Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:06, 4 July 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 pandemic in India article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 7 days

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. COVID-19 High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Viruses High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Disaster management Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. India: History High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian history workgroup (assessed as High-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Medicine: Pulmonology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Pulmonology task force.

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

WikiProject COVID-19 consensus WikiProject COVID-19 aims to add to and build consensus for pages relating to COVID-19. They have so far discussed items listed below. Please discuss proposed improvements to them at the project talk page. General Superseded by TfD October 2020 and later practice - consult regular {{Current}} guidance. Refrain from using Worldometer (worldometers.info) as a source due to common errors being observed as noted on the Case Count Task Force common errors page. (April 2020, April 2020) For infoboxes on the main articles of countries, use Wuhan, Hubei, China for the origin parameter. (March 2020) "Social distancing" is generally preferred over "physical distancing". (April 2020, May 2020) Page title COVID-19 (full caps) is preferable in the body of all articles, and in the title of all articles/category pages/etc.(RM April 2020, including the main article itself, RM March 2021). SARS-CoV-2 (exact capitalisation and punctuation) is the common name of the virus and should be used for the main article's title, as well as in the body of all articles, and in the title of all other articles/category pages/etc. (June 2022, overturning April 2020) Map There is no consensus about which color schemes to use, but they should be consistent within articles as much as possible. There is agreement that there should be six levels of shading, plus gray   for areas with no instances or no data. (May 2020) There is no consensus about whether the legend, the date, and other elements should appear in the map image itself. (May 2020) For map legends, ranges should use fixed round numbers (as opposed to updating dynamically). There is no consensus on what base population to use for per capita maps. (May 2020) To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.

Section sizes Section size for COVID-19 pandemic in India (68 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 12,832 12,832 Timeline 331 43,696 2020 10,749 10,749 2021: Second wave 28,186 28,186 2022 1,219 1,219 2023 3,211 3,211 Response 186 153,233 Health care and testing 6,526 74,276 Initial testing 4,100 4,100 Expansion of tests 9,314 9,314 Testing community transmission 5,254 5,254 Daily samples tested 9,169 9,169 Research and treatment 15,755 15,755 Vaccine development and production 8,785 8,785 Vaccination policy and distribution 15,373 15,373 Immediate relief 421 14,684 Welfare 6,050 6,050 Economic relief and stimulus package 8,213 8,213 Lockdowns 55 17,072 First wave: Nation-wide 13,147 13,147 Second wave: State-wise and localized 3,870 3,870 Administration, committees and task forces 15,738 15,738 Pseudoscience practices 1,157 1,157 Military 4,919 4,919 Private sector 4,392 4,392 International 22 13,866 International support 13,844 13,844 Response shortages and criticism 6,943 6,943 Evacuations by India related to the COVID-19 pandemic 208 47,094 Background 20 6,159 COVID-19 pandemic 2,712 2,712 Migration 1,470 1,470 Previous evacuations 1,957 1,957 International 22 31,092 January–April 2020 10,762 10,762 May 2020–present: Vande Bharat Mission 3,515 3,515 Phase I 7,582 7,582 Phase II 2,609 2,609 Phase III 650 650 Phase IV 1,483 1,483 Phase V 1,759 1,759 Phase VI 363 363 Phase VII 526 526 Samudra Setu II 1,821 1,821 Domestic 1,415 1,415 Reception 6,599 6,599 Incidents 19 1,621 Air India Express Flight 1344 565 565 Air India Flight AI-312 27-Aug Fiasco 1,037 1,037 Impact 14 71,300 Displacement of migrant workers 7,705 7,705 Drug shortages 4,026 4,026 Education 5,638 5,638 Economy 7,688 7,688 Freedom of expression 3,305 3,305 Other diseases 2,823 2,823 Healthcare and frontline workers 6,460 6,460 Religion 7,978 7,978 Rural and semi-rural India 4,799 4,799 Transport 9,102 9,102 Other 11,762 11,762 Statistics 1,538 12,596 Undercounting of cases and deaths 11,058 11,058 See also 287 287 Notes 263 263 References 33 33 Further reading 2,391 2,391 External links 2,162 2,162 Total 345,887 345,887

