Misplaced Pages

Talk:Western African Ebola epidemic: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:57, 26 September 2014 editGandydancer (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers28,205 edits Responses section: c← Previous edit Revision as of 18:31, 26 September 2014 edit undoJytdog (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers187,951 edits condensing: new sectionNext edit →
Line 484: Line 484:


:::::Starstr, this article is about the outbreak, not the disease. The link to the disease article is provided in the lead. The only subjects that we cover here are things unique to the outbreak. Perhaps if you feel transmission is not being properly addressed you should enter that info at the disease article. ] (]) 16:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC) :::::Starstr, this article is about the outbreak, not the disease. The link to the disease article is provided in the lead. The only subjects that we cover here are things unique to the outbreak. Perhaps if you feel transmission is not being properly addressed you should enter that info at the disease article. ] (]) 16:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

== condensing ==

am at work but some quick thoughts:
* Congo section can be split off into its own article and a sentence or two left with a link to that article
* more complicated - there is a lot of repetition in the narrative of the spread (the "Initial outbreak (December 2013-March 2014)" and "Subsequent spread" sections) and the country-by-country stories. suggest condensing the narrative of the spread dramatically, maybe even reducing to bullet points.
* the country-by-country sections seem to have evolved from just describing spread of the disease to including other related news (e.g. third and fourth paragraphs in the Guinea section are not about the spread, but instead duplicate content found in the "complications" section
* virology section could be really condensed. too much blow by blow there. what readers need to know is the Answer not all the wrong stabs at it along the way. if we are not certain then the section can be very short. (!)
* Prevention section in general is meandering and could be reworked.
**"Containment efforts" section content is actually alarms being sounded by health officials and not about containment efforts at all. This entire section seems like it could be distributed into the "response" section.
**"Complications" section also could be better ordered, with a subsection on "health care workers" that could include the attacks on health care workers and the entire "infections of health care workers" section, condensed.
** suggest re-org following the subsections in ] that is linked as Main there

have to go but wanted to put that out there.. ] (]) 18:31, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:31, 26 September 2014

Good articlesWestern African Ebola epidemic was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (August 26, 2014). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Western African Ebola epidemic article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12Auto-archiving period: 4 days 
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconAfrica: Guinea / Liberia / Nigeria / Sierra Leone High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa 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.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Guinea (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Liberia (assessed as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Nigeria (assessed as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Sierra Leone (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.
WikiProject iconMedicine Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
LowThis article has been rated as Low-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.
WikiProject iconViruses Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Western African Ebola epidemic article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12Auto-archiving period: 4 days 
In the newsA news item involving Western African Ebola epidemic was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 31 March 2014.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages
In the newsA news item involving Western African Ebola epidemic was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the In the news section on 29 June 2014.
Misplaced Pages
Misplaced Pages
This page is not a forum for general discussion about politics of Ebola containment. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about politics of Ebola containment at the Reference desk.

How can exponential growth stop?

The log-scale graphs need a short section discussing relevance, perhaps: "The log-scale graph is a straight line, this shows that ebola is currently increasing at an exponential rate, if it continues to increase at this exponential rate then the whole human population will have ebola by March 2016". At some time the exponential growth MUST break during the next 2 years (there are not enough humans to go past 2 years), and alternatives for breaks in the exponential growth must be discussed; will it be after suburb/city/country/continent(s) are infected; and when, where, why and how can it be stopped?

Mathematically it is clear: it will stop growing exponentially; what are the options? The time of break of exponential growth is THE crux of global interest for our species in this disease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.3.231.80 (talk) 10:36, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
It generally looks exponential early on but flattens out and declines in a bell-shaped pattern according to Compartmental models in epidemiology - cyclosarin (talk) 08:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

I think its fine to leave it the way it is. I mean all they are doing is showing that it is growing exponentially. I think a lot of time editors take out anything that seems to imply this could get much worse even if the article is just reporting facts.

That 20,000 figure from the WHO has been up here for weeks and its ridiculous. People just seem to be speculating that this won't affect hundreds of thousands. Why speculate when the exponential growth will end, when we have no idea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.171.255.167 (talk) 04:51, 23 September 2014 (UTC)


20k was never a serious estimate, just a projection forward a couple of months. Case count doubles every 4-5 weeks. There's a lot about this in the "predictions" section. Feel free to change this if you like! Robertpedley (talk) 12:19, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Sept. 18th WHO Situation Report - Depiction of Last 21 days cases / total cases-quotient

Hello,

i noticed the aforementioned quotient in the recent report, but to be honest - i dont quite get it. What exactly does it tell us? Of course, i understand that you can - to a certain extend - deduce a trend from it. But why do they choose the incubation period as numerator and not a random (e.g. 15) amount of days? I just dont get it, what specific information can be derived from this quotient?

Thank you very much in advance, i appreciate any help here.

