Talk:COVID-19 vaccination mandates in the United States

"List of companies requiring vaccines" section
I don't think the section is necessary or practical. There will likely be thousands of companies that require vaccinations for some situations. As it is, the NFL explicitly isn't requiring players to be vaccinated (despite appearing on the list), and the inclusion of restaurant Eleven Madison Park in the Yahoo listicle on the topic seems promotional. I see no way to salvage the list and agree it should be removed in its current form. User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 03:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * My support is probably obvious from my previous removal, but agree that it ought to be omitted for these reasons and others. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 03:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support, Wikipedia is not an WP:INDISCRIMINATE collection of information. Such a list will be long and unwieldy. —Locke Cole • t • c 06:33, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * OpposeVery few large well-known companies have implemented such policies. The list is properly sourced. Although the NFL has not put in place a policy for players, it has for other staff (as per the cited article). How is the inclusion of Eleven Madison Park promotional?--Rusf10 (talk) 15:01, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you going to include 1000 other restaurants? Or just the one with a knack for PR stunts? User:力 (power~enwiki,  π,  ν ) 19:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * No, because they are not well-known. That is a well known restaurant that has won multiple awards (which is why we have an article about it).--Rusf10 (talk) 02:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment when specific large companies have mandates which are discussed substantially in sources (for example, Walmart or the US military), those should be discussed in the article; it is specifically the list format I object to. User:力 (power~enwiki, π,  ν ) 19:02, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * So large companies like Delta Airlines, Morgan Stanley, and Saks? This is far from being a list of every small business in America.--Rusf10 (talk) 02:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Also, it does not seem newsworthy that a company would mandate vaccination given the pandemic. An article of companies who do not mandate vaccinations or have publicly come out against them would not be worthy of an article either. AaronY (talk) 14:06, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Merge proposal
is not a large article by any stretch of the imagination, and much of what this article will likely discuss would make sense as a section there, especially if the list is not kept (for reasons stated in the prior section). —Locke Cole • t • c 06:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support merge and redirect, since this seems to be a premature split. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose as a premature merge. The controversies around vaccine mandates seem different enough to me that a separate article may be useful.  If it isn't useful, we can merge them in a few weeks. User:力 (power~enwiki,  π,  ν ) 19:05, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Support The kind of exhaustive list this article would create is not the purpose of this encyclopedia. AaronY (talk) 14:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I decided to be bold and do it myself. There were a number of recent developments that were not yet acknowledged (including the recent mandates announced by multiple cities, and private businesses being prohibited from requiring vaccines in several states). ViperSnake151   Talk  23:19, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Split out again
Although I was unware of the previous merge discussion, I have recently proposed on the main article talk page to split this out again due to the substantial growth of content on the topic, and hearing no opposition, have split out the article. BD2412 T 06:08, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Wording of claim
I strongly feel that the following needs to be re-worded, but I'm aware that the whole topic is contentious so I don't want to be bold in this case: '' "Some politicians and conspiracy theorists, such as Marjorie Taylor Greene, have incorrectly claimed that under the Privacy Rule of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA, also sometimes incorrectly referred to as HIPPA), individuals have the right not to disclose their vaccination status to others."  Proposal: change "individuals have the right not to disclose their vaccination status to others." to "individuals may not be asked to provide their vaccination status"'' Reasoning: The actual incorrect claim here is that non-covered entities are not allowed to ask about vaccination status. Anyone is allowed to ask, but the individual is free to choose not to answer. As-written, this sentence is saying is that individuals MUST disclose their vaccination status to anyone who asks, which is simply not the case. Nobody is under any legal obligation to disclose their status to anybody else; but equally, if they do not disclose the information, the requesting entity maintains a right not to continue with the transaction of services. 97.102.30.205 (talk) 22:26, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅, this does appear to be more correct. BD2412  T 23:18, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Shorten lede
Can the lede for this article be shortened (and some of the content moved to a new section)? It is very difficult to read the wall of text here. I see that there is a comment that the lede for this article is transcluded somewhere else, so is that a reason why the lede is the way that it is? Natg 19 (talk) 18:02, 13 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Solved. Love of Corey (talk) 23:48, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

