Talk:Economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic/Archive 1

Title similar to Economic impact of HIV/AIDS?
Economic impact of COVID-19 would be more succint, and would neatly parallel the long-standing article Economic impact of HIV/AIDS.--Pharos (talk) 19:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Mention of George Floyd protests
This is currently the last sentence of the first paragraph of the lede and the fourth sentence of the page overall:


 * Indirectly, it caused the largest and worst civil unrest in the United States history since King assassination riots in 1968, which worsening economic impact caused by pandemic since it contains extensive property damage.

I have multiple issues with this:
 * "Indirectly, it [the pandemic] caused..." The citation gives no indication that the pandemic caused the protests, indirectly or "in turn" as the sentence used to say - heck, the cited article doesn't even mention the coronavirus or lockdowns at all. The Wikipedia articles COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and Economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States barely mention the protests, and they don't have a source for this statement either.
 * Even if an editor manages to refine this statement and source it, is its current prominence really reflective of its importance? Again, the article Economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States doesn't mention the protests at all - if they're not considered sufficiently relevant in the article about the country where they're happening, should they really be in the lead paragraph of the article about the entire world?

I've removed the statement already, but someone else has added it back, so I don't want to get into an edit war about this. But I think it should either be removed, or properly sourced and moved down to the appropriate country section. --IslandHopper 973 14:38, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Problem with a section?
The Economic_impact_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic section describes the impact on medicine as "interesting" (subjective) and seems to be poorly written. May someone take a look to revise this? -174.141.135.242 (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 May 2020 and 3 July 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yuxin L-.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 October 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tzc0725.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU22 - Sect 202 - Tue
— Assignment last updated by ParamfD (talk) 20:23, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 201 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by Jaynean (talk) 22:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

Requesting an edit
I think it would be relevant to add in the “Science and Technology” section, the following conclusions from a reliable source (scholarly paper writen together by 10 authors). What do you think? I have a COI with de Rassenfosse. (See my userpage for more info).

Scholars have concluded that the immediate lessons in terms of science and innovation policy are rather harsh. Time lost in the field of science and technology cannot be recovered. Moreover, allocating substantial resources belatedly towards specific scientific objectives, cannot make up for the insufficient private investments and misguided public policies that have characterized recent vaccine R&D efforts. AM13prime (talk) 09:07, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Reply 16-JUL-2023
Regards, Spintendo  12:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Per WP:NPOV, WP:NOR.