PS: I have the feeling that this quotient is really interesting. Should this somehow be added to the article (progressing graph)

--LatinumPulchrum (talk) 18:13, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Hey LatinumPulchrum you haven't given enough information here for me to know your source. However there's nothing mysterious about a quotient - check Wiki!! Only 2 stats are important in an epidemic - the basic reproduction number which tells you if it's getting bigger or smaller, and the case fatality rate which tells you how deadly it is. Both are covered in this article; BRN is around 1.5 and CFR is around 50% (both very uncertain, due to difficulty of collecting reliable stats). Taken together these are very bad news indeed. Robertpedley (talk) 19:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the interesting links. But that did not help me at all. I was talking about | page 2, chart at the top of the page. --LatinumPulchrum (talk) 21:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

Maybe I'm being a bit dim here. Do you mean where it says this?
  • Cases / Deaths
  • Total: 5,232 / 2,630
  • Guinea: 936 / 595 ..... etc

Robertpedley (talk) 10:09, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

i was refering to this WHO situation report, which was the reference for yesterdays chart update in the article.
The references mixed up, so my previous link did not work...sorry for that --LatinumPulchrum :(talk) 16:22, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

LatinumPulchrum 21 days seems to be the rough doubling time for this epidemic, if half the infections have occurred during past 21 days that means number of cases has doubled in 21 days and can be expected to double again in next 21 days. If its fewer than half the cases has occurred in that time, then (local)doubling time is longer thus it will probably take longer to double again and vice versa 89.235.235.174 (talk) 18:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Fault on Timeline traced to 31 August.

On 31 August

  • Sierra Leone reported 388 Confirmed death and 48 probable Total = 388 + 48 = 436
  • WHO figures For Sl was 430 and 46 possible Total = 430 + 46 = 476

Note 476 - 46 = 430 Difference 46 hence suspected was added up double. The crux of the disputed error. 6 difference between the report i still need to look into — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrianGroen (talkcontribs) 19:01, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

3 Sept

  • OCHA was the next source with 3 Sept 452 death confirmed and suspected

Sierra Leone reported 404 confirmed and 48 suspected Total 404 + 48 = 452 Report for 3 Sept is thus correct

7 Sept Then WHO Afro took over and the WHO report was erroneous

  • Afro WHO figures for sl was 478 confirmed and 46 confirmed Total = 524
  • Sierra Leone reported 428 Confirmed death and 48 probable Total = 428 + 48 = 476

Note 524 - 46 = 476 Difference 46 hence suspected was added up double. The crux of the disputed error.

10 Sept

  • OCHA report was correct 493 confirmed + suspected
  • Sierra Leone reported 445 confirmed and 48 suspected Total 445 + 48 = 493

14 Sept Again Afro report erroneous

  • Afro WHO figures for sl was 517 confirmed and 45 suspected Total = 562
  • Sierra Leone reported 468 Confirmed death and 48 probable Total = 468 + 48 = 516

Note 562 - 45 = 517 Difference 45 hence suspected was added up double. The crux of the disputed error.


I trust this is all clear explained it as best as i could. AFRO WHO are adding up there suspected cases double on each report.

I have e mailed them with error.

Kind Regards Brian BrianGroen (talk) 18:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)BrianGroen (talk) 19:10, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Brian, would it just make more sense to add another column to the timeline with a margin of error and we throw in the difference you calculated as a percentage? It might be better just to add that instead of telling people that these are accurate figures. AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 19:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
AmericanXplorer13 will do something about it in the morning Nearly midnight here by me in South Africa , but yes a good idea.. Have a fab day in the US BrianGroen (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

17 Sept Again Afro WHO report erroneous

  • Afro WHO figures for sl Death was 584 confirmed Total = 584 (Afro WHO report cases correct as per SL gov Report
  • Sierra Leone reported 489 Confirmed death and 48 probable Total = 489 + 48 = 537

Note 584 - 48 = 536 Difference 48 hence suspected was added up double. The crux of the disputed error.(Note Sl report differs by 1 death. Report from WHO state as of 18 Sept but figures are inline with respective gov reports for 17 Sept on timeline.) Hence leaving time line as is.

Added notes for 17 Sept BrianGroen (talk) 15:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

21 Sept Again Afro report erroneous

  • Afro WHO figures for death in SL was 552 confirmed and 45 suspected Total = 597
  • Sierra Leone reported 502 Confirmed death and 48 probable Total = 502 + 48 = 550

Note 597 - 45 = 502 Difference 45 hence suspected was added up double. The crux of the disputed error

BrianGroen (talk) 11:22, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Imported, exported, introduced

I found on the web all three types of cases. I.E. and Imported Case, exported case, and introduced case. The problem with the first two is they sound intentional and they require a person to have a frame of reference. If you are in the USA the case is imported. If it came from Liberia and you are in Liberia, it is an exported case. I would like to put forward Introduced Case There is no connotation of an intentional transfer. I was starting to do this then stopped when I noted we have an entire paragraph called Imported Cases. I would like to offer the opinion to move that to Introduced Cases.

Technically, Liberia, Sierra Leon, and Nigeria are all imported cases since they got introduced to them and exported from another country. Only DRC and Guinea have "homegrown?" Pbmaise (talk) 08:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Pbmaise - I think the key difference is between
  • intentional, controlled & contained (e.g. infected health workers to US, UK, France, Germany, Spain)
  • unintentional & high risk (Nigeria and Senegal, but presumably also Liberia & SL)
If you think you can distinguish these then I'm OK with it. Robertpedley (talk) 21:40, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Pbmaise Second thoughts - these cases are medevacs / medical evacuation. Title should be "Countries with medically evacuated cases" or similar.Robertpedley (talk) 05:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Port Harcourt, Nigeria Ebola death case

