Template talk:COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories

Discussion related to this template
Please see a discussion regarding this template and several related templates at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19. Thank you, --Animalparty! (talk) 22:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion?
where is the consensus that you mentioned in your move edit summary? -- DeFacto (talk). 11:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Discussion here and consensus established and discussion closed here. —Formulaonewiki 11:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks, but with no notification of that discussion on this template's talkpage, those who watch this page but not that project page didn't know about it - so it' cannot be considered binding here. And what about the UK/British Islands bit? -- DeFacto (talk). 11:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Apologies if I've jumped the gun a little, I've seen most of the articles in the WikiProject being changed from "2020 coronavirus pandemic" to "COVID-19 pandemic" over the course of this morning and so took that as a good indicator that this was a decision being universally adopted. Re UK to British Islands and BOTs bit, I took the view of WP:BOLD and made a change to what I believe was a clearly wrong and strange title for a template which covers far more than just the UK. —Formulaonewiki 12:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * okay for the first part, but I'm not sure about that new second part. Northern Ireland, for instance, isn't on a "British Island", the island it is on is mostly occupied by another sovereign state. And none of the Crown Dependencies included are on "British Islands". I think that as most of the content is specifically about the United Kingdon, that at least, should be in the title. -- DeFacto (talk). 12:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I've used the terminology described at Terminology of the British Isles; "British Islands" is a legal distinction which includes the United Kingdom (with NI and not ROI) and the Crown Dependencies. "British Islands and BOTs" is simply the most accurate way of succinctly describing what is included in this template. While I will happily concede there is some contention in the use of various terminology to describe the various countries and territories under the Crown, I believe the definitions outlined in the aforementioned page are fairly robust. I think it's also a bit of a stretch to say that "most of the content is specifically about the United Kingdom". I would also wish to point out that the primary articles about the CDs and BOTs highlight how the outbreak has spread differently and that their respective responses are coordinated mostly (and in some cases entirely) independent of the UK, so it would be misleading to include them under a template titled outbreak in the UK (which links to the main UK article). —Formulaonewiki 12:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * NB, also see: British Islands. —Formulaonewiki 12:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * If any possible confusion brought about by "British Islands" is of serious concern, then perhaps "...pandemic in the United Kingdom, Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories" might be better (as used in this article)? —Formulaonewiki 12:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * to me, "British Islands" used in this context sounds contrived and inaccurate wrt the Island of Ireland. I'd go with "United Kingdom, Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories". -- DeFacto (talk). 06:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That's fair enough. I guess in my own experience (living in a CD and therefore requiring the use of the various terminology) its a more familiar phrase and so I haven't quite the same appreciation for how it might read differently. "UK, CDs and BOTs" sounds good to me, it's techically perfectly correct and unambiguous. —Formulaonewiki 09:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 8 May 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, Crown Dependencies and British Overseas Territories → Template:COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom – Too long as a template name, and could easily be used as the proposed name. The other items could easily be split off into their own pages or a subsection. Starzoner (talk) 18:21, 8 May 2020 (UTC) —Relisted. – Ammarpad (talk) 10:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:PRECISION. The proposed title is incorrect as the template includes places which are not "in the United Kingdom". -- DeFacto (talk). 10:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose: The suggestion is flawed in that it is (1) incorrect as it implies Crown Dependencies are part of the UK and (2) misleading in that it (in my view) suggests some sort of unity in the response—which ignores the independent responses from each overseas jurisdiction and especially the Crown Dependencies (separate governance, legislation, healthcare system etc.)—over all the territories by the UK government by visualising them as sub-sections of the United Kingdom. I have previously proposed '...in the British Islands and British Overseas Territories' (British Islands being the accepted terminology for the UK + Crown Dependencies as detailed here), which, while more succinct, may pose some confusion as British Islands is less commonly used phrase and may not be clear to the average reader. —Formulaonewiki 11:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and simplicity's sake. — hueman1 ( talk •  contributions ) 09:05, 22 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Key people section
The list of key people was added in good faith on 7 October, but makes me uneasy as there are no clear criteria for inclusion. The list is growing and will eventually be long, as names will be added and presumably never removed. I propose to remove it. Wire723 (talk) 13:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , I added the list on 7 October including only a few significant people. I thought that the likes of Matt Hancock, Nicola Sturgeon and Chris Whitty were central enough to the UK's response to the pandemic to be included, but the list has expanded with some lesser known names - Yvonne Doyle, Ruth May - which I think are more questionable. Andysmith248 (talk) 18:57, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comment. I'll remove Doyle and May since there is little or nothing about the pandemic in their articles.
 * I didn't go ahead with complete removal as there is no support here. Instead I'll trim the national leaders, who are automatically part of a crisis, as well as the chancellor - if he's in we should have other ministers and opposition leaders. Wire723 (talk) 11:29, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying. I don't think it makes sense to have Vaughan Gething and Robin Swann but no Matt Hancock. Boris Johnson is arguably the most central person to the pandemic in the UK, and that's irrespective of whether he'd be expected to be because of his position. The leaders of the devolved governments are more central to the pandemic than some of their subordinates that have remained in the list. I think they should also stay.
 * The Chancellor trumps most of his cabinet colleagues because of the reception his financial packages have recieved. I'd rather delete the entire list than keep it as it is, missing some of the most significant figures. Andysmith248 (talk) 18:26, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Legal response section
This is getting quite long now. Would it be worth grouping/ summarising some of these as "Lockdown Regulations"? Crookesmoor (talk) 16:45, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * there is now a page for COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom. There's certainly scope to merge information into it if needed. Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree the legislation part of the template is excessively long. This could even be another template.Arcahaeoindris (talk) 09:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

"In popular culture"
Is this really an appropriate section for an event of such historical importance, which will surely have references in popular culture for decades to come? 'The Only Way Is Essex' especially stands out, since from the article I don't see the relevance other than the fact the show was delayed due to the pandemic. Dozens of shows would have been. Osa rio  (talk)  22:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I've been bold and removed this section but I'd welcome input from other editors of course. Osa rio   (talk)  16:55, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Expired/moot
I've moved The Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (All Tiers and Self-Isolation) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 to the Expired section and changed it to "expired or moot"; the regulations themselves don't expire but all the amendments they made are moot as the regulations they amended have expired or been revoked. Stifle (talk) 10:02, 18 March 2022 (UTC)