Talk:NHS COVID-19

Article incorrectly states that Palantir worked on the app
Palantir has not worked on the app discussed on this page; the current text is incorrect.

The current citation is not clear on the subject, saying only: "Meanwhile, questions remain about the involvement of the shadowy Cambridge Analytica-linked analytics firm Palantir in the NHSX app."

Meanwhile the body responsible for the development of the app has explicitly denied Palantir's involvement: "#Palantir are not involved in building the app."

This has been confirmed by the media. Sky News Technology Correspondent Rowland Manthorpe: "Why do I keep on seeing that Palantir and Faculty are involved in the NHS contact tracing app? They are not, but it seems to have got around, and now it's popping up in all sorts of random places"

English Wiki Account (talk) 10:14, 1 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Twitter is not a reliable source. There seems to be multiple sources, including (from 4 days ago),  that say they are working on the app. The Tech Crunch one even says that their contract has been publicly revealed. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:21, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


 * could i just point out that the tweet was from the official nhsx twitter account it even has a blue tick in it. many thanks Trains2050 (talk) 14:33, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Agreed, but that is directly contradicted by secondary sources, and the contract has even been released here (it was linked from TechCrunch article). Joseph2302 (talk) 14:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


 * oh, ok understood. Trains2050 (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


 * There are two separate projects: the NHS COVID-19 Data Store and the NHS COVID-19 App . These are different projects. Palantir has been contracted for the Data Store, as the contract you linked shows. It has not been contracted or involved in the app, and neither of your sources state that it has: the first doesn't mention the app at all, and the second one asks questions about whether data from the app will be integrated into the data store. Again, this Wiki page is specifically about the app, which Palantir has not been involved in the development of. English Wiki Account (talk) 15:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Re-requesting edit based on above clarifications (please see my last comment which has been left unaddressed). Please remove the mention of Palantir from this article as Palantir has not worked on the app.

The page still says that Palantir has worked on the app despite no authoritative source clearly stating that this is the case. The citation in the article is certainly insufficient to justify the inclusion of the sentence. Again, Palantir has not worked on the app, but on the Covid 19 Data Store, which is an entirely separate project, and is not an app.

It is not possible to demonstrate that Palantir has not worked on the app by linking to authoritative sources, just as it's not possible to demonstrate that Tesco did not work on the app: there are no articles with lists of companies that didn't work on the app (of which there are a near infinite number), there are only lists of companies that did (of which Palantir is not one). The next best thing, which is the official body denying the involvement, as well as senior media figures in the UK, will have to suffice.

Again, Palantir did not work on the app. At the very least, if you're going to leave the erroneous sentence up, please find an authoritative article that explicitly states 'the app was developed by Palantir'. The current citation is inadequate as well as being incorrect (as described in my previous comments). English Wiki Account (talk) 10:37, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Updated as follows: 1) moved Faculty/Palantir to new subsection 2) removed statement that they worked on the app 3) attempted to describe their involvement, using the TechCrunch source found by and the existing Byline Times source. --Wire723 (talk) 13:32, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Source number 8 is a 404
I apologise if this is the wrong use of the talk page, I'm a new user. The source for the "Implementation" sub heading directs to a 404. It is supposed to direct to the architecture guidebook on the github. I think this is the correct link: https://github.com/nhsx/covid19-app-system-public/blob/master/doc/architecture/guidebook.md Cetchup cat (talk) 22:51, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I mended it. Looks like the file was moved yesterday. Wire723 (talk) 10:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

App blocked by stores
"An update to the app in April 2021, timed to coincide with easing of restrictions on hospitality businesses, was blocked by Apple and Google. It was intended that users who tested positive would be asked to share their history of visited venues, to assist in warning others, but this would have contravened assurances by Apple and Google that location data from devices would not be shared."

Has this been resolved?

Relevance of the current 'pingdemic' image and the verifiability of its caption
The WP:IMGCONTENT section of Wiki's "Image use policy" is clear that the "purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article."

Are we in agreement that this addition of a photo of an empty fridge in a Morrisons supermarket in Wetherby increases readers' understanding by directly depicting the sharp increase in the number of people being notified by the NHS app due to the relaxing of social distancing rules and the increase in close contacts?