Trimming and refining the article

Hi fellow editors, this is a rapidly evolving situation and all of us feel the need to keep adding information to the article. But, from a readers point of view the article is too lengthy and contains information that's not necessary or holds little significance. Just for an example, there are statements from state CMs which could be moved to their respective sub-articles(except those of national importance), measures taken by states, obsolete facts and figures so on. I propose that we build consensus on as to what should stay and make the article more informative and precise AnM2002 (talk) 15:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

YES, I second this. Reading the first para itself is tiring. There is way too much info in the entire article and not relevant; and by irrelevant I mean wikipedia should not give ALL the facts. It must be cut short.Thundermage117 (talk) 15:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. Several sections need trimming and some updating. Like, at least the Timeline and Government response sections, which have not been updated for a while should be expanded following summary style. They're highly important to the subject imo. Overdetailed, out-of-scope stuff can be removed like you suggest. Shanze1 (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@Shanze1: @Thundermage117: thanks for your inputs. What i propose is that we trim down reports and additions from non-government sources and replace them withOfficial Government data if available. As this is a rapidly evolving situation more priority should be given to what the authorities are saying not opinion pieces, news articles or models. Sure they are necessary but at present we need to give information which is precise and reliable. AnM2002 (talk) 16:45, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

AnM2002, Sure. But conveying just info based on official outlets is never good. It might lead to WP:UNDUE issues. Only govt sources for figures and stats is acceptable. But I get what you're saying, there is some excess, no longer relevant detail (especially in lead section) that can be removed if everyone agrees. So, if you can identify such content, list them here to gain consensus for their removal. Thanks. Shanze1 (talk) 17:11, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@Shanze1: I totally get that we cannot depend solely on government sources, but the point is this page is the first thing people see when they look for COVID19 situation in India, it would be better if they easily find the most important information (both Govt./Non-Gov) not hefty paras. I have made few changes in the lead do take a look.

In addition to the changes I have made to the lead, I think the comments by Micheal Ryan and Oxford report should be trimmed and compiled in a short para , the detail comments can either be added to the lockdown article or a subsection on impact/reception. The statement about epidemic act also is ambiguous as the MHA has already recommended the pan India usage of the act in its guidelines. The statement on doubling and growth rate needs to be updated and rephrased. The sub-section on closedown and curfews is completely redundant as it's just a summary of state-specific decisions, these should be added to the articles of respective states. There's also a para under subsection on travel restrictions which just complies state specific restrictions, will prove useful on state specific articles.AnM2002 (talk) 17:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

AnM2002, thanks for bring up the topic, it is definitely required. I have trimmed some sections (Migrant workers, Tablighi hotspot, Closedowns and curfews, Legal action) but we should start taking more WP:CFORKs now. I agree with Shanze1 about using government sources only for statistics. Besides that, your edits seem fine so far. Do help us in keeping the rest of the article updated, thanks. SerChevalerie (talk) 18:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@SerChevalerie: thanks for your concurrence. I'll keep making adjustments to the article, will keep this thread posted live to further discuss the proposals. My view on Government sources is simple that they should be preferred more and other sources can be added as secondary sources to reaffirm. What do you think about the excessive states specific data ? Is there concurrence on editing it ? AnM2002 (talk) 18:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

AnM2002, can move the excessive state-specific data to the respective articles on each state, but we should keep historically significant events (see WP:10YEARTEST) in this article (while summarized extensively, of course). SerChevalerie (talk) 19:06, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@SerChevalerie: understood. AnM2002 (talk) 02:32, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi, fellow editors, I hope all of you are following the changes I have made to the page to streamline the delivery of information and concur. Feel free to covey your thoughts and inputs. Secondly, I would like to know if I should cut down the section named 'Closedowns and curfews' as I feel it's solely related to the restrictions announced by the states which are better suited on their respective pages. we can keep the gist of the most important ones. SerChevalerie Shanze1 Thundermage117 what do you guys suggest ?

Firstly, TIL about the {{Yo}} as an alternative to {{Reply to}}. Anyway AnM2002, you have done a decent job till now. I have taken care of the unnecessary italicising of figures, along with some minor punctuation and grammar errors. I do hope that you have moved the deleted content to the respective articles.

