Talk:COVID-19 pandemic in Canada/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

why no cats?

2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States and 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the Dominican Republic has them. This article doesn't. DMBFFF (talk) 04:16, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

It does, if you click the edit window and scroll all the way to the bottom they're in the text. No idea why they aren't displaying on the article though... ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:36, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Interesting. Thanks. DMBFFF (talk) 04:50, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

There was an unclosed hidden comment in the text. That breaks shit, because it causes the entire rest of the article, including the categories, to become part of the hidden comment. Bearcat (talk) 05:27, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

and thank you, Bearcat. DMBFFF (talk) 05:44, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Background section

For a debate about the new introduction of the Background section, please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19#Mass_duplicates_for_"Background".--walkee^talkee 17:26, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Sub-lead needed for Charts of disease progression section

Hello - the Charts of disease progression section needs an explanatory couple of sentences. Obviously (as of today) the charts on the left are simply numerical while the charts on the right are logarithmic. (1) This difference should be explained for people who don't understand the difference, and (2) there should also be an explanation of 'why both scales are being displayed. Personally, I understand #1 but I don't understand the statistical value of #2. PKT(alk) 14:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done I re-added the explanatory note. I also tend to agree that there isn't much use in displaying both so I've reverted to linear scale for the new case charts and logarithmic for the cumulative charts.UmpireRay (talk) 15:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2020

Alberta is not under a "Stay at home" order. On the chart listing the provinces, the date "March 28" should be removed and changed to "no". On March 28, the parking lots at provincial parks were closed. There was no stay-at-home order. link: https://globalnews.ca/news/6747060/alberta-provincial-parks-close-parking-covid-19-coronavirus/ CanadaWeather (talk) 03:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done

Caul's cluster - Newfoundland and Labrador needs update

Look at this: [1] 2607:FEA8:D5E0:E00:601A:FAD:188F:627E (talk) 23:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

2607:FEA8:D5E0:E00:601A:FAD:188F:627E,  Already done. Source wasn't there so I've added it. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Canadian map

The map has PEI listed as more than 150 cases. There are currently 25 cases in PEI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.78.78.148 (talk) 07:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

That map shows case per million inhabitants (of which PEI has 158.070), per the caption below. The switcher under the map can also show a map of total case numbers.UmpireRay (talk) 10:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Addition Error

903 deaths to the 14th + 103 deaths on the 15th = 1006 total, but the chart says 1010. 75.157.179.170 (talk) 23:07, 16 April 2020 (UTC) - R

200.68.142.19 (talk) 03:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC) Baden K.

 Done Thanks for the suggestion, consider it done! UmpireRay (talk) 10:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Cases by province and territory

The "conf. and deaths per million" comparison numbers, in the "cases by province and territory" chart, have not been edited in the last few days. They have become obsolete. For example, Quebec still shows 28.2 deaths per million while a straight division suggests a number above 100. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.244.161.148 (talk) 15:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Charts are very hard to read

Can someone who's better than me at wiki formatting separate the "new cases per day" and "deaths per day" charts onto their own separate lines? It's becoming impossible to read the labels as more dates are added. CJK09 (talk) 18:52, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done, they were getting quite messy. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm sad that you removed the numbers from on top of each bar of the bar charts. I was appreciating them. 75.157.179.170 (talk) 04:42, 21 April 2020 (UTC) -R

I stuck 'em back in there for ya :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:11, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

"Corona in Canada" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Corona in Canada. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Statistics by age table disappeared yesterday

The table of contents still shows a section "6.3 by age" under Statistics, but is now a dead link as the table it pointed to seems to have been removed (probably inadvertently) along with other edits yesterday (April 24). Since I am relatively inexperienced editing and there is also a discussion here about the other tables I probably should leave restoring it to others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StephenDow (talk • contribs) 16:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I now see what's wrong: the "by age" table has been included within the preceding section's Timeline table, which has a "show/hide" toggle, initally hidden. StephenDow (talk) 22:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2020 Adding covidmapper (Mapping COVID-19 Data From the Past, Present, and Future (daily updated projections)) developed at University of Alberta to External links

Add to External links link to tool COVIDmapper developed at University of Alberta. The unique value added are the daily updated projections for the future of this pandemic.

• COVIDmapper - Mapping COVID-19 Data From the Past, Present, and Future (daily updated projections) Liigandj (talk) 22:53, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done Aasim 21:09, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 April 2020

Within the Timeline/January 2020 section, the second paragraph is incorrect and mis-states the facts from the referenced materials. The paragraph should be changed from:

On January 17, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) implemented signage in the Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver airports to raise awareness of the virus, and had added a health screening question to the electronic kiosks for passengers arriving from central China. There are no direct flights from Wuhan to Canada.[24][25]

To:

On January 17, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) indicated plans were in progress “to implement signage” in the Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver airports to raise awareness of the virus, and that there would be an additional health screening question added to the electronic kiosks for passengers arriving from central China. The agency noted the overall risk to Canadians was low and there were no direct flights from Wuhan to Canada. The CBSA said it would not be, at that time, implementing extra screening measures, but would “monitor the situation closely”.[24][25] Hillbillydave1972 (talk) 08:47, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done Aasim 21:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

False positive

Resolved

It turns out that the Nunavut case is a false positive, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/covid-19-nunavut-1.5554545. Too much work to edit on my phone. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 19:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

👍--Moxy 🍁 21:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

You did not resolved at Background and epidemiology, there still say 1 active case Nunavut really annoying ... fix it now!!!! 0 active case is real life! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 21:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2020

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19-cases.html Change arrival date to 15 January 2020, as-is stated in the credible source above SnowyIsHere (talk) 03:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done: The timeline section of the article indicates that the man arrived on the 22nd; it was merely reported on the 25th. So, I did move the date back, but by three days, not the ten that you requested. Your source does not appear reliable, as it doesn’t provide any details of the supposed January 15th case, and seems alone in making that claim. In fact, I found a peer-reviewed case report of the “First Case of COVID-19 in Canada” which further supports the January 22nd arrival date. I added that citation (also included here) to the article. So, your edit request did help improve the accuracy of the article by drawing attention to the matter. Thanks for your contribution! — Tartan357  ^(Talk) 10:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Background and epidemiology - Ontario Death is Error

Resolved

why number of cases, resolved and active cases is correct but number of death is wrong number, 1,669 death is wrong number, you need fix it!

Official Status of cases: 20,907 - Total number of cases, 15,391 - Resolved, 1,725 - Deaths and 3,791 - Active cases

at https://covid-19.ontario.ca/

1,725 is OFFICIAL DEATH! FIX NOW! FIX NOW! FIX NOW! oh geez! YOU WASTE MY TIME! 3 hours ignorant is SHAME! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Walter Görlitz (talk • contribs) 02:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Buddy chill. There's no need for that. I've updated it. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for fixed it and chill out! :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 00:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Background and epidemiology - Newfoundland and Labrador is Error

Resolved

Newfoundland and Labrador got 248 recovered total and 10 active cases at https://covid-19-newfoundland-and-labrador-gnl.hub.arcgis.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 03:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Background and epidemiology - Alberta is Error

Resolved

Alberta got 6,644 cases, not 6,664 case. Official said 6,644 case from https://www.alberta.ca/coronavirus-info-for-albertans.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 02:39, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

A few things. First, do not "fix" entries left by others. In short, if you didn't write the comment here from the account or address you're using to edit from now, do not touch it.

