Talk:COVID-19 pandemic cases/Archive 1

Pandemic?
Did I miss something? I didn't notice the CDC or WHO announce that 2019-nCoV had become pandemic. -- 65.94.171.6 (talk) 08:05, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * 02:21, 9 February 2020‎ m  432 bytes 0‎  HueMan1 moved page 2020 coronavirus pandemic tables to 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak tables: Consistency

Errors in numbers
At least for Finland the numbers are wrong. For the past three days the table displays 40 cases, but reality was 59 on 11th March and 109 on 12th March. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.248.94.45 (talk) 08:15, 13 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 ) 18:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Copy editing?
Anyone know why this is marked as needing copy editing? The language looks fine to me Xcia0069 (talk) 07:21, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The problems that I can see are not literally copyediting problems, but rather general Wikipedia style, compatibility and sourcing problems, including:
 * the table is already too wide for a typical browser, and with a continuation of the outbreak likely for at least a few months, this will become ridiculously too wide; flipping the vertical/horizontal directions would be an acceptable temporary solution, provided that SARS-CoV-2 does not spread to all UN member states and non-member states/territories;
 * the name of the article is misleading since it claims to be "tables", but ignores most of the Wikipedia tables on this topic that already exist; the name should probably be something more like 2019–20 SARS-CoV-2 outbreak WHO confirmed cases, though this would have to be debated properly;
 * jargon like "sitrep" forces the user to spend some time working out what it means, and there's no explanation/sourcing of which report is wrong and which is right and why;
 * integrating this article with the others in the pattern Template:2019–20_Wuhan_coronavirus_data/China_medical_cases_(confirmed), as an includable table, would make more sense than keeping this as a separate "article"; try editing (without saving) one of those articles to see what's needed such as and section;
 * we cannot include Taiwan data ("Taipei") as part of PRChina data - including Taiwan in China would be very unlikely to achieve consensus on the en.Wikipedia;
 * the Diamond Princess (ship) cases should be separated from the Japan cases, following the WHO sources, and following common sense: a ship is a confinable location which is not just legally separatable from Japanese territory, but epidemiologically makes more sense to be separated, as "international conveyance" (the positive detections have been physically shifted to Japanese territory, but were detected while on the ship).
 * Boud (talk) 17:47, 14 February 2020 (UTC) (several edits up to Boud (talk) 19:30, 14 February 2020 (UTC))
 * I've fixed the most obvious style errors, in particular that there were no headings at all. With headings the tables are now properly sortable (though the non-data rows get sorted too, which is incorrect and needs fixing). Hairy Dude (talk) 01:12, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Single source
What's the reason for the "single source" maintenance template? It's not inaccurate, but given its nature (WHO reports) it's inevitable that it's all based on one source (namely the WHO). Hairy Dude (talk) 01:15, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorting by First reported case date
All the columns in the tables have sorting enabled, but the date column doesn't sort correctly. I changed all the date values in the tables to the Date table sorting template, using Notepad ++ and regex.

I used the following search pattern: (\d\d\d\d-\d*-\d*) and the following replace pattern:

Chocom (talk) 06:14, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Why is this
A template and not an article? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I wondered that, I created it as an article but someone turned it into a template Anguswalker (talk) 09:25, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * It is now an article, with a slightly changed name to reflect the creation of a page listing death figures Anguswalker (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Deaths statistics
Does somebody have accumulated death statistics from WHO situation reports to add? Aichibizov (talk) 22:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Can have a go, will take some time Anguswalker (talk) 12:10, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, have created deaths page, which is here: 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic deaths/WHO situation reports Anguswalker (talk) 22:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You are doing absolutely great job here, thank you! Aichibizov (talk) 23:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Countries and territories not reporting any cases
Can a reference be added to this data? Also consider making this as a table.Givingbacktosociety (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Your wish is my command Anguswalker (talk) 12:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Alternative table
The table of six leading countries I have added keeps getting deleted. I think it does show something different from the logarithmic tables - it is aligned when 100 cases occur rather than 1, it is not logarithmic, it only shows six countries for clarity. Arguably the logarithmic tables do not show anything different from the data below, but of course a graphic is often a lot easier to grasp. Anguswalker (talk) 12:10, 25 March 2020 (UTC)