Regarding the "Closedowns and curfews" section, I had worked on trimming it significantly a couple of weeks ago, so I don't think it can be trimmed any further. While you may update the respective states' articles with this info, it is important to understand that the state governments had initiated their own lockdowns much before the central government. However, if other users agree, I feel it is better placed in COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in India, maybe as part of some "Background" info. SerChevalerie (talk) 20:41, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@SerChevalerie: I moved the content to respective articles wherever it wasn't already present. Most of the content I removed was there on the dedicated articles so u can trust me on this. Secondly, I used italics and short forms to make the figures standout but you know better so I agree with your cleanups.

The section on close downs and curfews is still quite hefty, it has information on school closures in states, closure of tourism activities and others with very few mentions of curfews under section 144 of CrPC. I would suggest we trim it down to mention State orders relating to curfews and restrictions under the section 144 rest all should be moved to the respective state pages or as u said the article on Lockdown. There are only tak three mentions of curfew orders rest all are school closures, no mention of states like HP, Punjab and many others where statewide curfews were declared early.AnM2002 (talk) 02:29, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

AnM2002 that makes sense. You can proceed with the same; if anyone does not approve then we can go through WP:BRD. SerChevalerie (talk) 07:17, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Till now 24,677 bytes of unnecessary data removed/moved to dedicated pages, I am listing down the sections which I have reworked/trimmed till now:lead, Background, Travel restrictions, Closed downs and curfews, Aarogya Setu, Economic package, Religion. There's still a lot of work especially on the testing and countermeasures section(lot of comments and observations), government response needs reworking, Misinformation and discrimination, Research and treatment, data related to covid health care infrastructure is scant too. I am going to work on testing and countermeasures next. The Principal scientific advisor made a very detailed briefing on the R&D situation in the country, I'll try to focus more on it. Feel free to give inputs and suggestions.AnM2002 (talk) 09:15, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I was wondering if "Testing" should be a WP:CFORK. Let's see after you're done trimming/updating it. Meanwhile, I'll help you with your trimming whenever possible. SerChevalerie (talk) 14:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Charts, maps and tables

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

COVID-19 pandemic in India/Statistics created and selected parts of article used in COVID-19 pandemic in India- Timbaaa -> ping me 03:39, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

In context of the on going discussion above, shall we move all stat charts, maps(except for maps in infobox) and tables to a subpage a subpage or a separate article and use Template:excerpt to show only selected 2 or 3 graphs and 1 or 2 table in this article. Let this article focus on prose. Usage example at:COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil#Statistics.- Timbaaa -> ping me 06:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Timbaaa, I support this change as described by you. A select 2-3 graphs and 1-2 tables can remain in this article, the rest can be moved to a subpage. SerChevalerie (talk) 07:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

SerChevalerie, Can you tag others regular editors of the article? - Timbaaa -> ping me 06:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Timbaaa,This is needed now as there are many charts in the article now. Mayankj429 (talk) 03:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Timbaaa, so far you have achieved consensus. You can go ahead and make the changes and take this forward as per WP:BRD. SerChevalerie (talk) 03:15, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

@SerChevalerie and Mayankj429:, In that case, shall we follow the same naming scheme as shown example? What are all the graphs to be included in the main article? - Timbaaa -> ping me 05:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Timbaaa, naming scheme looks fine, graphs I'd say "Total confirmed cases, active cases, recoveries and deaths" and "COVID-19 cases in India" ("Timeline" section) are the most important, and maybe one in the "Testing statistics" section. SerChevalerie (talk) 08:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Timbaaa, Subpage can be named COVID-19 pandemic in India/Statistics. And we can let the statewise table remain in the Template while the summary table from Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/India medical cases summary could be moved in the subpage.

Graphs which can be included in main article -

1)Total confirmed cases, active cases, recoveries and deaths

2) Cases by region (which you were talking to add for some states with highest cases)

3) New cases per day

4) New deaths per day

If we are adding Graphs in Testing stats too in the sub page then these can be included in main page-

1) Tested samples curve

2) New tests per day

Also I have seen that COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil#Statistics is using line graphs for New cases and new deaths per day, we can use the same it will save us from that scrollable graph along x-axis. These are my suggestions, let me know if you have any other ideas as well. Thanks Mayankj429 (talk) 09:06, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Mayankj429, It's not possible to show values in line graph, for values to be shown bar chart is the option. - Timbaaa -> ping me 15:36, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Notifying Susam Pal and Ashinpt who regularly update Statistics to participate in the discussion. Mayankj429 (talk) 09:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Timbaaa. This will make the article easier to read. -- Susam Pal (talk) 12:39, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Timbaaa. I find it a very valuable and logical proposal to execute ~ Amkgp 💬 14:55, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