When will the OSHA vaccine mandates be lifted so that people can go back to work?
If the OSHA mandates are forced on to people how long will it take for those mandates to be lifted so that people who do not get the vaccine can go back to work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.44.227.111 (talk) 04:58, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose merging Biden Administration COVID-19 action plan into COVID-19 vaccination mandates in the United States. I think the content in the former can easily be explained in the context of the latter, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in latter. Specifically, this article is supposed to be on Biden's 6-point plan but only mentions his vaccine mandates, which are already extensively covered in the covid-19 vaccine mandates page and thus make this page redundant. ~ Phillip Samuel (talk) 23:33, 28 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose Wouldn't it be more informative to expand this article to include the other points of the 6-point plan? BD2412   23:35, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * BD2412 The only information that does not relate to vaccine mandates is the last line of the lead and 2 sentences on the OSHA healthcare ETS. All the other vax mandate information is already expanded and would be more appropriate with content on this page. Phillip Samuel (talk) 23:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Aren't there aspects of the Biden Administration plan other than mandates? BD2412  T 00:38, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have begun adding content about the non-mandate portions of the plan, specifically regarding speeding the availability of boosters and providing resources to assist those sick with the disease. BD2412  T 05:24, 29 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose Article is dominated by vaccine mandate info, but that is not the only content in the article. Kstern (talk) 19:31, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Oppose No, why should it? This would have happened (or attempts would have been made) if Biden was not elected. Just because it's a part of the action plan doesn't mean the article should shrink down and the netizens of the web be left in the dark of some of the more hidden and tucked away parts of this idea. Mebigrouxboy (talk) 21:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Closing, given the consensus not to merge. Klbrain (talk) 14:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

COVID-19 vaccination mandates
Should we create COVID-19 vaccination mandates? See Talk:Freedom_Convoy_2022. SystemEff (talk) 02:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Given the aggressive mandates to this effect outside the United States, this would seem to be necessary. BD2412  T 03:45, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

proposed inclusion under Legal Challenges
Perhaps at the very end of that section, could a sentence be added to include this recent development: https://www.newsweek.com/major-defeat-vaccine-mandates-nypd-ordered-reinstate-fired-cops-1745987

Thank you very kindly, 2600:4040:780C:6F00:DDC:974F:58F:D61C (talk) 10:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't think this rises to the level of including here. Firstly, the "New York Supreme Court" is the name of the trial level court, not the actual supreme court of the state, which is the New York Court of Appeals. Secondly, the decision is not premised on the permissibility of mandates generally (the court acknowledges that they are permissible), but on whether they were properly put in place for a specific worker's union with a specific contractual agreement. BD2412  T 19:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Covid vaccine mandates currently active
Many newspapers (CNN, NBC News) say that the Pentagon has lifted covid vaccine mandates for the army. Shouldn't we update this Wikipedia page? I didn't edit anything because I'm not so expert and I don't wanna break any rule MyLifeIsDragonBall (talk) 11:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2023
Hi everyone. As far as I know, there is no covid vaccine mandate for military. Or at least, this is what I've read on many newspapers. But according to the page, the mandate is still active. Shouldn' we update that? MyLifeIsDragonBall (talk) 22:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅, thanks for noting that. BD2412  T 01:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2023
Hi everyone! It seems they lifted all covid vaccine mandates, even for air travelers and Health Care Workers. We should update this page MyLifeIsDragonBall (talk) 20:53, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Updated, thanks. BD2412  T 01:26, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ by BD2412. Callme mirela &#127809; 03:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Legal challenge: "On January 13, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned the"
As I read the immediately following source, the Supreme Court stopped the mandate, rather than the injunction which was delaying the mandate. The page reads "... the Supreme Court overturned the injunction." I think that this is inconsistent with the source. If people are satisifed that it is also untrue, could it be changed, please? ( The page is semi-protected against me. ) Dent006.5 (talk) 01:28, 16 December 2023 (UTC)