Second, the data is actually housed in Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases by province. Finally, I have updated the number there. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

you want me go to Template:COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases by province to use talk if any wrong error number? and thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 03:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

No, that page is not locked and you can edit it. I do want you to sign your comments on talk pages with ~~~~ though. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

I do understand and I have to use ~~~~ like that? but can I use 70.76.229.79?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 03:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

No. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:59, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Photo of "Justice For Regis" rally

Is the photo of the "Justice for Regis" rally, in the Ontario section, relevant to the topic? The text doesn't make any connection between the rally and the pandemic. Jmdyck (talk) 01:22, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Definitely not. Removed. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 03:20, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 August 2020

In the restrictions chart, Manitoba references "Terrance Bay, Ontario". This should be Terrace Bay, Ontario. JakeWCa (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 18:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Nice New Charts

The new provincial logarithmic charts are nice!

It would be better to include links to provincial corona pages (e.g. the closures) rather than linking to the generic province pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.68.142.19 (talk) 03:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Vaccines and treatments for COVID-19: List of all COVID 19 Clinical Trials Authorized by Health Canada

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-clinical-trials/list-authorized-trials.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxy (talk • contribs) 11:48, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

PIIS2589-7500(20)30086-8

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/landig/article/PIIS2589-7500(20)30086-8/fulltext — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moxy (talk • contribs) 17:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Switcher

@UmpireRay: The most recent edit (diff) caused "Syntax error" in the "Total deaths by province and territory" graph. That's because you had to update two sets of the same information due to use of {{switcher}}. The complexity of doing that led to deletion of the |y1=0,0,0,... line in the second {{GraphChart}}. Please fix that (I'd rather not do it because I have no idea what the numbers are). However, is switcher really desirable? There must only be a tiny number of logged-in users reading this article who would have the switcher gadget enabled? That's up to people maintaining this article but it seems unwarranted to me. Johnuniq (talk) 03:33, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for alerting me to this. As for the use of the switcher, I believe it's enabled by default, so most users should have it. It's also used in other COVID articles (see the Netherlands for example). UmpireRay (talk) 03:52, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Daily table by province and territory missing

Could someone fix the page and reinstate the table that appeared first in the statistics section. The table listed the daily count of new cases, hosp, deaths, etc by province and territory. Charts are nice but some of us the hard data. Thank You.

Thanks to all of you working hard on a daily basis keep all of this up to date. 76.71.166.104 (talk) 11:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

The big table is still on the page, but it's collapsed and moved to the end of the "Statistics" section, just above "References". Jmdyck (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

All that is displayed the Statistics section are the:

• Progression Charts (which are out of date)
• Cases by Region chart and table
• Individual regions charts

Immediately following this is the references section. There is no "Show" table button . I tried attaching a screen capture to show you but the system will not let me upload it. Jcharest57 (talk) 19:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Ya, the table is gone. This is the only reason to visit this page regularly. Jrarrmy (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm looking at the page right now, and between the "By Regions" graphs and the "References" header, there's a Timeline of Cases of Regions [show] line, and if I click on "[show]", the big table appears. If that isn't what you see, I can't explain it. Jmdyck (talk) 03:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm also able to view the Timeline of Cases of Regions table; it's initially collapsed for me. IP editor and Jrarrmy, would you have happened to have disabled Javascript on Wikipedia? Otherwise try . —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:23, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Yes, I usually browse with scripts blocked, never caused an issue before that day, and it's working again now. The daily chart is back, above references. The cases per million by province is gone, even with shields down.

Thanks for your help. Jrarrmy (talk) 20:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request

Chart states that Ontario has been under a stay-at-home order since March 24. No such order has been issued. Fully two weeks later, on April 6, Premier Ford stated that he did not want to make such an order (https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/2020/04/06/ford-reluctant-to-issue-mandatory-stay-home-order-but-warns-ontarians-they-could-be-fined.html). Please edit the chart accordingly.

edit: in fact, stay-at-home orders have not been issued in Nova Scotia or Quebec, either. I do not think any stay-at-home orders have been issued. The chart should be correct or these claims should be properly cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awesome Aasim (talk • contribs) 17:17, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aasim 17:16, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Response: under the stay-at-home column, it should be changed from 'yes' to 'no' for each jurisdiction. No such order has been made on a province or territory-wide basis. Note that the Chart does not source the claim that stay-at-home orders have been issued (as they haven't). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.19.149 (talk) 22:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Nunavut has a case in Pond Inlet

Just from a few minutes ago, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/nunavut-first-covid19-case-1.5509014. I have trouble with my mobile editing. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 14:15, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

New Section: COVID-19 Testing

Since testing is frequently identified as one of the key things countries can do to combat the pandemic, I suggest this article should have a dedicated section on it. I have added one. Comments and suggestions are welcome. J S Lundeen (talk) 22:56, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

New name

Resolved

Since the name of the article on the pandemic in general has been changed to "COVID-19 pandemic," the name of this page and all the provincial ones should be changed to "COVID-19 pandemic in (insert jurisdiction)" YourAviationPro (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

This page done.....working on others.--Moxy 🍁 02:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Why are we doing this? There are articles on this in every jurisdiction around the world. 2020 coronavirus pandemic in the United States are still using the previous naming as are others. Shouldn't this be decided across the entire project?--Darryl Kerrigan (talk)

@Darryl Kerrigan: Check out the "Survey" section of Talk:COVID-19 pandemic#Requested move 26 April 2020—they will all be moved. Vaselineeeeeeee^★★★ 03:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I gather that applies to all articles, so the US, UK, Italy etc. articles will also be moved. It might have been a good idea to list that as a RfC or place a notice on all the related pages as that proposal applies to hundreds of others and if the editors of those articles think differently we could revisting this issue. It is probably the right decision though.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk)

@Darryl Kerrigan: best keep an eye on Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19 for talks about big topics.--Moxy 🍁 03:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Moxy:Thanks, will do. I think there is validity to this discussion though. When decisions are made across many articles, it is wise to put notices there if possible or on other noticeboards or RfC lists. Otherwise, people may question the process and "consensus" built there.--Darryl Kerrigan (talk) 03:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Canada related pages.... some data templates still need to be moved but they should be moved with the other related data templates as they are intertwined.--Moxy 🍁 03:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Request

Resolved

MedMira of Halifax developed one of the first rapid detection kits for HIV and has now developed a COVID-19 antibody test that takes 15-20 min.[407]

The article was misquoted it should have said: "From taking a drop of blood specimen to complete one single test, it will take less than three minutes," said Chan. According to Chan, other tests can take 15-20 minutes to complete and some need a reader to interpret the results.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Altamel (talk • contribs) 17:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I have now fixed this. Thanks. J S Lundeen (talk) 16:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Temporary impacts of pandemic on individual communities

Hello active editors here, please see the thread I have started at WP:CANTALK#Pandemic mentions in community articles. You are invited to comment at that thread. Cheers, Hwy43 (talk) 00:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Graphs in "Statistics" section are unclear

It is not clear why there are pairs of the same graphs (New cases per day, new deaths per day). There is nothing indicating the difference. Are the second versions created using some sort of smoothing? If so, why are both included?

Also, there are no labels for the graphs of each province. It isn't reasonable for viewers to understand that they are the same types of data as the national graphs above, now that the above graphs have multiplied. In the early days it was easier to make the connection, but at this point it has grown unwieldy.

