Minister, and state and territory Premiers and Chief Ministers agreed to further actions to support social distancing measures already in place, and to protect the Australian community from the spread of coronavirus. Premiers and Chief Ministers agreed they would give effect to these restrictions through their own legislative processes and make announcements accordingly.

Australians should expect these measures to be in place for at least 6 months."


At no time has the Australian government suggested ANY restrictions it has put in place will be lifted in less than 6 months! It rejects terms like "lock down", but if that or quarantine are used, then it is very clear that it is staying for 6 months minimum & as such, obviously the wiki page should reflect that. Might make it a little clearer to some countries that are downplaying this that it is a serious & long term issue that requires long term measures if you don't want mass deaths! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.210.98.214 (talk) 11:03, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Vietnam lockdown not on the list

Vietnam enters lockdown https://www.metalbulletin.com/Article/3925803/Vietnam-enters-lockdown-Toyota-suspends-vehicle-production-indefinitely.html 112.199.181.130 (talk) 05:58, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Albania Lockdown is not on list

Albania has imposed a national lockdown since 13 March. https://emerging-europe.com/news/coronavirus-forces-emerging-europe-into-lockdown/ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-albania/albania-extends-lockdown-till-end-of-coronavirus-outbreak-idUSKBN21J6AZ — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlbionOfAlbania (talk • contribs) 18:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation hatnote

I took a stab at writing a disambiguation hatnote between this article and 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic by country and territory. I'm not sure I got the distinction perfectly right, so if those of you maintaining this article want it to be different, please feel free to modify (so long as you're able to agree with the folks at the other page and keep the hatnotes synchronized). {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I have added link for the Criticism of response page. As far as I know, there in current consensus on hatnotes, if there is, do link it please. This should suffice for now. --Shawnqual (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 April 2020

Response in The Netherlands: In The Netherlands the country went in a silent lockdown on the 18th of April. In The Netherlands, it's called a smart lockdown which means that normal life is not forbidden but everyone gets its own responsibility. There are some restrictions such as: No parties, catering industry goes down and on the streets, no one can be in groups larger than 3 people. Also, the supermarkets get their safety proportions, a maximum amount of people can enter, the shopping carts get cleaned before entering and there is plexiglass at every cash register. Also, the leader of The Netherlands, Mark Rutte, has announced that handshaking will be a no-go for the coming months and we got to get used to a 1,5-meter society for possibly the rest of the year. KinkyWarrior (talk) 22:14, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: KinkyWarrior, I suggest waiting a while before there are further significant developments. The Netherlands has been observing an "intelligent lockdown" with similar restrictions since March. This is nothing new. Feel free to add these developments in the country's main article here. Please also provide references in the future for any edits you request. Thanks--Shawnqual (talk) 20:25, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Turn this into a list?