 Disagree with Timbaaa

Someone wrote "from a readers point of view the article is too lengthy and contains information that's not necessary" As a reader, I find it extremely valuable to know how many tests are done per day and all the graphs are consulted. This should still be featured. And why was this removed arbitrarily when no consensus has been reached? Manish2542 (talk) 15:04, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Manish2542, Nothing is removed just restructuring, selected statistics(including tests) are at COVID-19 pandemic in India#Statistics. More can be seen at COVID-19 pandemic in India/Statistics - Timbaaa -> ping me 15:11, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Timbaaa, In that case, at least add COVID-19 pandemic in India/Statistics under the "Testing" segment so that one can go to the charts. My apologies, got confused by the changes and thought someone vandalised the article Manish2542 (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Timbaaa. There are many graphs all over the place right now. Consolidating the main graphs in one place should make it an easier read. Are we moving the maps in the Statistics section to the subpage also? -- Ashinpt (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Ashinpt, Yes, select maps are in infobox, more at the subpage. - Timbaaa -> ping me 15:45, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Timbaaa. The map is really messed up right now. {{31}}{{25A (talk)}} 23:40, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposal for moving Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/India medical cases

The following discussion 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.

Now that the stats section is split and consolidated, I think the Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/India medical cases can be moved above, aside Timeline (like in the US article), where one can access it much faster. Shanze1 (talk) 15:51, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Shanze1. Now it contains only the table, so It can be moved. Also, can be renamed to Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/India medical cases by states and union territories - Timbaaa -> ping me 16:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Shanze1, This will make easier to access the table. Mayankj429 (talk) 16:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with Shanze1. SerChevalerie (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Shanze1, Thanks for moving the template up, as i see now the fonts of the table seems a bit large, can we shift to layout as in US article which is actually derived from Template:COVID-19 pandemic data. Reader will need to scrolll less too as the font size decreases. Mayankj429 (talk) 04:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

 Done moved and styled it as suggested. Shanze1 (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Shanze1. Mayankj429 (talk) 05:48, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Unlocking

India is starting to "unlock", even though cases are peaking every day. Can someone add a criticism section on this attitude of the Government? I guess that India doesn't want to be behind European countries... --81.202.238.193 (talk) 12:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done Please specify sources? {{31}}{{25A (talk)}} 23:39, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Indian nationals abroad

The number given for UK deaths could well be for members of the Indian (or even South Asian) diaspora population, which may not be the same as the number of Indian nationals (I don't know what the position on dual nationality is). The original UK government statement might be clearer on this point. Lavateraguy (talk) 10:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Lockdown

I realize that it's a summary, but the lockdown section should include at least a brief mention of criticism / effectiveness. Benjamin (talk) 02:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Could you propose your version here, keeping in mind WP:DUE? SerChevalerie (talk) 03:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

My previous edit was "the lockdown has been criticized as counterproductive", but I'm open to suggestions, and mostly indifferent to the exact wording, as long as it's mentioned somehow. Benjamin (talk) 04:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

I mentioned WP:DUE because even though it's a summary, we will need to cover both, bouquets and brickbats. I'll look into this later when I get time, but if you or anyone else can propose a version and achieve consensus, go ahead. SerChevalerie (talk) 05:08, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Maybe something like, "While generally regarded as necessary, the implementation of the lockdowns was also criticized for worsening the crisis."? Like I said, I'm not particular about the wording. Please consider adding other perspectives as you see fit. Benjamin (talk) 02:49, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Please add this information

Hello. To the editors of this page -

@Ozzie10aaaa: @Thegreatestmanonearth: @Mayankj429: @Timbaaa: @Shanze1: @SerChevalerie: @Italawar:} Perhaps it would be useful to put down the impact of covid, in terms of the arrest of journalists who were reporting on covid-19. Ref: https://clarionindia.net/55-journalists-face-persecution-for-highlighting-peoples-suffering-during-lockdown/ Please discuss; thank you! Tanyasingh (talk) 06:06, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps in the 'Situation' section? Or in Impact?