Even at high res, the labels on the provincial graphs are unreadable now that the time series has grown so big. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.202.200.214 (talk) 03:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

The x-axis date labels on the bar plots are now overlapping and unreadable. This is a known bug: Template_talk:Graph:Chart#Crowding_of_x-axis_labels. Here are some potential solutions: A. Switch to a line plot, which means losing the numbers above the bars B. plot a shorter time period. This can make it difficult and confusing to update the data since you need to remove data at the same time as adding it. C. Switch to a different plot template, such as the horizontal bar plot at the beginning of the article. Thoughts? Preferences? J S Lundeen (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I've switched it to an area chart, which seems the best solution. While we do lose the raw numbers, there are all available in the template below the graphs. A shorter time period simply seems too complicated and would lose important datapoints. The template horizontal bar plot at the top, as far as I'm aware, is for the very specific tracking of cases, deaths, and recoveries, and isn't really an option here. If anyone has a better solution or alternative, I'd be open to hearing it. UmpireRay (talk) 21:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

This looks good. Thanks. Another thing that would improve the charts is moving the colour legend closer to them. There are so many charts that they don't show up on my screen at the same time, so the colour legend also isn't on-screen making it unclear how to interpret the lines. Perhaps separating the charts into groups of three, each group with a legend? J S Lundeen (talk) 14:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Area charts

@UmpireRay:: I see that you converted bar charts to area charts. Personally I find these harder to read and have to try and guess what the numbers are. Sorry, but I don't think this change was necessary. The area chart shows less information than the bar chart. // sikander { talk } 🦖 01:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I also prefer the bar charts. However, as discussed above, limitations with the chart template cause the dates along the x-axis to overlap and become unreadable. I think that the area charts are the next best thing in this case, since they avoid the problem. UmpireRay (talk) 03:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

We're obviously not going to have graphs that cover March 1st, 2020 to March 1st, 2022. The bar charts with dates and numbers are excellent visual information for a reader and don't have to cover the entire pandemic period. Perhaps a dedicated page for raw data and graphs while the main page covers the previous month and a half? // sikander { talk } 🦖 13:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

The timeline

Since the last time I proposed to split a section, the size of the article has continued to increase. I'm thinking the timeline would be good to split given its 19 kB prose size (as of today). I would consider the federal government response, but I'm not sure about that one. Note that my summarization skills for split sections are generally pretty bad. Username⁶⁸⁹² 20:20, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Data error (?) May 6 (and 11)

In the detailed data sheet "Timeline of cases by province and territory" there seems to be an inconsistency in the data for May 6. The values for provinces/territories (23, 70, 24, 2, 412, 910, 1, blank, 7, blank, blank, ...) add up to 1,449 but the sum ("Cases/New") is shown as 1,450. If it is the sum that is incorrect, note that the cumulative sum ("Cases/Cml") needs to be corrected for that day and subsequent days as well. Saveur (talk) 14:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Another case of data entry or aggregation error on May 11 re. Cumulative Recoveries: 32,096 + 888 = 32,984, not 32,994. If it is the cumulative sum that is incorrect, then the cumulative sum for subsequent days needs to be corrected as well. Saveur (talk) 01:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

This part no longer applies since the recovery value for May 11 has been edited. Saveur (talk) 17:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Splitting proposal

The timeline section of this article deserves its own article (Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada). The article contains 78 kB of prose, which means it it should probably be split, and the timeline contains 21 kB, which, given how well-sourced it is, is definitely enough for a standalone article. (See WP:SIZESPLIT) Username⁶⁸⁹² 18:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

• With the references on the page broken, because there are too many references, there is no choice but to split the article asap. And as such, I've boldly done so creating Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. Nfitz (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

  @Nfitz: I'd prefer if a summary was made in this article similar to the US one (I'd say in the 5-8 kB range), though I'll admit that I'm pretty bad at picking what goes in and out. Username⁶⁸⁹² 22:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

  @Username6892:A couple of sentences wouldn't hurt - but the US one has 145 references, and would quickly break this article again. There's also massive duplication in the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada#Government response section. More needs to be done - but I'm not that person (I simply wanted to be able to read the references again!). Nfitz (talk) 22:54, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Percentage death for 80+ is 35%, not 74%!

Somebody seems to have wrongly assumed that the fatally rate for 80-89 and 90+ can be added together to get the percentage for 80+, whereas it has to be the total fatality for 80-89 and 90+ over the total number of cases for 80-89 and 90+. A quick computation will yield to 35% as the answer.

Please edit the table accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.52.89.87 (talk) 02:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Never mind, the table shows the proportion of fatality by age group, not the fatality rate as I initially thought. There are still some inconsistencies between rows, but I believe it would be better to just delete the 80+ row. (I don't have permission to make edits.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.52.89.87 (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

"Timeline of cases by province and territory" twice

Currently, the page has two occurrences of the "Timeline of cases by province and territory" table: once at the bottom of "Background and epidemiology", and once at the bottom of "Statistics".

Back when we had only one, it was in the later location, and then Revision as of 2020-05-15T19:22:57 moved it from there to the earlier location.

Then, Revision as of 2020-05-17T10:07:32 "added it back" at the later location.

Presumably, it should only occur once. Do people have a preference as to where it lives? Jmdyck (talk) 01:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

My two cents: I think that section "Background and Epidemiology" could contain a link (at bottom) to section "Statistics", from which section the detailed table "Timeline of cases by province and territory" can be found. Saveur (talk) 02:03, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

This was resolved in the 2020-05-26T15:16:41 revision: User:Jcharest57 removed the later occurrence. Jmdyck (talk) 14:24, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

‎

And now we have two occurrences again. Jmdyck (talk) 03:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

The second occurrence was added back in the Revision as of 22:06, 28 May 2020 by User:Rukaribe. The reason that the second occurrence was removed is because the article was too long which was preventing the reflist from generating properly. Jcharest57 (talk) 00:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

References and External Links sections seem "broken"

Clicking on an inline reference nothing happens. In the References section at the bottom of the page there was noting there except for the following:

References

Template:Reflist

I looked at the underlying code and it seems fine to my amateur eye. Reflist states that the named parameter colwidth is obsolete. I tried removing the named parameter but the result was the same. Since I dont want to break anything, could somebody have a look at what the issue is please?
== References ==
{{reflist|colwidth=30em}}

While you're at it, the External links section also appears to not be rendering properly. The following is displayed:

External links

Template:Commons category

Jcharest57 (talk) 02:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Template limits....need to do major trimming.--Moxy 🍁 04:01, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Resolved (temporarily at least) by splitting the timeline information to new article Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada which has over 90 references. But I suspect that this will be a problem again soon, and further splits, or culls, will be necessary. Nfitz (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

This is happening again. Looks like it came back with last night's "Statistics" update. Jmdyck (talk) 15:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Clarification: that's the revision at which the Reflist template started failing (again), but earlier revisions (back to June 1) were already showing failures for templates further down the page. In the generated HTML, these templates have the comment "WARNING: template omitted, post-expand include size too large". See WP:PEIS. We'd get some breathing space if we removed one of the occurrences of "Timeline of cases by province and territory", since each of those contributes a fair amount to the page's post-expand include size. Jmdyck (talk) 16:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the second occurrence, so References (and other templates) are working again. However, the post-expand include size is at 97.5% of the limit, so that probably won't last very long (at most a week, probably less). Jmdyck (talk) 00:57, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

As of 2020-06-14T00:43:26Z, the page is exceeding the post-expand include size limit again, so expansion of templates is failing again (starting with the ones at the very bottom of the page). Jmdyck (talk) 05:10, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Jmdyck, perhaps we can split the section "Government response" into its own page, something like Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada? We might be able to shutter quite a few of the references that way to bring the page within the PEIS limit. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:30, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu: That would help, but I suspect not much (i.e., not for very long). My understanding of PEIS is not great, but I don't think the large number of references is particularly the problem (although they do contribute, of course). My guess is that the main contributor to the page's PEIS is all the graphs. Jmdyck (talk) 15:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Jmdyck, I agree that the graphs are also a big bulk of the problem as there is an extra third or so that isn't apparent at first glance. It might be better to split them off into a Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada and keep the more important ones on this page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:02, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I did some experimenting in my sandbox and found that graphs account for about 43% of the page's PEIS, tables about 23%, and everything else about 34%. Jmdyck (talk) 20:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Number of recoveries and number of deaths in first paragraph

Should the number of recoveries and the number of deaths be listed to the lesser 100 in the 1st paragraph, as total cases are? This would make the format more consistent. It would be listed as such: As of June 7, 2020, there have been over 95,400 confirmed cases, 53,900 recoveries and 7,700 deaths in the country. YourAviationPro (talk) 16:42, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Agree with proposition. Jcharest57 (talk) 02:03, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Updating stats for QC and ON in 3rd para daily

I'm wondering the usefulness of the stats for QC and ON in the third para. These are changing daily. Furthermore, the are listed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:COVID-19_pandemic_data/Canada_medical_cases_by_province and in the individual provincial pages.