 * The logarithmic graphs even though they are aligned to first reported day, they still clearly show the change after 100 as well.Givingbacktosociety (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I've changed it to cases after 1000. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anguswalker (talk • contribs) 12:55, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Inconsistent numbers?
I noticed that the numbers in the table don't add up. For example, already on the third day (Jan 23), the number of cases listed (571+1+4+1+1+1+1+1+1=582) doesn't match the total indicated (581). For later days, the mismatch gets far worse: for example on February 29, the total listed is 85,403, while the total of all entries in the table is 85,906 - a difference of more than 500! Are there indeed such inconsistencies in the WHO's own data? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.179.141.19 (talk) 09:41, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I went through the WHO reports, and noticed that the mistake in this table in what is counted as "China". Note that in the WHO report, what is described as China is not just mainland China: it includes Mainland China + Hong Kong + Macao + Taiwan (listed as "Taipei and environs"). However in this Wiki template, HK, Macao and Taiwan are listed as separate entries, and are therefore mistakenly counted twice. Not sure how to edit the table, but great if someone can correct it. (If keeping HK, Macao and Taiwan as separate entries, make sure to subtract these 3 lines from the WHO report on China.) Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.179.141.19 (talk) 15:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I checked the WHO report. Before January 24, "Taipei Municipality", "Hong Kong Special Administrative Region", "Macau Special Administrative Region" were excluded from China. After January 25, "Hong Kong SAR", "Macau SAR" and "Taipei" were included. There are also other mistakes about the number of Singapore, France in several days which I'm trying to correct now. PE fans (talk) 15:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The other issue comes from the Portugal data in March 12 and March 13. Since the title of this template is "WHO situation reports", I have removed the non-WHO source and replaced the number by the WHO number 41. PE fans (talk) 16:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Another error is March 1, International conveyance data is 705, not 706. PE fans (talk) 17:04, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 2, Italy data is 1689, not 1679.PE fans (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 3, Croatia data is 9, not 8.PE fans (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 5, Australia data is 66, not 57. PE fans (talk) 18:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 6, Saudi Arabia data is 8, not 5. PE fans (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 7, Saudi Arabia data is 8, not 6. PE fans (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 7, Paraguay data is 0, not 1. March 8, Paraguay data is 0, not 1. March 10, Paraguay data is 1, not 5. March 11, Paraguay data is 8, not 5. March 12, Paraguay data is 5, not 6. March 13, Paraguay data is 5, not 7. March 14, Paraguay data is 6, not 7. March 15, Paraguay data is 6, not 8PE fans (talk) 18:53, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 9, Faroe Island is 3, not 2.PE fans (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 11, Bulgaria is 10, not 6. PE fans (talk) 19:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 13, World total is 132,758, not 132, 760. PE fans (talk) 20:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 14, Guyana data is 6, not 1. March 15, Guyana data is 7, not 1. PE fans (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 14, Japan data is 716, not 718. PE fans (talk) 20:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 15, World total is 153,522, not 153,517PE fans (talk) 20:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 15, Portugal data is 112, not 169. PE fans (talk) 20:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 15, Pakistan data is 28, not 30. Up to now, all the numbers are consistence in the first half of March.PE fans (talk) 21:05, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Januray 27, China data is 2,761 not 2,741. PE fans (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Before February 5, International conveyance data was included in Japan data. After February 6, International conveyance data was excluded in Japan data. PE fans (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * February 8, World total is 34,886 not 34,598. PE fans (talk) 21:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * February 13, China data is 46,550 not 46,532. PE fans (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * February 18, Japan data is 65, not 63. PE fans (talk) 21:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * February 23, World total is 78,811, not 78,891. PE fans (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * February 24, Kuwait data is 3, not 1. PE fans (talk) 21:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * February 29, South Korea data is 3,150 not 3,510. PE fans (talk) 21:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Up to now, all the numbers before March 15 are consistent. PE fans (talk) 21:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I have just adjusted the Kosovo data to make the number consistent. Still working on finding more inconsistent numbers. PE fans (talk) 22:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 16, Singapore data is 243, not 226. PE fans (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 16, Guatemala data is 1, not 0. PE fans (talk) 22:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 16, International conveyance data is 712, not 697. PE fans (talk) 23:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 17, Sudan data is 2, not 1. PE fans (talk) 23:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 18, Netherlands data is 1,705, not 1,704.PE fans (talk) 00:27, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 18, Greenland data is 0, not 2.PE fans (talk) 00:56, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 19, Sint Maarten data is 0, not 1. PE fans (talk) 01:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 19, Bermuda data is 0, not 2. PE fans (talk) 02:00, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * March 20, World total is 234,073, not 234,075. PE fans (talk) 02:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I have fixed all the numbers until March 24. Now all the numbers are consistent. PE fans (talk) 02:17, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for fixing all the numbers, much appreciated, they're quite difficult to keep track of because WHO makes mistakes or changes the way it does things Anguswalker (talk) 19:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Delay in WHO data
I noticed that the data for Sweden in this article seems to be delayed by one day compared to 2020 coronavirus outbreak in Sweden (I assume this is due to WHO not receiving reports from Sweden in time to publish on the same day). While the article is named "WHO situation reports", I wonder if there’s any reason to have an article entirely based on that specific source when the data doesn’t always correspond to when the cases were actually diagnosed. If not, the article should be renamed to not include "WHO". 0x9fff00 (talk) 09:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * There are delays between national reporting and WHO's situation reports, and Johns Hopkins University has tally that updates every few minutes; however the daily WHO situation report is the clearest snapshot of the pandemic, albeit about a day behind reality, and so I have used it for consistency and clarity Anguswalker (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Article/template
Please stop turning this article back into a template, it doesn't fit the description of a template any more, if it ever did. It shows the case data in several different ways and formats across several tables, charts and lists. Anguswalker (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Log scale graph
I see a couple of graphs have been added. Not sure using the log scale is the most appropriate, since at first sight it makes the progression of infections look like it's under control. At the very least there should be a warning indicating that the graphs are using a log scale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.68.77.103 (talk) 17:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree that using logscale graph is not suitable for general audience. But I used it so that all the graphs will have the same y-axis range. I initially used linear scale, but the graphs became crowded. Here is the graphs with linear scale with each graph having a different y-axis range.Givingbacktosociety (talk) 20:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