I donot know why the Port Harcourt incident which involved a doctor who was infected by diplomat who escaped quarantine in Lagos was removed. If there wasn't a reason for removing such sourced content, I will have to add that back. Stanleytux (talk) 07:03, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Stanleytux, i did not removed it but i have the distinct feeling the diplomat were named. As per WP:RS rules reference to a living person may not be added portraying him/her in a negative light, unless there is a good reason. i.e he was found guilty in a court of law of this action. Unfortunately media reports is not a strong enough evidence that he was involved in the incidence in deliberately spreading the disease and he was not yet found guilty in a court of law BrianGroen (talk) 11:27, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Stanletux, you will need group consensus before you replace that information. I am the one that deleted it with an edit note saying that while it may be a topic of importance to some people in Nigeria, it is not a topic of importance worldwide. I have tried several times in the past to edit that information and have always been reverted with a rather indignant edit summary. There has been an almost odd effort to name names and places, the name of the hotel, for instance. Gandydancer (talk) 12:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
@BrianGroen: The report about Ebola death in Port Harcourt has been confirmed by numerous reliable sources including the Health Minister and the WHO. If you think it was too quick adding the diplomat's name to the report, that is not enough reason to remove all the sourced reports as if it never happened. You can restore the report on Port Harcourt back and leave out the diplomat's name from it. The world should not be kept in the darkness about this matter and every place mentioned by reliable sources should be included. If clarity is not appreciated here I might as well talk here without signing my post. Stanleytux (talk) 13:02, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Stanleytux, do you also use the name TomClement? Gandydancer (talk) 13:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Stanleytux i tend to agree with Gandydancer on this. It may be of interest to Nigerian citizen , but not to the world in general. Also naming the person and the hotel(a company is recognized as an individual organization) and therefor may not be named in a wiki page. Is a direct NO No to wiki rules. Yes the minister of health of Nigeria stated this, but in doing so they opened them self up to a potential lawsuit. The WHO report may have reflected the incidence (but i have not seen any mention on this issue in a WHO report.), but they are covered in this issue as they report what the respective health minister report to them. We cannot in good faith discuss every single case in detail as to what they have done and the subsequent fall out. Tom Sawyer case is worth while mentioning as this is very relevant as to how Ebola entered Nigeria, but any subsequent action i.e his actions in Nigeria have been removed as per wiki's neutral point of view. BrianGroen (talk) 14:19, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
I still stand by what I've previously said. Restore report remove name of diplomat and hotel that's a simple thing to do you know. Misplaced Pages is based upon reports from reliable sources. I was not the one who reported the Port Harcourt Ebola death, remember? @BrianGroen: you did. After I read the report, I did some research on it and eventually found out more information including the hospital Good Heart Hospital which you mentioned in the report. I created a page for the hospital because I have created a couple of more hospital articles here in the past and linked it to this article. I didn't do anything wrong did I? you mentioned the hospital in your report. The way you guys are going about this it is as if the report was originally produced by me. Stanleytux (talk) 16:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Stanleytux"On August 28, it was confirmed that a Liberian diplomat who had had contact with Patrick Sawyer, died in the city of Port Harcourt, two days before, from the disease. This death brought the total number of deaths from Ebola in Nigeria, to six." this was the original report i did introduced it but i did amend the reference and wording a bit.

This was my subsequent edit. "On August 22 a doctor who treated a Liberian diplomat in a hotel, who had contact with Patrick Sawyer, died in the city of Port Harcourt from the disease. This death brought the total number of deaths from Ebola in Nigeria, to six.The Good Heart Hospital in Rivers State and a unnamed hotel has been shut down. As a result 70 people have been quarantined. "BrianGroen (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't see the reason displaying your report, I already read it in the past plus it can be viewed via the page history. Anyways, since this report is sourced and you edited it yourself why all of a sudden everything gets removed when names start popping up. I say this report be restored I donot see anything wrong with it. We can leave out the names of the hotel and diplomat but not act like there wasn't any Ebola death reported in Port Harcourt. If someone who reads wikipedia for information and probably relies on it and couldn't find anything about Ebola in Port Harcourt. The person can assumed the media is not reliable and may inform others that there wasn't any Ebola in the city this misinformation can cause ignorance and alot of damage to the masses. And who will be blamed? us editors. We have to always do our best to report valid and reliable information on Misplaced Pages, there isn't any need to take out content especially when they are sourced and are of high importance to the world. There are hundreds of expatriates in that city, they could be one of our relations you never know. Stanleytux (talk) 17:46, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
This article must be kept at a reasonable reading length, thus the editors here need to continually go through it and delete less significant information. We've all added plenty of information that was deleted as time went along as part of normal article upkeep. Gandydancer (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Stanleytux using your reasoning where do we end , do we add all the towns regions in all four countries.Imagine that list!! Sorry it sounds hard but it just a basis for reasoning. The article will become a complete cluter of info. at times i becomes nessary to remove inf.. like i did on Sierra leone today. removing redutant info.BrianGroen (talk) 18:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Just a little info, my daughters uncle works in Guinea in an ebola region, but i did not report the region, knowing full well that he might return as a potential carrierBrianGroen (talk) 18:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC) exposed to Ebola.