I suggest deleting the numbers bit and leaving the statement

Most of those cases are in Canada's most populous provinces, Ontario (32,370 cases, 2,527 deaths)[6] and Quebec (54,054 cases, 5,242 deaths).[7]

to as follows:

Most of those cases are in Canada's most populous provinces, Ontario [6] and Quebec .[7]

Jcharest57 (talk) 02:17, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support, if only to make it easier on editors so that they don't constantly have to update another thing every day. Besides, the breakdown by province is tabulated immediately after the lede. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
• Agree Jmdyck (talk) 14:30, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Infobox images are outdated

With the exception of 1 image, the images in the infobox (confirmed cases by province/territory, deaths per million) have not been updated since May 24. They are woefully outdated. I would propose to remove these images until more recent graphics become available. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:22, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Timeline

What was the point of creating a separate page for the timeline if it barely has any recent information? Should there be a summary of its contents in the main article here? Just my two cents. CaffeinAddict (talk) 02:39, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

CaffeinAddict, because the page had exceeded PEIS limits and splitting sections off was the solution. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm well aware of why its split off - but it's not being updated at all. CaffeinAddict (talk) 04:23, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Death Age

Time to update now!

0-19 - 1, 20-29 - 9, 30-39 - 15, 40-49 - 50, 50-59 - 210, 60-69 - 650, 70-79 - 1,629, 80+ - 6,404,

August 23 - 8,968

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/epidemiological-summary-covid-19-cases.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.76.229.79 (talk) 19:36, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Regular Updating

This page needs to be updated more regularly. As of today (September 17), the timeline of cases by province and territory hasn't been updated since September 9 (this used to be updated almost daily and that needs to continue). The six maps in the Statistics section haven't been updated since August 21/24. The 'By Age' section hasn't been updated since August 23. The image at the very top of the article (Confirmed cases per 100,000 residents by health region) hasn't been updated since June 22! If help is needed, I'm willing to step up. Just let me know where the info is coming from and I can then edit certain sections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NoWikiNoLife (talk • contribs) 07:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

And the map is wrong/misleading too. All the Nunavut cases later turned out to be false-positive. An "<32 case per 100,000" is quite misleading when the number is actually 0. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

There hasn’t been massive updating on any pages relating to COVID recently either. I suspect people are sick of it and have Covid fatigue. I’m a regular updater but it gets extremely tiresome as these pages have to be updated at least daily, sometimes multiple times a day. This is a volunteer job after all. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I definitely appreciate these updates, especially the timeline of cases by province and territory (at least once every three days). I bet you many, many people rely on this very page to get their updates, because Canada's official government website and other websites are not nearly this concise and clear with the info as Wikipedia's format. I can understand fatigue, however Canada is clearly in the midst of the second wave which is just about to burst into all its 'unholy glory' and seeing the numbers in one place has never been more important.

Special exemptions to quarantine

There are at least some people getting exemptions to the quarantine, although I'm not sure where to include this information:

• https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/billionaire-covid-quarantine-exemption-1.5726050
• https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/18/trump-donor-liz-uihlein-canada-quarantine

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 20:30, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

I’m pretty sure it’s medical professionals and diplomats. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Which these people did not fit into either of, I've tried to find a list of exceptions but its not very clear at all https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/services/publications/diseases-conditions/covid-19-information-essential-service-workers.html. John Cummings (talk) 12:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

As it turns out, the "billionarie" was granted an exemption by a CBSA official (border guard) when she and her husband flew into a minor airport in Toronto and it was not ministerial nor anyone in the health profession who granted the exemption. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:40, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Put the info in the timeline, it has news coverage and is noteworthy. CaffeinAddict (talk) 14:32, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Post-expand Include Size

@Jcharest57, Jmdyck, and UmpireRay: This article exceeds the Post-expand include size limit, which causes it to appear in an error category and causes templates at the bottom of the page not to appear. This is largely caused by the huge number of graphs and charts on the page. I would suggest moving some, such as those in COVID-19 pandemic in Canada#Provincial and territorial 2, to a sub-page. It will make this page more readable and remove the template error. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:07, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support. Ahecht, we have an earlier discussion where Jmdyck noted that graphs account for about 43% of the page's PEIS, tables about 23%, and everything else about 34%. I think most of the graphs should definitely move over to a new page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
• Support. I think the three national graphs in that section should stay on this article, but the provincial and territorial graphs would be much better suited for each province or territory's article. This would reduce the vast majority of the graph PEIS. UmpireRay (talk) 23:40, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
•  Maybe. I'm not fundamentally opposed to a move. But I disagree with some of UmpireRay's suggestions. For one thing, each of the first three "Provincial and territorial" graphs covers all the provinces and territories, so it doesn't make sense to put them in an article for a specific province or territory. As for the grid-of-graphs, those at least would make sense to farm out to specific articles, but I'm doubtful that it would be a good idea. Many province-specific pages already have graphs, and they're probably not interested in another one. Even the pages that don't have graphs might not want one, as it's a maintenance burden (and the underlying numbers might conflict with the ones that the page already has). It seems to me that there's some benefit to having the grid-of-graphs together (though not necessarily on this page), all with the same timescale, style, colours, and alt-graphs; but if not then maybe we should just drop them entirely. (Doing so would free up about 16% of this page's PEIS.) Jmdyck (talk) 14:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
•  Done --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 17:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
  • No, you stuffed it up. When you correctly link to a template, it's actually included and visible. You don't use {{main}} and when I do it "correctly" the template is a mess. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
    • @Walter Görlitz: No, I didn't stuff anything up, and I'd suggest re-reading Wikipedia:Transclusion and Wikipedia:Template limits to refresh your memory. Linking to a template is exactly that, creating a link that one can click on to get to a template's page. Transcluding a template is where "it's actually included and visible". However, the mediawiki software places limits on how many bytes of a page can be traanscluded from templates. Once that limit is exceeded, other templates, including {{Reflist}}, will no longer be displayed. As a further quirk, when a template is inside another template (such as when {{GraphChart}} is used within {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases by province chart}}), those bytes actually count twice towards the limit. For complex templates like graphs, that can add up quickly -- that's why your attempt to switch {{main}} to a direct transclusion was "a mess", because the post-expand include size limit was exceeded and the mediawiki software just gave up at some point stopped trying to interpret any more templates on the page. Please do not re-add templates to this page unless you've previewed it to verify that (a) you don't get a Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included message at the top and (b) all the templates towards the bottom of the page, including the contents of the References section, are displayed correctly and don't just show up as links (e.g. Template:Reflist instead of the actual references list). --Ahecht (TALK
      PAGE) 19:47, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
      • @Ahecht: Yes you did. You are treating the template like an article in main space. If we were to link to it the way a template is supposed to, it would not render. You clearly do not understand and I will leave it for another editor to revert you. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Better choice. Since it's being used as an article and not a template, I have nominated it for deletion and expect the TfD discussion to end with a decision to move it to article space. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:27, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, the template has been long deleted and the contents moved to Draft:COVID-19 cases in Canada by province, but we the references were not included when it was moved to a template so could whoever moved the charts out please update the draft so it can be moved into mainspace? Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:59, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• You may be interested in this discussion: Wikipedia talk:Template limits#Necessity of the "post-expand include size"-limit, identifying the core problem and possible alternative solutions. --Prototyperspective (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Please may we add footnote to recent death increase