I sympathize with both views, but would argue that these graphics are for a general audience, and the prime function of a graphic should be clarity: all possible potential for confusion should be avoided. It is wasteful on space to go linear, but I have noticed some journalists start to chatter about "flattening" when looking at similar which actually show no flattening at all. Slaughterteddy (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 29 March 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: Moved.  Anarchyte ( talk  &#124;  work )  12:25, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

– The unneeded description. 91.124.169.249 (talk) 13:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic cases/WHO situation reports → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic cases
 * 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic deaths/WHO situation reports → 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic deaths
 * This is a contested technical request. — Nnadigoodluck 🇳🇬 16:45, 29 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Not uncontroversial; requires discussion. Inadequate rationale provided. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)


 * This was originally named 2020 coronavirus pandemic tables, then moved to templatespace with a few different titles including Template:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic data/WHO situation reports which explains the slash in the current title, then back. I support removing this vestigial part of the title, compare to 2009 flu pandemic tables. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Please finally decide on a name whatever it may be and stop moving stuff around every second day. Kirils (talk) 23:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Per nom and we don't use slashes in such titles. Brandmeistertalk  14:57, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Support The current title is just awkward. ~  HAL  333  20:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Support Proposes title is easier to find and uses a similar title naming to other pandemics. Sak ura Cart elet Talk 00:17, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Support if we're going to keep this article, but I have some concerns about this being in mainspace given WP:NOTSTATS. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 04:26, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The issue of what should be done with the statistics probably could be discussed in another section after the rm is over. Perhaps summarizing it by month or otherwise merging/deleting into another article. Sak ura Cart elet Talk 01:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Move per others. --Soumyabrata stay at home wash your hands to protect from coronavirus 16:32, 7 April 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.