Sure. If you can come up with a draft, it can be added. Shanze1 (talk) 06:05, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Suppression of facts and reporting on Covid-19

A report titled "India: Media’s Crackdown during COVID-19 Lockdown" was published on 15th June, 2020. Many sources state that at least 55 journalists have been heavily cracked down on for reporting on Covid-19, with FIRs being filed against them under various Acts. The charges have been levied for reporting starvation faced by migrant workers, the failure of the administration to supply rations, mismanagement and negligence at quarantine centres, or any other reporting that is construed as 'anti-government'.

UNESCO also released a brief titled "Journalism, press freedom and COVID-19" in view of how important it is to have verified and accurate information, produced by independent media during the time of a pandemic.

References

1. "'At least 55 journalists targeted during COVID-19 lockdown'". Deccan Herald. 2020-06-15. Retrieved 2020-06-21.
2. "'A Clear Intimidation Tactic.' Press Watchdog Urges India to Drop Investigation Into Journalist Over COVID-19 Reporting". Time. Retrieved 2020-06-21.
3. Tatke, Sukhada (2020-05-06). "Indian Journalists Challenge Government Over Coronavirus Transparency". Global Investigative Journalism Network. Retrieved 2020-06-21.
4. ^ Desk, Caravan. "55 Journalists Face Persecution for Highlighting People's Suffering During Lockdown". Retrieved 2020-06-21. {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
5. Deol, Taran (2020-06-15). "55 journalists were targeted for reporting on Covid pandemic, says Delhi think tank report". ThePrint. Retrieved 2020-06-21.
6. https://plus.google.com/+UNESCO (2020-04-30). "@Press Freedom : with COVID-19, journalism faces new challenges, says UNESCO report". UNESCO. Retrieved 2020-06-21. {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help); External link in |last= (help)

 Done ~ Amkgp 💬 03:07, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Add lines in Misinformation and Discrimination section

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add following lines in Misinformation and Discrimination section.

Fake news circulated that the World Health Organization warned against eating cabbage to prevent coronavirus infection. The poisonous fruit of the Datura plant as a preventive measure for COVID-19 resulted in eleven people being hospitalized in India. They ate the fruit, following the instructions from a TikTok video that propagated misinformation regarding the prevention of COVID-19. Jasksingh (talk) 16:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done This is just yet another one-off incident which has been outdated and lost significance long ago. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 16:10, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

OK. Can you please define on what basis it is being decided that whether an incident is significant or not? Can you cite any guideline of wikipedia on the basis of which you made this decision? I am saying this because even in the past, I have felt that some admins of this page try to censor any incident/information which presents Hinduism or its beliefs (like Datura being recommended as a Covid cure because of its use in Ayurveda) in bad light but are very quick to add information which presents other religions (especially Islam) in bad light. For example, how is the following incident, which already exists in the article, more significant than above incident that you rejected?

Muslim cleric Ilyas Sharafuddin has stated that Allah has punished the Chinese by unleashing coronavirus on them for their brutal crackdown on Uighur Muslims.

I would suggest that this page should be open for edits to normal users just like pages of Covid pandemic of other countries are otherwise it would result in censorship which Misplaced Pages claims to be completely against. Please see WP:CENSOR.

1. "WHO did not warn against eating cabbage during the COVID-19 pandemic". AFP Fact Check. 31 March 2020. Archived from the original on 2 April 2020. Retrieved 3 April 2020.
2. "11 in AP hospitalised after following TikTok poisonous 'remedy' for COVID-19". thenewsminute.com. Retrieved 9 April 2020.
3. Reporter, Staff (7 April 2020). "Twelve taken ill after consuming 'coronavirus shaped' datura seeds". The Hindu. Retrieved 9 April 2020.

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class COVID-19 articles
• High-importance COVID-19 articles
• WikiProject COVID-19 articles
• B-Class virus articles
• High-importance virus articles
• WikiProject Viruses articles
• B-Class Disaster management articles
• Mid-importance Disaster management articles
• B-Class India articles
• High-importance India articles
• B-Class India articles of High-importance
• B-Class Indian history articles
• High-importance Indian history articles
• B-Class Indian history articles of High-importance
• WikiProject Indian history articles
• WikiProject India articles
• B-Class medicine articles
• Low-importance medicine articles
• B-Class pulmonology articles
• Unknown-importance pulmonology articles
• Pulmonology task force articles
• All WikiProject Medicine pages
• Misplaced Pages articles that use Indian English