I just glanced over this article, and...well...it'd be improved if we just turned it into a transclusion of the "domestic responses" section of the main pandemic article. Is it really fitting that this be a written out article, or should it just be a list? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:05, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it is fitting as a main article as on the main pandemic article, only a handful of countries are given their subsection for response as soon as a consensus is reached. This depends on how hard-hit the country is and/or how well its response has been. However, we do need to start thinking about which countries could be placed in this article. As it would simply be too long if every country/territory would be given its own subsection, either small or big. Plus, most of it is ghoing to be copy-pasted from main articles A consensus is probably required on this, I suggest subsections for five worst-hit countries (countries with highest number of cases) per continent for Africa, Asia and Europe as they are large. Three would suffice for the Americas and maybe two for Oceania as they are smaller. For the other countries/territories, a list could be prepared hyperlinking to the response subsections on their main articles for the pandemic. --Shawnqual (talk) 20:25, 18 April 2020 (UTC) EDIT: I have since added lists of countries/territories hyperlinked to their respective response subsections on main articles for every continent.
Moxy, Epiphyllumlover, Sdkb, Esslet What do you guys suggest? --Shawnqual (talk) 05:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
If you are going to keep this around as something other than a list, my main suggestion is to make heavy use of excerpts, since this article is never going to receive as much attention as the individual country article leads. I still feel that it's not the best way to spend our energies — we can only have so many levels of detail, and the main pandemic article has a very shallow level, and the country articles themselves have a deep level, and I don't think we need something in between. What reader is going to be better served here than at one of those other two levels? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:55, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
I agree it is likely to become neglected. I have been impressed with the work Shawnqual has recently put into this article. If Shawnqual and others continue to maintain it, I don't see any harm in keeping it up. It is unlikely to get too big in the next few months at least, and if it does it can be separated by continent. It doesn't seem terribly important to me whether we ration the number of countries according to a set plan or just according to editor motivation. I would like a list type article, and think it might go well here in place of the See also section. Maybe 5+ years later if this article is not maintained, the list section can become the whole article and everything else deleted. As for "What reader is going to be better served here than at one of those other two levels?"--it is important to have other countries listed side-by-side as this is an antidote against the skeptical "its a hoax" sort of attitude. A person who leans conservative or liberal can also see that it is "real" in countries which have conservative or liberal governments.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

France

The section about France does not have sources that work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.249.225.137 (talk) 20:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what to do the user that did this told me they won't fix it.
The refs have been fixed - - RichT|C|E-Mail 22:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
That is wonderful thank you very much Rich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.249.225.137 (talk) 23:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Lockdown

In lockdown, you list all places in the world with lockdown. Aldrin Orlanes Poliico (talk) 03:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Lockdown

You list all places in the world with lockdown. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldrin Orlanes Poliico (talk • contribs) 03:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

El Salvador

The article states that the lockdown in El Salvador ended on April 2nd, when it actually has just been getting extended. The latest official end date is June 6. Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-el-salvador/el-salvadors-president-extends-lockdown-crimping-law-allowing-restart-of-economy-idUSKBN22V2XS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.29.14.146 (talk) 03:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

European Union response to the COVID-19 pandemic

Just wondering why the title limits the scope to national responses?

Would this make European Union response to the COVID-19 pandemic not interesting, while the EU might be the third economy by its GDP and the first by its trade?

A more neutral title could be

Such more neutral title would fit better with the European Union response to the COVID-19 pandemic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.136.214.158 (talk) 18:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic - Sri Lanka

The Start Date for the lockdown in Sri Lanka is given as 20 Mar 2020. Tjhat is correct. The End Date for the lockdown in Sri Lanka is given as 26 May 2020. That is INCORRECT, As of today 22 June 2020, the Covid-19 lockdown has not ended albeit it is now a four hour night curfew every night. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.135.238.222 (talk) 04:17, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 13 June 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Mdaniels5757 (talk) 02:34, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic → Government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic – It seems imprecise to me to talk about "national responses", confusing a country with its government, when the word "government" will do. Kudu ~I/O~ 23:49, 13 June 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose per Flejern. The current name is sufficiently descriptive IMO and the article can clear up any ambiguity what it is about. (t · c) buidhe 05:38, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose Unless subnational government responses are within the scope of this article, this article should not be moved. --Flejern (talk) 02:28, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

It could be called "national government responses" then. My point is that "national responses" is ill-defined; it could include actions by national civil-society organizations, for instance. Kudu ~I/O~ 18:51, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion at Talk:COVID-19 pandemic § Lockdowns map still commented out

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:COVID-19 pandemic § Lockdowns map still commented out. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:45, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 July 2021

South Australia has recently entered another lockdown, 20/7/21 - 27/7/21. Source https://www.facebook.com/sahealth/posts/182693203884385 AussieGoose88 (talk) 14:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. lomrjyo(talk•contrib) 16:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_responses_to_the_COVID-19_pandemic/Archive_1&oldid=1066416282"