Doubling
The tables have a row for "Doubling (days)" that's never wikilinked nor explained. Also see Possible doubling error earlier on this page where someone asks how this is calculated. That question was never answered. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 22:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Here is one suggested way:

Doubling days = Ceiling(1/log2(growthfactor)), where growthfactor = (Current day count / previous day count). The assumption is that the growthfactor is a constant and that every day it increases by this constant factor.

Simple Example:

Day 0 - 100

Day 1 - 100*1.2

Assuming it grows by a constant factor of 1.2 the predicted numbers are:

Day 2 - 120*1.2 = 144

Day 3 - 144*1.2= 172.8

Day 4 - 172.8*1.2 = 207.36

In general the formula for Day i = Day 0*(growth factor)^i

So from 100 it became 207 in 4 days.

Using the formula we get Ceiling(1/log2(1.2)) = Ceiling(3.80) = 4.

Setting Day i to be 2*Day 0, we get, 2 = (growth factor)^i. Taking log2 on both side, log2(2) = i*log2(growth factor) => i = 1/log2(growth factor)

Actual Example:

March 12 - 125260

March 13 - 132758

Growth factor = (132758/125260) = 1.059859492

Ceiling(1/log2(growthfactor)) = Ceiling(1/log2(1.059859492)) = 12 Givebacktosociety (talk) 21:07, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The way I have done it is to look back at the latest day that had fewer than half as many cases than the day in question - no logs or anything Anguswalker (talk) 17:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I thought about this more and there is no one correct way to do it. Updated my previous comment.Givebacktosociety (talk) 18:42, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Another option is to look forward instead of looking back. For example if day 12 had count as 20 and then if day 19 is the first day with count as atleast 40 then the doubling time is 7.Givebacktosociety (talk) 03:46, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Possible doubling error
Are you sure that World doubling (days) for 17th and 18th March are correct? If so, how do you calculate it?

--77.253.170.128 (talk) 11:00, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I've made corrections according to the definition "The minimum number of days since fewer than half the current number of cases was reported". PE fans (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Monthly tables are too wide. First reported case does not need to be in all tables. All references need to be in a separate row near the top. class=sorttop
Column for "first reported case" can be removed from all the tables. It can go in a single table. This allows it to be updated more easily. Is someone updating that column in every table now? That is a ridiculous amount of duplication and work.

Also, the references next to the numbers are making some tables too wide. All the references should be in a separate row at the top or bottom of the table. The top would be better because then people find the references more quickly.

See: COVID-19 pandemic deaths. At one point I saw the references row near the top of a table. For example;

I think that is a good location. It is near the top. It also helps separate the world data from the country data that follows.

I just discovered that   works for consecutive rows at the top. It is not currently mentioned at Help:Sorting. I will add it there now. I added it to the above chart. Try it out. Click the sorting icons. The top rows no longer move.

I also moved the references row in the May tables to the top, and added   to it. --Timeshifter (talk) 08:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Separate alphabetical table created for first reported cases
First reported cases for countries and dependent territories. It is now in a separate table in the article. It is in alphabetical order. It was taken from the May table, and then the wikitext was alphabetized in a freeware text editor, Notetab Light.

Feel free to delete the "first cases" columns from all the monthly tables. They are no longer necessary. It is much easier to update an alphabetical table just for first cases. --Timeshifter (talk) 08:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Unstable title
Why has this page been renamed again? Granted at least it's not happening every second day now but twice a month is still way too much. Can we please agree on the best title and keep it that way for at least half a year? Kirils (talk) 00:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Why is this article using WHO? Others may be more accurate
I'm not sure if this was discussed before.

As of May 17, the number of confirmed cases by the Johns Hopkins University (JHU) covid dashboard, which is the most commonly used resource was:

4,710,614

As of May 17 the WHO total was:

4,525,497

Furthermore, other wikipedia articles use JHU:

National responses to the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 pandemic by country and territory

Should we be consistent between articles?