besides Lagos is in the article. Port Harcourt is in the Lagos district.BrianGroen (talk) 18:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Port Harcourt in the district of Lagos? since when was that? @BrianGroen: you are going to need to support that statement with a reliable source. FYI, Port Harcourt is just like any city in the United Kingdom or the United States. Saying that Port Harcourt is located in Lagos is just like saying Melbourne is located in Brisbane or that Rio De Janeiro is located in Sao Paulo. If this had happened in the United States every piece of detail will be mentioned like some kind of CIA report. Why can't it be reported the same way in the case of other countries since Misplaced Pages is assumed to be a worldwide project? Stanleytux (talk) 19:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Stanleytux sorry my mistake Port Harcourt in is in River state as indicated on the map. We have in about 40 + areas in total , cant report on all of them.. will cause enormous clutter.. Refer to a DRN if you are not happy with the this . BTW i am not from the united state but i live in africa..BrianGroen (talk) 19:59, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Agree with other editors. It's very very good news that the Nigeria outbreak has been contained with just 22 cases, 8 deaths. But Guinea, Liberia, Sierra Leone have thousands of cases, thousands of deaths; this is where the fight is focussed now and our WP page should reflect that.Robertpedley (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Stanleytux i see your eagerness to have port harcourt mentioned . Checked Port Harcourt page. You are the main editor there. I have added small reference in Nigeria as per latest who report .., Suggestion, why don't you add a section health to port harcourt page.. then you can report it there. BrianGroen (talk) 20:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

20 Sept Numbers.

Hi Dernier Siècle Just check report dates when posting

"1. COUNTRIES WITH WIDESPREAD AND INTENSE TRANSMISSION 5843 (probable, confirmed and suspected; see Annex 2) cases and 2803 deaths have been reported in the current outbreak of EVD as at 20 September 2014 by the Ministry of Health of Guinea, as at 17 September 2014 by the Ministry of Health of Liberia, and as at 19 September 2014 by the Ministry of Health of Sierra Leone (table 1)."

Will update Liberia when i get it. I have updated Sl so long. Kind Regards BrianBrianGroen (talk) 19:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Also note i will update the lead and main SVG as soon as Liberia release new numbers for 20 SEpt.BrianGroen (talk) 20:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello BrianGroen
Sorry but I don't want to post any first-party primary source figures, I only post third-party secondary source datas.
And CDC published exactly same figures as me on its current main page --Dernier Siècle (talk) 22:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Dernier Siècle understandable, but if you read the WHO report correctly you will see they get their numbers from the governments and not own numbers.. CDC just copy government numbers but don't look at dates.(Picked this up in the past) WHO at least state the date. CDC just add it, no dates. It is a nightmare to get all the numbers. I have to look at every report in detail WHO, CDC, OCHA, UNDA and goverments. My numbers correlate with OCHA and gov's and Map Response Kind regards Brian BrianGroen (talk) 05:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Handling DR of Congo

Should we add the Democratic Republic of Congo to the map at the top page and keep track of these statistics too? If we decide not, why do we have a DC of Congo section in the page for the West Africa epidemic? What will we do if (when) the virus spreads from DR of Congo to West Africa (or vise versa). Since the viruses are both of the same strand, how would we differentiate which came from where and how it affects our numbers? AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 19:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi AmericanXplorer13, I don't think DRC is in West Africa, it's Central Africa. It deserves a nod on this page, but that's mainly to clarify that there is no known epidemiological or geographical connection. It's mentioned separately on the List_of_Ebola_outbreaks page. Robertpedley (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

RfC:Should Ebola death in Port Harcourt be included?

Please consider joining the feedback request service.
An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list: When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Should this previous well-sourced report on Ebola death in the Nigerian city of Port Harcourt be included in the Nigeria-sub section of the Nations with local transmission? Stanleytux (talk) 20:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. If it is done for Nigeria we will receive request from all the other countries in this epidemic. Calls for unnecessary clutter BrianGroen (talk) 21:00, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


Oppose. Relatively minor in the context of this topic, need to maintain focus on major topics and issues. Robertpedley (talk) 21:33, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose.It is minor--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 01:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Unlike the other EVD cases in Africa, Nigeria have EVD confirmed in just 2 cities (Lagos and Rivers which are very far apart as Lagos is on the West while PH is on the South of Nigeria). I do not see how including a sentence or 2 in the Nigerian subsection be regarded as too much info. Ebola is confirmed in only 2 Nigerian Cities and that figure appear to have stabilized so there is no chance that other Nigerian cities will have Ebola cases. Are you people telling me that if there are 2 Ebola cases in both Chicago and Los Angeles you are going to include only one of the cities and ignore another city in the US subsection? If there were more cities affected with EVD in Nigeria then it can be excluded but since its just 2 states i believe it can stay. This is why I want to create a Nigerian Ebola article.Seanord (talk) 10:45, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I oppose for reasons already stated above. However, I think that there is a lot of merit to Seanord's suggestions. As we are (hopefully) coming to an end for Nigeria's cases, it seems it would be a good idea to include the fact that the outbreak was confined to only the two cities when we write a "wrap-up" of their involvement in the West Africa epidemic. Gandydancer (talk) 16:09, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support per Seanord and principles of epidemiology. It should be done for Nigeria and it should be done for all the cases that are part of this outbreak. All reported cases should be included in the article. SW3 5DL (talk) 16:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
All of Nigeria's cases are included in the article and no editor has suggested that they not be included. Please see my comment below. Gandydancer (talk) 12:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. The map and the reference to tracking cases in Port Harcourt is incongruous with the narrative that refers to Sawyer's arrival and isolation in Lagos. A brief sentence to summarise the nature of the transmittal of the disease to Port Harcourt would not seem inappropriate. Mattojgb (talk) 09:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment From previous conversation on this page, it is my understanding that there is no objection to stating in the article that there was a case reported in Port Harcourt, but rather an objection to the reporting details such as the highlighted wording below:
On 22 August, a doctor who treated a Liberian diplomat in an unnamed hotel—who had contact with Patrick Sawyer—died in Port Harcourt from Ebola. The BBC report says the diplomat had escaped from quarantine in Lagos and travelled to the city for medical treatment. He however survived after being treated. At present, the total number of deaths from Ebola in Nigeria has been brought to six.The Good Heart Hospital and the unnamed hotel in Rivers State has been shut down. As a result 70 suspected contacts have been quarantined.
This article is already long and getting longer by the day. We are not going into such great detail in any of the other countries and there is no reason to make an exception for Nigeria. I agree that this information may be of great importance to some people of Nigeria where the epidemic has become a very intense political issue, but these details are not appropriate for our article. Gandydancer (talk) 12:10, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