Recent deaths are actually from spring and summer data clean-up. https://globalnews.ca/news/7373691/ontario-coronavirus-cases-october-2-covid19/

Thanks for all your work 🤗 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrarrmy (talk • contribs) 11:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Definitions - "Second Wave" and "Atlantic Bubble"

Hey there, as I've been editing local Canadian articles as they relate to COVID-19 I wanted to bring anyone interested into a conversation I started on the talk page of COVID-19 pandemic regarding a definition of "Second Wave. I would love to get some more feedback and discussion generated. You can find that here: Talk:COVID-19_pandemic#Concept_of_a_'Second_Wave'.

The other thing is I believe it would be warranted to have a page for "Atlantic Bubbble" as it appears to be fairly significant (and pretty much unaffected by the second wave in Canada). Thoughts?

CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:50, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I don't think an article is merited for the Atlantic Bubbble. Its use is almost (of not entirely) exclusive to the region's response to SARS-CoV-2. I expect it can be explained in a few words or sentences and its impact would not be more than a few paragraphs in all. That's not really enough for a stand-alone article. However, if there's a separtae article about each of the three province's COVID-19 pandemic, and there's no logic to merging them, then a stand-alone article might make sense, but those are some big ifs that need to be discussed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:50, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

There's currently an article for each province and territory. Considering one province has been COVID-free the entire length of the pandemic, Atlantic Bubble is actually a more notable concept. Also it wouldn't make sense to merge four separate provinces with four independant governmental responses together. CaffeinAddict (talk) 03:44, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Nunavut is a territory, not a province.

We do not create definitions, we find what sources say and echo them.

Why don't you create an article in draft space—either your own or a page under this article—to see how much content you can create for an Atlantic bubble. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:38, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Fatality rate

We appear to be calculating the fatality rate incorrectly. As of right now, we do the calculation as follows: {{Percentage|9664|189387|2}}. The number, 189387, is the number of confirmed cases. However, the fatality rate should be calculated based on the recovery cases + deaths, as some proportion of the currently active cases will be fatal, too. I therefore propose that we change this. I don't claim to be an expert in these things, though, so I'm leaving this discussion open for at least 24 hours. I'll note the unreliable source, Case fatality rate, directly supports what I'm saying. I quote, "A CFR can only be considered final when all the cases have been resolved (either died or recovered)." However, the very next sentence notes that during an outbreak, the numbers may be lower, which argues against my position. --Yamla (talk) 19:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

The numbers are lower given the current measurement because no one knows the fatal nature of active cases. Therefore the true fatality rate will not be known until the pandemic is over. CaffeinAddict (talk) 23:44, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

True, but they can be calculated more accurately, no? Ignore the active cases, as I suggested. We know the outcome of the non-active cases. Note if you firmly believe the current calculation is correct, great. I'm happy to accept your position if that's the case. --Yamla (talk) 01:31, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

ScienceDirect has an excerpt from Forensic Epidemiology written by Michael Freeman and Maurice Zeegers that gives Figure 3.10 which expresses case fatality rate as:

${\frac {\text{Total number of new deaths due to a certain disease or injury}}{\text{Total number of incident patients with this disease or injury}}}$

Not sure if this helps, as Case fatality rate doesn't utilise any equations which might resolve this issue. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:53, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you. That seems to indicate that the current formula is correct, according to the science, and (as CaffeinAddict pointed out) this means we just generally acknowledge the fatality rate is a low estimate until the pandemic is over. Thanks for the discussion, I'm happy to leave this calculation unchanged on the article. --Yamla (talk) 09:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Needs update

A lot of this article is outdated and skewed towards the early phases of the pandemic rather than being more general. Blow-by-blow can be done in summary more on the provincial pages. Besides that, there needs to be

• More focus on reopenings and on the "second wave" emerging in multiple provinces (i.e. Ontario, Quebec)
• A re-focusing of the Provincial and territorial table to focus on current traits (i.e. schools, mask mandates, any prevailing restrictions, per-capita cases, etc.)

ViperSnake151  Talk  18:42, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

10 day old stats, please edit or unlock Jrarrmy (talk) 21:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Or, you make {{edit protected}} requests with precise changes. There are reasons the article is protected. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the response Walter, I don’t know how all this works, I guess more people need to get involved, but politics or arguments freezes things, thus stopping me from wanting to get involved. I guess I don’t have enough credit to suggest edits. Jrarrmy (talk) 23:48, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Sex of patient

There was a separation of co-vid 19 infection rates and deaths by the gender of the victim. It appears to have been deleted. This is very important information to anyone studying the disease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.178.130.172 (talk) 14:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Clarifying columns of "Background and epidemiology"

On first glance the column names of the table in "Background and epidemiology" section are a bit confusing, could details be added? For example, instead of "Tests" with "per k" to the right, change to "Tests per k"... and in turn "Cases per m", "Deaths per m". A feature request (..that might be too much work to maintain) would be an additional column for test positivity rate. Cheers, thanks for the work keeping it up to date! Uninspired Username (talk) 03:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I agree I had to read the source on the table format to even understand it. CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:09, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

If it's not being regularly updated, perhaps it can be commented out until it's caught up? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:14, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

The table says it was last updated today, a couple numbers I checked look fine, definitely worth keeping IMHO. Uninspired Username (talk) 02:18, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, the Froffi for COVID 19 in Canada.Klient Wiki (talk) 15:43, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Nunavut Map Update

Nunavut is currently going through one of the largest outbreaks in Canada, especially compared to its low population. Someone should reflect this on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.117.241.49 (talk) 16:22, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Graph updating

The graphics and information in the statistics section seem to be inconsistently updating. I'm just wondering if there is something I can do to help with that. naturalnumber (talk) 22:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

To clarify, I'm checking if these have been done by hand or is it something like a script someone was running, and checking to make sure I don't step on any toes. naturalnumber (talk) 23:13, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

It appears to be a graphic someone has made themselves. Then it just needs to be uploaded to Wikipedia. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:04, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Central Canada/Eastern Canada

As per Nicolas Perrault III's recent edit [2], which I don't disagree with, defining Central Canada vs. a more specific definition of Eastern Canada seems to be in order. By definition, Central Canada is a description, while not actually being the geographic centre of the country, but a term denoting the two provinces of Ontario and Quebec as a population centre. I find the "Eastern Canada ex-Atlantic to be confusing to the average reader personally. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Agree; I had no idea what that meant. Can't we just further delineate by using Central Canada or the Maritime Provinces? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:12, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I think Central Canada is correct when referring to Ontario and Quebec, however (and again this is another one that gets confusing), the other eastern provinces are Atlantic Canada... not maritimes - The Maritimes only refer to NB, PEI and NS, they do not include Newfoundland & Labrador. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Wow, that's really confusing. I'd say wikilink to whatever encompasses the affected regions the most. Do we have a page on how Canada can be geographically divided? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:48, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Sort of. List of regions of Canada is the closest but it gets very convoluted... Right now it's obvious the COVID spikes have been in three distinct regions: Western Canada, Central Canada and Atlantic Canada, with the territories being affected differently based on their geographic isolation. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:02, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I did not know that the expression “Central Canada” is recognised as meaning Quebec and Ontario. This rings quite odd to me. I get and agree that “Eastern Canada ex-Atlantic” is also odd. What about simply “Ontario and Quebec”? Nicolas Perrault (talk) 05:37, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Alternatively, perhaps add a blue link to the expression “Central Canada”, so that readers unfamiliar with this (in my opinion strange) expression can see for themselves that “Central Canada” is recognised as meaning Quebec and Ontario? Nicolas Perrault (talk) 05:43, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Misplaced graph