JHU seems to have come from more sources that are also reputable, including the WHO. The WHO sources are likely just national sources, which vary widely in how often they report, while other sources may gather data and report more often. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NittyG (talk • contribs) 18 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Country lists are much easier to maintain if a single source is used. I suggest starting another country list using another source. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Sorry, not sure what you mean - JHU is one source. NittyG (talk) 13:56, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Where is JHU table by country by date? Use it to start another article on Wikipedia. Using both WHO and JHU numbers in one article would make the article too big. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The JHU data seems to be about a day ahead of the WHO data, they aren't wildly different Anguswalker (talk) 08:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * and Does WHO or JHU have tables like the ones here? Can you provide links to them? Or do they only put out daily cumulative totals? --Timeshifter (talk) 08:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


 * No, WHO only puts out daily totals and JHU updates even more frequently. Anguswalker (talk) 07:54, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Florida
8,942 new cases Florida on 06/25 not 5,004 -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:586:400:93e0:c8d1:953:eb10:1daa (talk • contribs) 22:54, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Where did the regional figures come from?
They are not attributed and are not from WHO, which is where all the other figures come from. I suspect they are from JHU Anguswalker (talk) 20:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I do not know if JHU publishes regional figures:
 * JHU publishes splited and updated national figures by its JHU geographical considerations: for instance split between French Guyana and France or adding Taïwan
 * WHO publishes as is member figures and group them by WHO region: for instance Egypt is in the Middle-eat and Taïwan is not a member but an observer
 * ECDC publishes updated national figures grouped by continents: French Guyana included in France or Egypt in Africa.
 * This should be explained in more details in methodological pages from JHU, WHO and ECDC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.136.214.173 (talk) 10:26, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTSTATS
This article is a utterly pointless rehash of statistics that are much better presented in the numerous graphics we already have, and totally against WP:NOTSTATS. On the other hand, this article should be rewritten to have a meaningful presentation about the number of confirmed cases as compared to the number of suspected cases, to get a sense of the true extent of the pandemic (e.g. ). It is well documented by now that the number of confirmed cases is much, much lower than actual cases, often due to testing rates (which should also be discussed in the article). --  P 1 9 9  ✉ 13:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think this remains a useful record of cases reported to WHO, and thus the history of the spread of the virus, which isn't shown anywhere else (certainly not in one place) on Wikipedia Anguswalker (talk) 10:33, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

"First case" column removed from all tables except most recent month
I removed "First case" columns. I left just one in the most recent month.

There is no need to duplicate that column. It makes tables unnecessarily wider. It also makes it difficult to update the info since it has to be repeated on multiple months.

It would be better in a separate table just for first cases by country.

I see that it already exists here: --Timeshifter (talk) 09:17, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * COVID-19 pandemic by country and territory

Removed the remaining "First case" columns. No longer needed since there is a link in the top notes
I removed the remaining "First case" columns. They are no longer needed. There is a link in the top notes to a table: Timeline of first confirmed case by country.


 * Further information: COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 pandemic deaths, and COVID-19 pandemic death rates by country. See also: Timeline of first confirmed case by country.

--Timeshifter (talk) 21:16, 21 September 2020 (UTC)


 * , if you are using a sandbox to keep the latest month updated, please remove the "first case" column from it. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Page size
This page now has 542,211 bytes of markup; it should be subdivided, into several parts. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Ideally, each month's two tables should be deparated off into a separate article (leaving a list of cross-references at the start of the current month.Rif Winfield (talk) 08:30, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Now done! Anguswalker (talk) 18:15, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Russia
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/28/russia-admits-to-world-third-worst-covid-19-death-toll-underreported — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.214.90 (talk) 21:50, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

American Samoa
Who keeps removing American Samoa from the list of territories without cases? It is a genuine WHO reporting area. Anguswalker (talk) 07:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

A few things.
 * 1) I can only see with Micronesia being on there since the case on 8th january could just have been a false positive.
 * 2) Why is Kiribati on there? Didn't they get their first case a week ago?