"Confirmed cases"

I have brought this up before but as conditions worsen, I'm bringing it up again. I question the inclusion of "confirmed cases" info in the lead because the average reader may assume that it is comparatively low because the remaining cases are not Ebola, which is not accurate. From WHO:

There are several points to be considered when interpreting epidemiological data for the EVD outbreak. Many of the deaths attributed to EVD in this outbreak occurred in people who were suspected, but not confirmed, to have died from the disease. EVD cases are only confirmed when a sample tests positive in the laboratory. If samples taken from a body test negative for EVD, that person is no longer counted among EVD deaths and the figures are adjusted accordingly. However, because laboratory services and treatment centres are currently overwhelmed in several countries, the numbers of probable and suspected cases, together with those confirmed, may be a more accurate reflection of case numbers. Thoughts? Gandydancer (talk) 22:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

I think this is definitely something to deal with. The virus could easily spread faster than healthcare workers can test for Ebola. The suspected cases will rise faster than the confirmed cases. AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 23:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
If I were a sick Liberian, what are my choices? Stand in a very long waiting line bumping into people sicker than I am, or stay home – in which case nobody could possibly count me, much less confirm me? Art LaPella (talk) 01:40, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
As soon as i get the latest totals for Liberia i will separate this issue , and clarify way confirmed cases is low. Gandy has a point it is a bit misleading. So my suggestion is a small paragraph added on this...expecting LB figures sometime today. Just bear in mind the labs are also over run with samples to test. But yes Art agree with you, if they don't have the proper centers to treat and if i was in there shoes i would also rather take my chances at home. Sound harse but id rather die at home than in the blazing hot sun in ques for days hoping to get admitted. Seen numerous photos of people dying in there ques.. BrianGroen (talk) 07:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Difficulty in getting reliable statistical data is mentioned several times. Not sure what else we can do. Robertpedley (talk) 12:11, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Actually there have been two edits clarifying this problem last night (U.S. time): Art LaPella (talk) 14:47, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Replace top image with SVG version?

Would it be possible for us to use the SVG version of the image at the top? If it needs to be updated, it could be done much easier with an SVG rather than a PNG. Thoughts? AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 02:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to replace the png with an svg since it's higher resolution and the numbers can be changed much more easily. AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 19:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi AmericanXplorer13 there is Svg available in coomons File:2014_ebola_virus_epidemic_in_West_Africa.svg Greetings Brian BrianGroen (talk) 19:59, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi AmericanXplorer13 BrianGroen (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Why did Liberia stop?

According to the data table, cases and deaths did not increase by a single digit from Sep 17 to Sep 20 in Liberia. How can that be? Is it a typo, or has the epidemic stopped there so suddenly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.27.168.226 (talk) 12:14, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Liberian government does not issue updates every day! Robertpedley (talk) 12:21, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Liberia was late repoting.. Added it today. the report states 21 Sept but figures indicate 20 Sept. Hence treated it as such will update if i receive corrected date. BrianGroen (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Request permission to condense timeline

Hi All just a request to condense the timeline till beginning Augustus on a monthly basis. Will divert to The figures to Talk page for reference. Timeline is getting massively long. Please consider. BrianGroen (talk) 17:15, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

How about weekly for starters? Mattojgb (talk) 09:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
That seems like a good idea Brian. Gandydancer (talk) 11:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Table Addition

It might be interesting to see a separate column for Reported Cases Delta -- that is, the average rate of change in cases reported over the length of time between reports. On the day I'm posting this (23Sep), the most recent data (20Sep) showed roughly a a rate of just over 100/day for the last week (+~800 from 14Sep-20Sep). This didn't strike me as especially high until looking at previous totals and noticing they were closer to ten, then twenty a day, and now over one hundred in a relatively short time. Just might be a figure of added interest, clarification. 18:43, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Thoughts anybody? DLanman (talk) 21:39, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Two possible cases in Europe

Two new cases in Europe.. will wait before i report but on case highly suspicious. Swiss new patient was in contact with family member with ebola.

Italy will wait for lab confirmation. BrianGroen (talk) 19:54, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

This sounds like it might be a case. If it is, do we add it to the map similarly to Senegal getting one case added? AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
yes it sound definite (Swiss one) AmericanXplorer13 so hopefully we will get the lab result soon.. give about a day then we add if positive. Possible senario article will then become pandemic.. Suggest we hang ten for a day.. BrianGroen (talk) 20:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Brian, I was going to throw out some designs for the map if it does become a pandemic, because obviously it would be a bigger map. Any suggestions on the design? AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 20:30, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

AmericanXplorer13 I think we will have to cover a complete section i.e use whole page width if it happens. Lets ope not, but i'm afraid to say the inevitable is it is going to happen. The scare are going to turn real the more this disease is not controlled. BrianGroen (talk) 20:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Brian, I'll get working on a basic one of the world for when the inevitable happens. AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 20:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Swiss suspect is clear. Robertpedley (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

STOP NOW FREEZE THIS PAGE NOW!!!!!!! Hijack Alert

Seriously listen to me. This entire isssue has been hijacked by those with political interests.