The graph "COVID-19 cases in Canada" appears in the "Preparations" section, though it has nothing to do with the topic of preparations. It should logically appear immediately above this section in the Background,etc. section. Is there any reason for this or is it just a layout error? Ross Fraser (talk) 23:41, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Infobox maps

We really need new maps. They’re very outdated at this point. I believe User:UmpireRay did them last. Any chance we could get some new ones bud? Thanks. CaffeinAddict (talk) 04:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@CaffeinAddict: Sorry I've been quite busy lately but I will try to have them up in a few hours. UmpireRay (talk) 04:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Minor grammar request

Can't edit the article, so for those that do: in a few places, we have the phrase, referring to measured rates and levels, such as number of cases at some date, "highest ever". As this is always something bound to be exceeded, and eclipsed by later text, it should read "highest yet". 2001:56A:F0E9:9B00:5D6D:2AA1:D60:755F (talk) 00:12, 13 December 2020 (UTC)JustSomeWikiReader

I found one instance of it, and it was actually on a linked page. If you find others, giving the precise section would be helpful. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Template Size Limit Notification

Resolved

 – PEIS brought back under limit; template transclusion has been removed; a link has been added instead. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 20:46, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm a little confused on the template size limit notification. What specifically needs to be rectified? CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

CaffeinAddict, I'm glad someone brought this up. The article has exceeded the WP:PEIS limit, which means that templates have started not transcluding from the bottom-up. If you take a look at the bottom you'll notice that the latest citations are not being properly rendered and the navboxes are not being transcluded.

The only solution is to reduce the current use of templates on this page. The culprits are generally graphs and charts like the ones in the "Statistics" section. Other pages, like COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and COVID-19 pandemic in Japan have moved the bulk of those to a separate page, such as Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan respectively. We should be able to keep one or two of the most important graphs on this page and direct readers to the appropriate page with {{Main}}. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 08:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I would suggest we keep the three templates: National Cases, National New Cases and Nation deaths and port the rest over into a new page. The maps are displayed already in the infobox of the article and the provincial and territorial data is well documented in individual province pages. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:39, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Side Comment On another note, I noticed LABcrabs added the States of Emergency table back in and I appreciate the information. Does this eat up the template size restrictions however? Just wondering the effects of this as it's quite a large table. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:43, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Analysis: Doing a quick analysis of each section revealed that the PEIS breakdown is, as of 10:33 on December 9, 2020:

• Lede: 34600/2097152 bytes (1.65%)
• Background and epidemiology: 249337/2097152 bytes (11.89%)
• Preparations: 994949/2097152 bytes (47.44%)
  • Medical cases chart: 979475/2097152 bytes (46.71%)
• Timeline of outbreak in Canada: 254/2097152 bytes (0.01%)
• Government response: 314997/2097152 bytes (15.02%)
  • States of emergency subsection: 135383/2097152 bytes (6.46%)
• Economic impact: 10995/2097152 bytes (0.05%)
• Pandemic by province or territory: 205480/2097152 bytes (9.80%)
• COVID-19 testing: 72749/2097152 bytes (3.47%)
• Statistics: 460771/2097152 bytes (21.97%)

@CaffeinAddict: Amazingly, the "Preparations" section is the one that is taking almost half of the allowed PEIS limit. {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases chart}} is. at this point, too detailed for this page with daily updates. We may need to convert the daily entries into (rolling) seven-day averages or remove the template and provide a {{see also}} to the page it is being transcluded from. The subsection that includes LABcrabs' re-added table isn't taking up too much space; the subsection the table is in is taking a little over 1/20 of the allotted limit. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 19:53, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Not that we have to follow everything the US does, but the article for COVID-19 pandemic in the United States in the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States#Progression_charts section, keeps their medical cases chart as the only template, while they have moved all of their other templates onto separate pages. I'm not precious about the chart but it is the one through-line the pandemic's timeline consists of. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:59, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

I just did a test edit of what would happen if the entire "Statistics" section was removed. The PEIS was at 2096808/2097152 bytes (99.98%) after the section's removal, so something else has to go. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 23:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Would it work to just move the COVID-19 cases in Canada table and Timeline of cases by province and territory table into Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada? Collapse both by default. That may solve the problem without creating any new topics. - Wikmoz (talk) 06:28, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

I have not checked, but suspect that would work here. Not sure how much additional pressure the move would place on that article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:38, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Tried it and it looks like it resolved the PEIS issue and Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada can handle the additional data. Placement in that topic could probably be improved though. Maybe removing the right float from the visible cases table or putting it into December 2019 and moving the other hidden table eslewhere. - Wikmoz (talk) 06:49, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu, can you confirm what percentage of the PEIS limit is now being used for this topic? - Wikmoz (talk) 07:04, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikmoz, with your removal the article is down to 1264620/2097152 bytes, or 60.3%. The template {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases}} appears to account for 208463/2097152 bytes, or 9.94%. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 08:35, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The article is back within PEIS limits. While it's unfortunate that {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases chart}} can't be kept on here, a {{further}} template leading to it has been added. Thanks for fixing it, Wikmoz! —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 20:46, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Wait did AMT5596 just put it back into the article? Are we deciding we should keep it out? CaffeinAddict (talk) 06:36, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah, I see what's going on: Wikmoz removed two templates—{{COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases}} and {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Canada medical cases chart}}. AMT5596 restored the latter, which by itself isn't enough to break PEIS limits. In other words, we'll still have access to the graphical data, but not the raw numbers behind it unless we access the link. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 08:18, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Best to split ....this way the second most important part of the article after prose - the references that allow further information to be seen functions .....and we wont lose any data/info if we split over deletion.--Moxy 🍁 23:59, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Update State of Emergency restrictions for Alberta & BC

Can't edit the article, but this table has two really serious errors. Since these errors are about health orders these should be fixed ASAP.

Both Alberta and BC should both be changed to "All gatherings" under the "Gatherings Banned" column.

For BC there is already a reference (200) https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-brings-in-sweeping-new-measures-to-control-covid-19-including-mandatory-masks-1.5808617

For Alberta: https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/new-covid-19-restrictions-alberta-to-close-most-businesses-make-masks-mandatory-leaked-document-1.5221814 --Davisrf (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davisrf (talk • contribs)

 Done I double checked with individual provincial sites here [3] and here [4]. CaffeinAddict (talk) 04:50, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Lockdowns versus SAHOs

I'm currently editing the "Stay-at-home ordered" (SAHO) column in the States of emergency table. In editing the column, I always assume that lockdowns and SAHOs are the same. Both Ontario and Québec ordered lockdowns and/or SAHOs of almost identical duration:

• Québec: December 25, 2020 to February 8, 2021
• Ontario: December 26, 2020 to February 11, 2021

However, an edit by Sixula claims that "Stay at home wasnt [sic] officially ordered until today", so the start date was changed to January 14, 2021. Is this fair, or should the lockdown date of December 26, 2020 be used instead? Sixula's edit also removed the footnote, which mentions when lockdowns begin in Toronto, Peel and more; I will restore the footnote. Please let me know which start date we should use for Ontario. --LABcrabs (talk) 17:59, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

On a completely biased note - Doug Ford doesn't know what the hell 'lockdown' or 'stay-at-home' actually means in other parts of the world, and the province is completely unable to enforce this. Now - back to being NPOV - I guess we weren't aware until this week we were in a lockdown, then a shutdown and now stay-at-home orders. I think logistically it's a semantics problem... we never quite knew what any of the terms meant, if you see discussion I started over at COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario#Consistency in phraseology of the new response framework and COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario#Lockdown language - I have a hard time trying to find the right 'encyclopedic' words to describe Ontario's approach to lockdowns/shutdowns/SAHO/State-of-emergencies. CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

@LABcrabs: first off, please ping before talking about my edits, thanks!