My opinion is that it doesn't so it should be removed per WP:BRD (I tried to) - there is nothing about supermarket shelves in this article section. In addition, the reference supplied with the image caption does not support the caption's assertion that "The 'pingdemic' caused much of the workforce into self-isolation causing among other things stock shortages in supermarkets". -- DeFacto (talk). 06:57, 23 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Adding the image was a reasonable thing to do, but I do see why it was challenged. It shows one of the results of supply chains breaking down, namely empty shelves. I suppose the issues are whether we can attribute this particular empty chilled cabinet to people having to self-isolate and whether it matters (ie: would a generic empty shelf to illustrate the issues be acceptable)? Starting with the latter, I think it does matter; Wikipedia has a responsibility to be presenting reliable information and a generic image may lack appropriate context.
 * As to whether we can say the image is the result of people self-isolating, that's a bit trickier. It has been reported that Morrison's are experiencing issues, but that the branches in the area relevant to the photograph haven't made statements about how they're doing as of 22 July. I have seen signs at shops in London explaining why they have shortages, perhaps there was one here but not in the photograph? Basically, is there context which the photographer has but we don't - that could be a sign we can't see, a comment from staff, or something else. Conceivably it could be empty because it was broken or perhaps the lorry carrying the stock broke down. The balance of probability is in favour of it being due to people self-isolating, so I think it's an editorial call on whether to include the image. Richard Nevell (talk) 17:50, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , do you think the picture currently increases readers' understanding of the article's subject matter by directly depicting something described in the article? Perhaps we've put the cart before the horse here and now need to backfill the article to match what we see in the picture and how what's in the image is interpreted by the caption. OTOH, we could look for an image that matches the prose, and add a caption to it which reflects prose - or is that a bit too radical an idea? -- DeFacto (talk). 21:31, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You'll have to forgive me, I was following the framing of the initial reverts of the image which specifically mentioned sourcing as the issue. If the matter is in fact whether such an image belongs in the article at all, that's a slightly different matter, and the edit summary may have been misleading. Perhaps the image highlights a deficiency in the text. What is your take on the matter? Richard Nevell (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with Richard Nevell. For starters I've fixed the misleading caption "much of the workforce" is vague at best and inaccurate/misleading at worst. The source (which I fixed up) details "20%" in one sector. There's also a lack of context, balance and weight - the context being an exponential rise in UK Delta variant pandemic infections with a 1:3 ping rate of contact tracing (can't remember if the app or the Test and Trace), so an exponential rise in pings is a working system. As for the term itself, if there were exponential increases in house fires, would we call it an "sirendemic"? That literal blaming the messenger aside, the app is only advisory (like a smoke detector) unlike the compulsory Test and trace, which is the crucial fact missing from the article - this is not clearly stated in app's primary source FAQ, but obvious from the wording of it https://faq.covid19.nhs.uk/article/KA-01146/en-us, but it is clear in this primary source isolation recommendations from the NHS COVID-19 app (in contrast to those from the Test and Trace Service) are not currently legally enforceable. https://www.yorksandhumberdeanery.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/nhs_phone_app_template_letter_v4.pdf . If the supermarket staff are isolating because of the app (rather than Test and Trace), they are doing that voluntarily. Widefox ; talk 14:08, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , my 'take' is that as the image showing only empty shelves does not add anything to the readers' understanding of the NHS COVD-19 app (the subject of this article), and as it is given massively undue weight in the article as a whole, that, even with the recent mods to make the caption more verifiable, it should be removed. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * The picture is reasonable but lacks some context. I saw a closed bank yesterday with a sign on the door saying that they were closed due current staff shortages caused by the pandemic.  A picture of such a sign might help confirm the cause.  But what I'm dead set against is the word "portmanteau" – a pretentious plague which has long afflicted Wikipedia. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Another reason the sources mention for shortages is that panic buying is emptying shelves, caused by the reaction of the public to the mischief-making media hyping up the effect the increase in app pings will have on stock levels. -- DeFacto (talk). 16:55, 24 July 2021 (UTC)