Red alert drum beats.

I pick yesterday's announcement by Nigeria as cutoff date. No more EVD but West still Wants to send troops to help. Are you aware of 2,700 high-calibre arms shipped into Nigeria Feb 2014? Ship name Iron Trader Maybe that is real reason. Maybe not. Again as we know something is afoot.

Gandy Brian freeze page now. Think of us like war reporters. We needed those reporters to bring back photos To study. The record is lost if continuously revised.

Esp. If done so for political ends.

Duplucate page 100% and save two copies.

Rename copy one... 2014 Ebola virus disease initial epidemic outbreak

That page is then semi protected. It is this Snapshot of history we are destroying. By putting every new headline in this page no one has a good Way to review 100 years from now how it all began.

Rename copy two....2014 Ebola virus disease epidemic containment effort We can then purge page. New data here on.

Yes no mention geography. In the past geography was important since they were isolated.

Ebola search on google needs to land on page readers are looking They want to find data about epidemic not disease.

I working on entire page for just the single event of Patrick Sawyer. These is one of the many stories in history we must record.

We are not a ticker tape reporting every second. We can not Confuse possible propoganda.

The page is WORTHLESS to billions of cell phone users. We have to stop this nonsense of sourcing every detail. When and IF a point is obscure okay. But anyone can Google easy to find info on their own

Page three title...hold on.... 2014 Ebola virus disease outbreak: Freeze frame September 23, 2014 This page fully lock. As name implies there can be other dates in future that We freeze for future.

Pbmaise (talk) 22:01, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Puzzling. All Misplaced Pages pages are open to editing (although some are restricted to experienced editors, and some are restricted during edit wars), so I can't imagine the page getting "frozen". If you want to save the current version of the page, you are free to make a copy yourself, and Misplaced Pages also saves a copy in editing history. And if some evil cabal is about to invade the jungle (?!), our best defense against propaganda is to keep our pages open to editing, with strict sourcing requirements. Art LaPella (talk) 22:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

?,,,--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 23:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I can save a page. I can scan back. But 100 years from now a historian or school child cant. What we wrote thought did in what may very well be a world changing event is important. Today I am jumping up and down waving flags something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Houston we have an issue. Who saw it, what they tried to do, and what they failed to do is important. I want to scare you with the word. Endemic I studied the reports of third term women and babies exposed to Ebola.

Almost all women died giving birth 100% of babies died. If Ebola becomes endemic, and we have no way to prevent babies from being exposed, there may be few of us left. Pbmaise (talk) 23:23, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The page is not being continually edited "for political ends," it's being continually edited because this outbreak isn't over with and hasn't been completely studied yet, so new information is always coming in. To assert that it's for political purposes is just useless paranoia.
If, 100 years from now, people cannot view the article history, it's probably because the internet has collapsed and Misplaced Pages has been lost -- no article history, no article.
We are not in control of Google search results, which are somewhat personalized for each user.
We ALWAYS source any information. No source, no inclusion.
While there are an unfortunate amount of people dying from this, your claims that Ebola is going to nearly wipe out the human race are so paranoid I almost have to assume you're trolling.
This talk page is for article improvement, not a place for you to cry that the sky is falling. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
And even if a Black Death is coming, this isn't fixing it. Art LaPella (talk) 23:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

???Updating on a ongoing event a political agenda, seriously how do do you come to that conclusion.BrianGroen (talk) 05:59, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Ebola is being used as a political tool in Nigeria, but this article is a political tool for no one. The majority of the arguments/discussions and subsequent edits are about data/sources, as they should be. Snd0 (talk) 07:51, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Map for all Ebola victims

I was thinking about creating a map which showed the countries where each Ebola victim was located. For instance, the United States has 4 victims, Spain had 1, I think Saudi Arabia had 1, etc. I think this is nice information to have, just to see what certain countries are doing with Ebola patients, and where victims are flying. Any thoughts? AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 01:14, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Sorry AmericanXplorer13, I don't think a geographical map will add anything of value to this article. What's maybe significant is that the countries who have medevaced their nationals are all in the top dozen or so of rich nations, with sufficient resources to pay for the quarantine flight and high-security isolation units. I think the US estimated $1 million cost for each of their 4 patients. The uncontrolled outbreak is in 3 of the world's poorest nations. But I think this is covered. Robertpedley (talk) 21:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Deliberate under-reporting of Ebola deaths

I've added a paragraph on this to the timeline sourced from a recent NYT article "Fresh Graves Point to Undercount of Ebola Toll" The story seems credible and helps to explain why the CFR in Sierra Leone seems anomalously low. If the story develops further it may warrant a separate section.Galerita (talk) 08:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up. I've been thinking of adding something about it to the article for some time now. See for instance this: . There are several editorials at that site as well. I think that Brian was possibly correct to delete the word "deliberate" from the timeline section because that may not be the right place to make such a claim, but I personally believe it to be accurate to use the word deliberate. Let's see what others think. I was thinking a paragraph in the Sierra Leone section might be the place to include the info. Gandydancer (talk) 11:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
See the Ebola editorials here: Gandydancer (talk) 11:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I can't see anything in the NYT article that might justify the use of the word "deliberate" here. -- The Anome (talk) 13:11, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I removed the word "deliberate" , but yes it clearly indicates what WHO has been saying for weeks "the numbers are vastly under estimated". IMO don't think it is deliberate, WHO and governments are so swamped they can't tally all the numbers. Lack of co-operation results in these kinds of mistakes. Remember we have a massive number of deaths and are definitely underestimated. Some patient do not even reach the treatment center where Ebola is treated, hence any case dying of Ebola symptoms are marked as such by the burial teams removing the bodies from homes, these bodies don't even see a hospital let alone an autopsy to determine case of death.. Whether these numbers are tallied on the report is unlikely if you ask me. IMO opinion it belongs in the Sierra leone section. .BrianGroen (talk) 14:24, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Nigeria and Senegal