Now, I'm happy with the footnote right now stating there was a lockdown before, but there were no travel restrictions on Ontario until now, which meant that there was no stay-at-home order. If you guys want to add the stay-at-home order saying there was, that's fine, but I personally don't believe so. Also, CaffinAddict is right, the terminology is an absolute mess with this government. Thanks, Sixula^Talk 01:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Redundant?

I noticed Arrecife has added number of vaccines distributed to the COVID-19 by province and territory table template, further down in the article I have been updating a vaccine specific table and template - I'm wondering if we think this is redundant? Should we have this info separate? All in all its nice to have all the information together, and thank you Arrecife for continuing to update that template. CaffeinAddict (talk) 02:15, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

• My apologies, I have been so busy with the template, I haven't looked at the article in a long time. I think I will take down the extra column, it is a great fiddle to maintain in addition to all the other stuff. Thanx for doing "vaccines", and I can reinstate the column any time you think it a good idea. Arrecife (talk) 05:07, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan - and if anyone else has any other ideas feel free too chime in :) CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

New map

Pinging UmpireRay or anyone who has the wherewithal to update it. Would it be possible to get a new map for the infobox going? Thanks :) CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Suggested fork on vaccine

The users HueMan1 Arrecife CaffeinAddict Moxy UmpireRay AMT5596 LABcrabs Johnny Au—and so many others—who created and maintain this site have done an amazing and difficult job on a current topic! A number of news media articles have expressed gratitude and admiration for the work on Wikipedia articles related to COVID-19. 2020 press coverage.

I have been added a bit to the section on vaccines. I was considering forking some of this content into a new article COVID-19 vaccination programme in Canada based on similar articles in the Category:COVID-19 vaccination programmes, such as COVID-19 vaccination programme in the United Kingdom. More detailed content about new laboratory in Montreal could be developed. In the current article, the vaccination roll out risks becoming too detailed. Comments, suggestions, concerns? If tables are copied and pasted for example, it would be preferable if those who created them or spent lots of time building them, could do the copy and paste? Thanks Oceanflynn (talk) 20:54, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I’ve had that thought exactly - but was simply waiting for the section to start to bloat as I knew it would eventually. I am not opposed in the slightest but I guess the question is if/when it’s the right time. CaffeinAddict (talk) 22:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree with CaffeinAddict. Right now, the entire vaccine section is about 16k bytes, which would make the separate article a little small, even with the addition of an infobox and appropriate navigation templates, as well as a slightly larger reference section. It would be best to wait at least one month for the vaccination section to be developed further before revisitng the idea of creating a new article. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 00:48, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Sounds good. We will see in March. Thanks. Oceanflynn (talk) 02:24, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually, it seems to be almost big enough to warrant its own article. Question is: do we keep the template on this page and migrate the rest over as well or just have a full hatnote directing to the new page with all information. CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:55, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

@Oceanflynn: I agree with CaffeinAddict that the section is large enough to warrant its own article. What do you think? Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 00:20, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

@Johnny Au: @CaffeinAddict: What a huge amount of work has gone into this! Thank you for all your contributions. I think it is ready for its own article particularly with all the media coverage. I think one of the major contributors to this section, not myself could consider creating the fork? I can contribute in whatever way is helpful. Oceanflynn (talk) 00:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to fork the article, however keep the template on both pages for now as it is a useful statistic/metric to follow in comparison with the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada by province and territory template. If it bloats the PEIS limits for the full page we can certainly remove it I think. CaffeinAddict (talk) 02:18, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

One year since this page was created

If any of the regular editors of this page had any interest as I did check out the oldest revision of this page here: [5]. One year ago today this page was created and it's been a wild ride. Just thought I'd share. Cheers! CaffeinAddict (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Footnote list on states of emergencies

Is there a way to collapse a notelist? It's getting a little unwieldily. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Check this template: Template:Collapse Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 02:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks - I tried and got "Template:collapse is not available for use in articles (see MOS:COLLAPSE)." CaffeinAddict (talk) 03:50, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Canada Bubble law

Canada has responded to pandemic isolation by passing a law to permit two families to form one bubble. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-families-find-their-bubbles-as-lockdown-measures-ease/ https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/covid-bubble-family-easing-restrictions-1.5547039 Kemual (talk) 02:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

There was no such law, but it was a practice. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

These sources are also a year old. CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Template formatting in the Background and epidemiology

There's a number in the heading of the graph and at the end of it. I don't know much about transcluded templates other than that they exist, so does anyone know how to fix this? Clovermoss (talk) 00:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Arrecife as they have been working on this project (for many many months I might add!). CaffeinAddict (talk) 02:27, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanx! Arrecife (talk) 15:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Botched Cansino Deal

How is it possible that the botched Cansino deal is never even mentioned!?!?!?!?! https://ipolitics.ca/2021/03/12/a-waste-of-a-lot-of-time-researcher-in-cansino-deal-shares-new-details/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F2C0:93A7:4200:55E1:D59F:9988:DE1D (talk) 03:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Calling it "botched" is WP:POV. It was essentially a cancelled project https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/canada-china-covid-19-vaccine-trial-plug-pulled-1.5701101 How many other cancelled projects would you like us to discuss? Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

There is some background information in the history section of the COVID-19 vaccination in Canada article where it might be more appropriate - but it would hardly deserve more than a few lines. Over there we deferred to using notes to mention previous vaccine manufacturing issues throughout the years because it would be too lengthy to mention in the article of which the purpose is to talk about the current vaccination program. CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:32, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Vaccination field added to infobox?

A field in the pandemic infobox template was recently added for vaccinations (see COVID-19 pandemic in the Republic of Ireland for an example). @CaffeinAddict do you want to add this field, given that there's already a COVID-19 vaccination in Canada page that you regularly update? Nsophiay (talk) 03:01, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Fatality rate: Decimal point in wrong place?