Now that the WHO has stated that both Nigeria and Senegal have both successfully completed the 21-day observation of any person that had contact with an infected person, should we move them to a new category? Gandydancer (talk) 13:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes, please do. "countries in which the disease has been successfully contained" maybe? Robertpedley (talk) 20:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Might be a little premature; the rule of thumb for declaring an outbreak over is twice the incubation period - ie. 42 days. There's already been one false dawn in Nigeria. Donners (talk) 22:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Can we prune those countries off the timeline table? It would make it a bit more manageable. 173.69.39.47 (talk) 00:55, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
And prune off some of the graphs as well. The Anome - your graphs are looking a bit stale! Robertpedley (talk) 09:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Donners (talk - I still think Gandy should go ahead with this edit - I know that Nigerian editors in particular are very keen to reclassify, so it might happen anyway. Maybe qualify the edit by mentioning your reservation - see here, page 9. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/134771/1/roadmapsitrep_24Sept2014_eng.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertpedley (talkcontribs) 09:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Welll... I was going about doing just that because I can well imagine that Nigeria or any other country would want to be declared disease free, considering the terrible economic repercussions that they are going through. But going about it, I came across this: (also see Donner's above post) and I'd also run across the WHO's manner of doing their headings into widespread and local, and decided that perhaps we do need to use the 42d period before come right out and call them disease-free. I am still working on Nigeria and will add some of the info from the source I just listed above. Thoughts? Gandydancer (talk) 11:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
No, we certainly can't declare a country disease free before WHO does!! Robertpedley (talk) 18:59, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Archived timeline

BrianGroen (talk) 18:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

@BrianGroen: I reverted the reduction. I think the better way to do this is move all the data to a timeline article and have this article just display the graphs. Glrx (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Glrx the idea was to revert it here first then separate it in a article but still keep it bi-weekly on the timeline. But yes i know you did a lot of work in the beginning therefor did not want to wipe it out...Lets keep it for now but open a separate timeline article and only display the last months data here and preceding on monthly basis. This thing is going to become very long.. Regards Brian BrianGroen (talk) 18:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Sorry Glrx i did request permission to do it, but this is your original work and i don't want to just go ahead without consensus.. Especially not on your hard work on this..Greetings BrianGroen (talk) 19:01, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
(e/c)
Sorry, but I've been doing other things, and this is the first time I've looked at this article in about a month.
I agree that the timeline information is too dense for the amount of info it provides here. I think a wholesale move is better than trimming, but I'm open to keeping some recent data on this page because it is used in summaries and would get more eyes here.
BTW, my original intention with the checkmark was to have editors enter the data, and then another editor come by and check the data for accuracy. But I never put that in writing anywhere.
We should come up with a name for the timeline article.
Glrx (talk) 19:12, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Not to worry Glrx "Ebola epidemic in West Africa Casualty timeline"...not to worry i check most of the figures and they are spot on.. give or take a margin of error of about 0,05 % i think in latter cases and a date or two perhaps a day out but not enough to whack the line out.. Just thought about it not a brilliant idea to put bit on talk , some BOT will archive it...lol..BrianGroen (talk) 19:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Glrx been thinking about this. instead of moving it, i could build a collapsible table. Thus keeping it on the page but reducing and can be expand with on click. . greetings Brian.. BrianGroen (talk) 13:32, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Glrx timeline condense with a collapsable table Greetings BrianBrianGroen (talk) 16:44, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Nice jobMattojgb (talk) 19:28, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Countries With Imported Cases and Senegal

Shouldn't Senegal be listed as a country with imported cases, rather than one with local transmission, as no one was infected (to our knowledge) within the borders of the country? Also, I would consider moving Nigeria to a new section now that it is "Ebola-free". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.122.15 (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I also wondered this. If Senegal is on the map, shouldn't Spain and Saudi Arabia, and the United States be on the map as well? AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 20:21, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
There's another talk section about the title of this section and use of the word "imported", started by Pbmaise, but it's gone quiet. I'm going to change this to "medically evacuated" Robertpedley (talk) 20:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
HI Robertpedleysounds good to me. Just wondering if the possible swiss case that was not medivac. Still not reported watching for confirmation. Will go under active spread then. greetings BrianGroen (talk) 21:17, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Swiss case now seems to be negative http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/suspected-ebola-case-in-lausanne/40796430 Saxmund (talk) 22:31, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

sierra leone

why are sierra leones fatality numbers so low?--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:57, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Under-reporting. Plenty about this in the article and in other Talk topics. Robertpedley (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ozzie10aaaa Sierra leone lock-down figures will only be out on Thursday... I expect a huge jump then.BrianGroen (talk) 21:13, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

I concur. thank you.--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:19, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Please see update d timeline lead for evidence of under reporting. BrianGroen (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Brian, the Thursday report doesn't show an increased number of deaths. The CFR is still below 30%. AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 18:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi AmericanXplorer13 see note above.. Monrovia have note reported any cases and lock-down cases still not released.. I added it to the paragraph above the time line..Think it is going to be a massive increase soon. I monitor all sites that report cases daily no mention of it yet.Greetings Brian.. BrianGroen (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Brian, I was looking at this report. AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 18:14, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