The fatality rate in the info box at the right near the top of the page seems to have the decimal point in the wrong place. It was 1.85%, then 1.86% for many days, but a few days ago suddenly jumped to 18.52%, which is implausible. I'd appreciate it if someone would check the number and correct it, or at least leave that field blank until the right number can be found. Thanks! ☺Coppertwig (talk) 20:04, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Good catch! The fatality rate is calculated with (deaths/cases)*100 and there was one digit missing in the number of cases. It has now been fixed. Nsophiay (talk) 23:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I see! Thanks for fixing it! ☺Coppertwig (talk) 19:20, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

NL mask mandate

Newfoundland and Labrador's Chief Medical Officer of Health, Dr. Janice Fitzgerald, reinstated the mask mandate as of September 18, 2021, at 12:01am, citing concern of the Delta variant that has dominated other provinces in recent weeks. The mask mandate was lifted on August 10, 2021.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/covid19-newfoundland-labrador-september-17-masks-1.6179835

I updated the table. CaffeinAddict (talk) 02:42, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2021

Please edit out the line stating that the surge in cases is a " pandemic of the unvaccinated " is the reason behind the v pass 208.101.102.113 (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:35, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

It is the reason for the vaccine passport. This is a common phrase, and is objectively true backed up by sources. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:43, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Infobox stats

NoWikiNoLife I noticed you reverted changes by Tol which had added automatic updates to the infobox numbers. On one hand, the figures are off slightly, but on the other hand I was grateful that the stats didn't have to be adjusted daily. I invite everyone to discuss. CaffeinAddict (talk) 16:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I have been updating this for months. I have no problem it the data is sourced from automated links but only if the data contained in those links is correct. All data, for almost a year now, has been collected from the only page in Canada which seems to have correct and up-to-date data every single day, and that is the CTV News one. None of the government webpages comes even close in accuracy, nor in being serious about daily updates. As for vaccination numbers, they should be taken from the government webpage here. I think it is important to stick to sources which have been reliable for quite a while and not switch to other sources unless there is a very good reason for it.

For instance, as of right now these are the differences (I am listing the automatically listed/linked numbers first - marked as ‘Auto’ - and the correct numbers second - marked as ‘Corr’) and they are quite substantial:

Confirmed cases --- Auto: 1,668,009 --- Corr: 1,667,564

Active cases --- Auto: 42,388 --- Corr: 37,427

Recovered --- Auto: 1,572,982 --- Corr: 1,601,848

Deaths --- Auto: 28,264 --- Corr: 28,289

Fatality rate --- Auto: 1.69% --- Corr: 1.70%

Total vaccinated --- Auto: 29,363,912 (77.14%) --- Corr: 29,091,447 (76.06%)

Fully vaccinated --- Auto: 27,431,198 (72.06%) --- Corr: 27,187,246 (71.09%)

I can make sure that this infobox is updated every 24 to 48 hours (as I have updated it in the past), unless when it's weekend or a stat holiday (in such cases, the next update is always made on Monday or Tuesday) and that the numbers are always correct. Please let me know if it's okay to revert back to that system. That way the info on this page will continue to correspond to data found on the more detailed page Timeline. Thanks. :) NoWikiNoLife (talk) 09:00, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Tol did you have a comment on this? CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:15, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@CaffeinAddict: I would prefer the automatic system (and I would prefer government sources over CTV News), but I don't mind it as long as it's properly referenced. Currently, only active cases appear to be referenced. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:55, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@Tol I agree it should be government sources. I'm personally fine with automating whatever you see fit. CaffeinAddict (talk) 00:55, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

What happened to the references?

Why does the majority of references just say "The time allocated for running scripts has expired."? How does one fix this? - RandomEditorAAA (talk) 18:31, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@RandomEditorAAA: Chances are the article's PEIS limits have been surpassed, and templates will need to be shunted elsewhere. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:04, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@User:Tenryuu, huh ok, this doesn't seem good. But I am not great with technical stuff, especially with an article of this size and importance (my computer takes a minute to load this article when I am checking between revisions). Hopefully someone will fix this soon, Thanks anyways - RandomEditorAAA (talk) 22:52, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

@RandomEditorAAA: This has happened a few times already with COVID-19 related articles. It's mostly a question of what we're going to move off the page. I'm going to ping some of the more recent regular editors on this page so we can discuss that: CaffeinAddict, GoingBatty, Tol, LABcrabs, and NoWikiNoLife. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

This page continuously gets bloated because this pandemic has gone on... forever. I'm gonna sweep the article and make some suggestions. CaffeinAddict (talk) 00:57, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to suggest the following sections be split off into their own articles: - States of emergency - Testing and - Statistics. Looking at COVID-19 pandemic in the United States as an example this is what's been done. The main page is actually quite succinct. CaffeinAddict (talk) 01:00, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Without doing an in-depth PEIS analysis, §Statistics tends to be one of the chief offenders on these pages. We're usually able to get away with leaving one or two on here, though. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:28, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: I'm really not a regular editor here, but it looks like the problem has been resolved for now. While the article is near the PEIS limit, the error encountered was the Lua time usage limit instead. It appears that much of it comes from find-and-replace commands, but I'm not sure which template(s) are causing it. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 02:59, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Alright, I've looked into this — it looks like the primary offender is Template:Excerpt, used primarily in § Pandemic by province or territory. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 03:02, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

thanks Tol - each province and territory has their own robust wiki page - I think we could pare the excerpts down. CaffeinAddict (talk) 04:01, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the problem and resolving it (for now), both of you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:16, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: As I was editing the references in this article, sometimes I'd get the "time allocated" error but most of the time I would not. Hope it's been resolved. GoingBatty (talk) 04:36, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Seems like in the reference sections that it is fine, however in the external links it is still there. I will probably soon start trying to shorten down the article. Thanks - RandomEditorAAA (talk) 16:17, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Gathering sizes in NB

Hi, should the gathering sizes for NB be updated in the graph to reflect their current restrictions? NB is in level 2 of their winter plan which prohibits gatherings over 10, but also allows indoor and outdoor informal gatherings for their household contacts, plus their steady 10. Thoughts?

https://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Corporate/Promo/COVID19/alertlvls/docs/Alert-Level-Guidance.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueJay456 (talk • contribs) 12:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi BlueJay456, the chart should reflect the latest restrictions. Feel free to update it yourself whenever you notice that something is out-of-date. Nsophiay (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 14 January 2021 and 24 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: OTUAustinOligario.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Portals not running

Anyone know why the portal scripts are not running at the bottom of the page? CaffeinAddict (talk) 05:13, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Vaccinations in Infobox

Could someone explain the vaccination numbers in the info box for me? It says "One dose: 2,224,108 (5.82%) and Two doses: 18,943,413 (49.53%)". I don't think those numbers are correct? Thank you! BlueJay456 (talk) 15:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)BlueJay456BlueJay456 (talk) 15:53, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Looks like it was recently changed - the percentages are breakdowns of the larger 83% vaccinated. CaffeinAddict (talk) 15:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it was annoying me for the longest time so I changed it back myself, lol!! BlueJay456 (talk) 11:16, 3 February 2022 (UTC)BlueJay456BlueJay456 (talk) 11:16, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

@BlueJay456: The vaccination numbers in the infobox showed vaccination status in Canada, which are mutually exclusive categories. So 2 million had only gotten one dose, 14.8 million had only gotten two doses, and 15 million had gotten three doses. Together they add up to the 32 million total of people who have had at least one dose. I'm fine with keeping your changes, but we just need to describe them so it's clear what the figures are representing. In your case, it would be doses administered. Also, we should add percentages. --Nsophiay (talk) 19:34, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

@Nsophiay: Hi there, I personally think the way it is currently will confused people who aren't familiar with the way the numbers are broken down like that (myself included). People will see that and may think we have a low vaccination rate. The way it was broken down before with the number of people who are partially vaccinated, fully vaccinated, and boosted was more clear, IMO. - BlueJay456 — Preceding undated comment added 12:25, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 January 2023

Add source (https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736%2820%2930370-6/fulltext) to "The virus was confirmed to have reached Canada on January 25, 2020, after an individual who had returned to Toronto from Wuhan, Hubei, China, tested positive." Theybothdieintheend (talk) 14:44, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I don't think this is necessary because WP:LEAD doesn't require citations in the lead if the relevant citations are included elsewhere on the page. I noticed that there is already a higher-quality citation for the arrival date in the infobox, which includes the information about the origin and destination of the individual. TimSmit (talk) 21:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

References