AmericanXplorer13 Still not in that one as well. BrianGroen (talk) 18:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Splitting of some parts

The article is getting really long. I think it is time to take out some of the content and place in new (sub)articles. For example the tables and graphs with cases and deaths.Nico (talk) 10:40, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. (See above where it is being discussed.) Gandydancer (talk) 11:31, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps "Responses" could be split as well. Gandydancer (talk) 11:50, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Gandydancer timeline condense with a collapsable table Greetings Brian BrianGroen (talk) 17:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Keep the graphs - they're a great way to convey a large amount of information in a small space. Is there any kind of Wiki guideline about the best way to manage a page like this which covers a complex and constantly changing situation? Robertpedley (talk) 19:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
I'd like to archive the medevac cases as soon as possible, as they have very little relevance to the topic as a whole. Not just yet though. Robertpedley (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Robertpedley looked into it i can do something similar with nations greetings Brian BrianGroen (talk) 19:57, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

WHO epidemiologist

This guy was medevaced to Hamburg, Germany on 27 August - four weeks ago. I can't find any update. Anyone? Robertpedley (talk) 19:21, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

Germany very tight lipped about this. been mentioned in a bulletin a week ago, but no updates..BrianGroen (talk) 16:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Responses section

I very strongly believe that we need to split this section into a separate article with a short summary left here. This section is already very large and is sure to grow, and contributes to the reason that our article now far exceeds the WP guidelines for article length. Please give feedback as I'd like to see this taken care asap. Gandydancer (talk) 14:39, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Tricky. This is essentially a current affairs page, with content that evolves over time. At the moment, the two fastest moving areas are a) the countries with transmission(including timeline) and b) responses by NGO's and governments. I'd like to keep them together. If the article is too long, we should compress or move other bits. Experimental treatments, transmission both properly belong on the EVD page for example. Robertpedley (talk) 14:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I pretty much agree with you. Let's get rid of Experimental treatments and anything re transmission...and the intro to the Treatment section as well (but keep the "Level of care" section). But even still, that will not reduce the article nearly as much as we need to reduce it. I am constantly going over all of the info compressing it, but IMO if we do much more of that we will lose what the article is all about and devote more and more to the extremely lengthy (and bound to grow) Response section, which (other than the international organizations) I doubt is of much interest to most other than what their own country is doing. The last time I looked, the article was more than three times the recommended length. Gandydancer (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
HI Gandydancer, Robertpedley before we start deleting i ma busy sandboxing response with a "hide show"... It is within Wiki rules just must see that all browsers i.e smart phone support it.. Similar to what i done on the time line greetings Brian BrianGroen (talk) 16:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Before you go to all that work Brian, please hold off because while it seems like a good idea to me, it is something I have seldom seen done in a case like this. I'm going to ask an editor who did a little work on the article early on to come over and take a look at it and see if he has any suggestions - fresh eyes from an experienced editor can be very valuable. Gandydancer (talk) 16:57, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Transmission - list of body fluids etc. by Starstr

Various edits by Starstr aim to expand information about the mode of transmission. Opposed because

  • we have sufficient information about modes of transmission in other sections
  • detailed mode of transmission is relevant to Ebola Virus Disease page. This page is about the epidemic, which is a different focus

Robertpedley (talk) 14:42, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Its just a little summary which is really required. The page barely mentioned the word "bodily fluids" before this section was added. Starstr (talk) 14:51, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Its beyond unreasonable to exclude the very substances causing infection in an article about a disease epidemic. Starstr (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Starstr 5 mentions of fluids before your edit. Robertpedley (talk) 14:59, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
There was no list of fluids in the article before I added it. Starstr (talk) 15:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Robertpedley thanks . I support this. We are already trying to trim the article a bit. It is covered under Ebola Virus. BrianGroen (talk) 15:10, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Sweat and tears are not mentioned in those articles either. Starstr (talk) 15:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Starstr, this article is about the outbreak, not the disease. The link to the disease article is provided in the lead. The only subjects that we cover here are things unique to the outbreak. Perhaps if you feel transmission is not being properly addressed you should enter that info at the disease article. Gandydancer (talk) 16:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

condensing

am at work but some quick thoughts:

  • Congo section can be split off into its own article and a sentence or two left with a link to that article
  • more complicated - there is a lot of repetition in the narrative of the spread (the "Initial outbreak (December 2013-March 2014)" and "Subsequent spread" sections) and the country-by-country stories. suggest condensing the narrative of the spread dramatically, maybe even reducing to bullet points.
  • the country-by-country sections seem to have evolved from just describing spread of the disease to including other related news (e.g. third and fourth paragraphs in the Guinea section are not about the spread, but instead duplicate content found in the "complications" section
  • virology section could be really condensed. too much blow by blow there. what readers need to know is the Answer not all the wrong stabs at it along the way. if we are not certain then the section can be very short. (!)
  • Prevention section in general is meandering and could be reworked.
    • "Containment efforts" section content is actually alarms being sounded by health officials and not about containment efforts at all. This entire section seems like it could be distributed into the "response" section.
    • "Complications" section also could be better ordered, with a subsection on "health care workers" that could include the attacks on health care workers and the entire "infections of health care workers" section, condensed.
    • suggest re-org following the subsections in ] that is linked as Main there

have to go but wanted to put that out there.. Jytdog (talk) 18:31, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Categories: