Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive of past discussions about 2009 swine flu pandemic in the United States. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The article says declaring a public health emergency is SOP and was done for the presidential inaguration and "flooding?" Why is an inaguration a health emergency? --Lucent (talk) 17:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
The deaths column should be separated into two, confirmed and suspected. 76.66.196.218 (talk) 22:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
The source provided states 100+, not 200+. On the main swineflu page it also talks about 100+, not 200+ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.227.224 (talk) 23:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
A consensus has emerged after discussion at the parent page of this article, 2009 swine flu outbreak, that areas should be sorted by severity of outbreak, NOT alphabetically. Please discuss format changes before applying them. Wine Guy Talk 17:41, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
What is the criteria for yellow/suspected cases? I remember from the comments that the reason Minnesota was left off the TABLE was that State Health Officials hadn't confirmed the existence of a possible case. We added it to the map but not the table(this was also when US states were mentioned on the Main Article). Now we have evidence that South Dakota and South Carolina State Health Officials are 'looking into' possible cases there. Does this meet map or table criteria for possible cases?
--PigFlu Oink (talk) 18:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
SOMEONE ADD IDAHO TO THE POSSIBLE CASES!!! http://www.idahopress.com/news/?id=22785 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.167.150.217 (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
I usually use Firefox or Chrome, but I wanted to try out the WebSlice feature (that I noticed this article among others is using) so I went to this page in IE8 and I noticed that the text doesn't wrap around the table and instead it only starts at the bottom of the table, leaving a massive void to the left. Is this just a (huge) bug that didn't get fixed for IE8, or is there any way to work around it? I have no idea if it affects other versions of IE, but it really sucks at least for anyone viewing this article in IE8. -Paul1337 (talk) 00:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
there is a link, do we remove SD from the table, I really have no idea how we are doing this. -Marcusmax(speak) 01:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
No one has even died. In the 1918 swine flu outbreak in the United States (there is no article for this), 600,000 people died in the United States. I really don't understand this. Wallie (talk) 13:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I put this over on the Main Article Talk page as well
SF Chron quotes the LA Times ""Coroner's Capt. John Kades (KAY-dis) says tests are being run on two bodies to see if swine flu was a factor in their deaths, but there is no confirmation that the disease killed them. Kades offered no other details of the men.""--PigFlu Oink (talk) 18:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Here is something to work into the article.
This source states that Mexico tested samples from hospitals but the US tested samples from routine surveillance, and suggests this difference explains the presence of confirmed deaths in Mexico but not in the US. That suggestion is wrong. The US also has ongoing, active surveillance in hospitals in 10 states, including New Mexico (bordering Mexico). If the virus had been present, it would have been found. The same goes for the US national surveillance, which prefers to test in cases of severe influenza-like illness; none of those have turned up this virus. --Una Smith (talk) 18:30, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
The case in Florida was not confirmed, and the source article even says so, yet both the map and the table says a case was confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.243.241.75 (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Already fixed the text and article reference. Someone else fix the graph? Flipper9 (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Per the Fox Orlando story (at the bottom), I believe we should treat the cases as what follows:
I would say that Suspected Case and Unconfirmed are the same thing, and should correspond to someone having a sample being tested by the state/CDC. Reporting "suspected cases" as you outline above would include anyone with symptoms. I would only call a suspected case if the patient's history makes it likely they contracted swine flu, they have preliminarily been confirmed to have Type A Influenza, and a sample has been collected and sent for analysis. Reporting anything less than that would not be useful. Flipper9 (talk) 19:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Please update New York to "many hundreds" of suspected cases. The ref format is too hard for me: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jjHS8S3jIndU2oI6WHB_KqB-pvwAD97RKIF00
NY Times on this rootology (C)(T) 19:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Only 6 cases in texas has been confirmed not 8 as the article says.--Vrysxy ¡Californication! 18:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I referenced the link, but I'm not sure if I did it right. http://www1.whdh.com/news/articles/local/BO111734/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.8.76 (talk) 21:27, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
There has been many confirmed cases. Where I live in South Carolina there are two confirmed cases and a school in Newberry, South Carolina has been closed because of the outbreak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.71.183.113 (talk) 22:03, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
It seems that the North American map is outdated and four cases from Arizona were as 'posible', it should be in orange now reference.--Vrysxy ¡Californication! 03:54, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The CDC source is already more than 15 hours old. How can this be a legitimate source anymore? Table should be reverted to how it was previously, as the CDC hasn't updated yet. 69.231.128.137 (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Is it really necessary to have 'Confirmed deaths' and 'Attributed deaths' columns when no deaths in the United States have even been attributed to swine flu? -Paul1337 (talk) 22:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
It's only a matter of time. TheCoolOne99 (talk) 02:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
{{Mergeto}}
There is alredy an article about this new infuenza outbreak from a global perspective. Mexico is by far the most affected country, with more than 1300 cases reported, and at teast 80 deaths. In the U.S. there are like 10 - 20 cases, and there have not been any deceases. I think that an article about the outbreak in the U.S. is unnecesary, considering that there is no article about the outbreak in Mexico, and only reflects an american point of view bias in wikipedia. I suggest that this article should be merged with the 2009 H1N1 flu outbreak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MiguelParamo (talk • contribs) 14:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Talk:2009_H1N1_influenza_outbreak#Merge_proposal
American deaths are expected. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090428/ap_on_he_me/med_swine_flu --Sky Attacker (talk) 06:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
There's a North American map available: image:H1N1 North America Map.svg
All the news channels and online major sources here are reporting 1 case of probable Swine Flu in Cold Springs, MN - not the sensationalist 50 figure on the statistics !!!Thejohansenfamily (talk) 13:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The CDC is reporting a confirmed case in Nevadabloomberg report Robert Beck (talk) 15:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
South Dakota is still showing up on the map as a state with suspected cases even though those cases were confirmed as unrelated to the swine flu several days ago. How is the map updated? 24.111.13.50 (talk) 17:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
someone needs to update the map and turn Texas black. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 12:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm not really sure how do mess with referencing correctly (my focus is more on fact checking) so I thought that I'd mention this: The reference (currently #83) isn't working (the article appears not to exist) and thus we can't verify the claim of 3 people in Maine. I went looking and found a reference that we can use in the Boston Globe. It is good for verifying the two cases in Massachusetts (along with some details) and a mention of three cases in Maine.[1] I'm not really sure how to change this without royally screwing something up, so I'll leave it for the more technically inclined people to do that. Pharmaediting11 (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
...And second the death of the 23 month old baby in Texas - how can this be recorded as a death in the U.S. - it was a Hispanic child from Mexico coming over for treatment - so it should be classed as a Mexican death - as no human U.S. to U.S. case of death has been reported ... Thejohansenfamily (talk) 13:30, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The death was a Mexican citizen who was already sick when he came here. Should that really count as an American death? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.243.241.75 (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
76.66.202.139 (talk) 14:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree too. I think it should be classified as a Mexican death, but still he was in the US.--Parker1297 (talk) 22:02, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Why did the suspected numbers go up?--Parker1297 (talk) 22:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you.--Parker1297 (talk) 00:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
It has just been reported that there are 2 possible cases of swine flu in Colorado. Samples have been sent to federal labs for testing. Here is the link:
http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20090429/NEWS01/904290328&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
Can someone change the map and graph?
71.237.93.44 (talk) 16:49, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
on flu he says 'Wash your hands'; sorry but given the recent politics I found it most amusing. --PigFlu Oink (talk) 00:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
What is the meaning of this?--Parker1297 (talk) 00:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Take this discussion elsewhere. It does not belong here, or anywhere else on WP. Wine Guy Talk 01:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
NBC Action News Kansas City is reporting that Governor Jay NIxon of Missouri is declaring that a probable case of swine flu has been found in Platte County, MO.
This should be added to the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.92.123.79 (talk) 00:47, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
http://www.pandemicflu.gov/plan/community/community_mitigation.pdf Why was this removed without even an explanation? This is the CDC guide on how to deal with just this type of problem. This doesn't make any sense. --OxAO (talk) 01:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I think we need a specific article about Texas, there are too many cases there and they're spread.-Nutriveg (talk) 15:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Fort Worth Independent School District has closed all schools due to concern over the flu. http://www.star-telegram.com/804/story/1347939.html 71.91.114.109 (talk) 02:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I think we should have information on the state Pennsylvania also! MySummerJob (talk) 02:30, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The article table has columns for "Laboratory confirmed," "Probable," "Suspected‡," (unconfirmed)‡," "Confirmed." How are these defined? Thanks to all for writing such a nice article! WriterHound (talk) 03:34, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I have set up automatic archiving to archive any threads with no comments for 48 hours in order to (hopefully) cut down on the clutter. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I think that the time shown when the US map is updated should be changed to Eastern Daylight Time. Considering that this is a current event that deals with the US it would be easier for people not to have to remember that it is in UTC. I know that my proposal goes against standard Wikipedia policy but, I find myself checking this page and the map at least daily. Thank You. 67.176.42.11 (talk) 05:15, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I am in the process of creating sub-sections for each individual state that has confirmed cases. Having looked at the table, then at the TOC, I saw that Maine and Massachusetts did not have entries. I did not even notice New England because that's not what I was looking for.
It's my feeling that, at least for the time being, states with confirmed cases should have their own sub-section, and information from other states can go in the Elsewhere section. Wine Guy Talk 06:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Added the 6 cases being looked at in Louisiana at the moment. Listed them as probable based on CDC guidelines as all 6, at the current time and time of the news articles, are testing positive for Influenza A.
If someone could update the map and add a wikified section for Louisiana in the main article it would be greatly appreciated. Don't have the time at the moment, all resources needed should be contained in the citations which I added to the state chart. Der.Gray (talk) 07:24, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The USA is lighting up like a fricken Christmas Tree! This disease is spreading fast and is very easy to transfer... We have to try and prevent other states from getting it! =(
A concerned American from Pennsylvania
MySummerJob (talk) 02:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
There's no corresponding article for the SVG map, found it here: http://www.king5.com/topstories/stories/NW_042909HEB-swine-flu-kids-KS.2c1b44e.html NigarashiRyuni (talk) 10:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
... found the linked article in the map - maybe sleep's making me groggy- what I should have said was within the 'other states' section NigarashiRyuni (talk) 10:46, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I think there should be a recovered collum if possible.--Parker1297 (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The map needs to be updated, per Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 18:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
AZ first confirmed case is 8 year student, I believe AZ should be have a short paragraph, something along the lines of " Arizona first confirmed case is a 8 year old student; it is unknown if the student had traveled to Mexico.The school that the student attended has been shut down for seven days...." http://www.azcentral.com/community/northvalley/articles/2009/04/29/20090429swineflucase-ON0429.html SACP (talk) 03:12, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
AZ article was added, thanks whoever did it SACP (talk) 15:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Arizona and Nevada have confirmed cases, but do not yet have any info in the body of the article. Could someone please add these under affected states? (I'm done for the night... or is it morning;)) Wine Guy Talk 08:52, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Tv News says Georgia has a confirmed case. Looking for internet source. --PigFlu Oink (talk) 15:07, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Per todays webcast: Acting Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Rich Besser, says they have rolled out test kits to NewYork and Califonia: They expect to be able to roll out testing kits to other states on Monday. Prior, testing was only avaliable at CDC headquaters in Atlanta. The new kits are expected to be able to speed up the testing process. Dr Besser also said that Mexico has just now been able to do their own testing. --PigFlu Oink (talk) 17:36, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The article is beginning to take on a sensationalist tone. Deaths are being listed (even though there is a *), when there is no confirmation that they are attributed to swine flu. Also, possible cases is too broad. The article should only include verified infections, those infections that are truly suspected of being due to swine flu (and not just random counts of people with a fever) and are being tested specifically by the state/CDC for swine flu, and those deaths that are confirmed to be by swine flu. Any other speculative information is sensationalist in tone and shouldn't be in an encyclopedic article. Flipper9 (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
I would suggest that the main article and all sub-articles on swine flu should read like an encyclopedic article, and not a news article. We are listing suspected cases, suspected deaths as if the reader should return later for an update...as if it were the evening news. I would suggest that we only list confirmed infections, and confirmed deaths. Flipper9 (talk) 19:39, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Additionally the Los Angeles coroner is now saying that at least one of the "reported" deaths is not due to swine flu but rather pneumonia. --75.190.179.49 (talk) 20:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
The reason the article may be taking a sensational tone is due to the media reports we are using quoting and refering to. Like many stories the media has overblown the whole situation 30,000-40,000 people die from the regular flu every year and personally the swine flu won't be anything special until it eqals or surpasses those numbers!!!--Bhockey10 (talk) 15:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
The purpose of Wikipedia is for encyclopedic articles, not news articles. I would say IMHO that the news articles referenced are not verifiable information, but fluid information that is likely to change. They are written with less stringent controls as would be published, peer-reviewed articles. A better place for all of this fluid and dynamically and increasingly "speculative" info should be placed in Wikinews, and not Wikipedia. We should be posting only verifiable information, which would include laboratory-confirmed cases and confirmed cause of death due to swine flu. Other information is just not encyclopedic. Flipper9 (talk) 16:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
To be clear about the inappropriate tag I added to the main article: all of the "suspected cases", "probable cases" and "probable deaths" are unverifiable information. Just because a news article says it, that is more speculative information and has no basic in something that can be verified. For example, news articles are regularly updated, retracted, and sometimes based on the flimsiest of evidence. The information gleaned from the popular press IMHO is not verifiable in the strictest sense. Yes; you can lookup the article and see that some guy at a news organization wrote it, but it's not verifiable by any authority. The only verifiable information is confirmed cases of infection and confirmed cases of death. The other columns of possible or probable cases and deaths is not something you would expect to find in an encyclopedia article; but in a dynamically updated news article or site, hence why that unverifiable information should be placed in Wikinews or some other wiki site. Flipper9 (talk) 16:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Well is seems like certain editors don't want to discuss whether this article is encyclopedic, and repeatedly resort to removing the unencyclopedic tag without disscussion. Why not follow proper procedure? Flipper9 (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The test results have not come yet. There is one case on April 28th they reported they sent it to a state lab to be tested and that the results were expected in 48 hours. WHY people keep changing it to zero I don't know. At least they let 80 suspected cases stay, because that's what the sourced article said. Now please show me where the sourced article, which is not new by the way, says that the potential case has been tested negative? I think there may be some confusion here - since it was initially reported that there was a confirmed case, and then that was cleared up, but that doesn't mean this one case has been resolved. --Revolución talk 05:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
4 cases have been confirmed at UD with 12 probable. http://www.udel.edu/ 128.175.19.135 (talk) 18:45, 30 April 2009 (UTC) UD student
Table updated; somebody with SVG skills needs to update the map. --YixilTesiphon TalkContribs 20:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I propose we move this to its own section at the bottom of the article, since it's overlapping with text and images in its current location. –Juliancolton | Talk 19:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Discussion moved |
---|
Please Note: This discussion has been copied to Template talk:2009 US swine flu outbreak table and has continued there. --Navy II (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2009 (UTC) I think that the state table at the top of the article should have the states alphabetized. Readers can then very simply check to see which states are having reported and/or suspected cases. I'm afraid that I might mess it up if I did it but someone really ought to. --Navy II (talk) 20:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I think there's certainly a consensus that it should not be sorted by an invented severity heuristic. Put it by severity when the CDC publishes a list, which they may. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 23:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
My 2c: Both the current and alphabetized table have advantages: the current table (as WineGuy notes) shows which states are most affected most easily; while an alphabetized table will be most useful to a reader looking for information about their state. I prefer the alphabetized table since it is easier to maintain (since we don't need to repeatedly update the order), doesn't involve coming up with our own ranking scheme, and because CDC takes that approach. Abecedare (talk) 02:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
The CDC does not attempt to judge severity. They present their data in alphabetical order (see http://www.cdc.gov/swineflu/). Why does this table continue using a subjective, ambiguous sort order that has no meaning to anyone other than the handful attempting to maintain the sort order? What constitutes severity: the severity of consequences, indicating a by death rate sort order, or perhaps severity of public health threat, in which case deaths don't matter as much as infection rate. There clearly is not a "consensus" about severity. If we are truly seeking consensus before making a change, then present the information in an unbiased format (i.e. alphabetical order, or by proven infection discovery order) until "consensus" can be reached on severity.128.138.112.248 (talk) 14:25, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Here's my summary on the current status of this issue. The original "consensus" for this article involved a discussion between Wine Guy and PigFlu Oink and a third anonymous person who does not appear to have continued interest in maintaining the article (the discussion has been deleted from this chain, but is archived in history). PigFlu Oink has weighed in and agrees severity order no longer makes sense. So of the original "consensus", 1/2 of the active and at least 1/3 of the total users no longer concurs. In this discussion topic, I count 7 people weighing in on a preference for alphabetical order and 4 people for severity order, and 1 that doesn't indicate a preference but discusses the format of the table. As for an external reference, the CDC does not attempt to maintain any type of severity indication; they organize their information in alphabetical order. At what point does this become enough of a “consensus” to change the table?128.138.82.193 (talk) 15:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Either way, I've templatized the table at Template:2009 US swine flu outbreak table. It was too much to scroll through to get to the article text (in edit mode). --Elliskev 15:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC) "Consensus" summary: Here is the way I view the opinions expressed so far. Three clearly for alphabetization (Navy II; 128.138.82.193; Mendaliv), four clearly against (76.216.84.2; CB...(ö); Wine Guy; ThaddeusB), one neutral (Abecedare), and four with no clear opinion (PigFlu Oink, Titoxd, Parker1297, Elliskev). As such I do not think consensus has been reached. Thus we need more time for input, IMO. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
I support alphabetization. Wiggerpedian (talk) 16:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
|
Please Note: This discussion has been copied to Template talk:2009 US swine flu outbreak table and has continued there. Wine Guy Talk 20:26, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Plainfield Sun reports that Will County has 3 "probable" cases. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 23:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Illinois Department of Public Health reports that Illinois has 41 probable cases --67.162.23.166 (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
According to WTVR-TV and the Virginia Governor's Office, there are two confirmed cases of Swime Flu in Virginia. One in Eastern Virginia and one in Central Virginia. Both people were recently in Mexico. Probably need to create a section for Virginia as well. - NeutralHomer • Talk • April 30, 2009 @ 23:59
There's no reference yet for the 16th case in California, here it is, and there are 57 cases of swine flu in California with 16 confirmed and 41 probable. --Vrysxy ¡Californication! 01:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
File:CDC MMWR M8d0430a2f.gif exists, it appears to be an updated version of File:CDC MMWR m8d0428a2f.gif 76.66.202.139 (talk) 07:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Is there a way to make the state-by-state table printable? Thanks. -Ghost —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.216.227.186 (talk) 15:44, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.216.227.186 (talk) 14:31, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
There are only 137 NOT 138, because there are only 50 cases in New York not 51. .--Vrysxy ¡Californication! 04:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Time to update the sources where approprate: CDC --PigFlu Oink (talk) 15:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
CDC doesn't even mention cases in Georgia or Maine. Why does this article have them as red states in the map? 207.136.239.146 (talk) 16:06, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't Florida be in bold letters. Parker1297 (talk) 21:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
It seems that ABC jumped the gun on reporting CDC confirmed cases for Maine: This is the Maine DOH report as of Thursday, April 30, 2009, 4 PM (No report for friday as of yet) This is the source we currently use for 3 Maine cases. This mornings CDC report didn't include any numbers for Maine. If I don't see any objections in the next 30 minutes I'm going to move the 3 confirmations back into the suspected column using the DOH source.--PigFlu Oink (talk) 21:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
While I could understand maybe 80 refs (1 for each state in the chart, DC and PR, and 28 more for other statements throughout the article), from an accessibility standpoint alone, 190 references is just way too much. If you are adding something, please see if there are other items in the article which your source supports. If so, and no other statements depend on the old source, replace it. If you get a chance, take a look at the article and find places where refs from the chart support the article and vice versa, and replace the weaker reference with the better one. Let's all pull together to not only keep the article up to date, but readable and quickly downloadable too. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 21:32, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Where does the District of Columbia fit into the figures? —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 11:13, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
DC has 2 cases now. 71.206.176.163 (talk) 06:14, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Since most states are now reporting numbers, should we consider those (or CDC numbers) preferable (when available) to news report numbers? --Elliskev 01:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Scammers reportedly have called people in Indiana in an effort to sell “mandatory swine flu kits,” claiming that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security are requiring their purchase. Has anyone seen reports like this anywhere else? If so, perhaps this merits inclusion in the article. Wine Guy Talk 07:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
how do you get: "|" Parker1297 (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Still new to Wiki, but AZ now has 4 confirmed cases-all elementary students- http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/04/30/20090430azswine-ON-CR.html SACP (talk) 00:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Done Thanks. Wine Guy Talk 01:29, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Actually, 3 confirmed at elementary schools and 1 at NAU. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.190.32 (talk) 22:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
It's extremely outdated at this point. There are 3 new states that need to be shaded yellow and Michigan needs to be shaded red as the cases there have been confirmed. [2]
TheCoolOne99 (talk) 19:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree, the chart is reflecting far more confirmed, probable, and suspected cases than the map. I am not talented enough to fix it, but if anyone knows how, it would be greatly appreciated. --Trendguy18 (talk) 19:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to request it from someone in the main article. TheCoolOne99 (talk) 19:27, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I did it. --WolFox 19:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. But one more edit, could you please shade in Michigan red? It's confirmed there too. Thanks a lot. TheCoolOne99 (talk) 19:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Here's a PNG version. It's uglier, but can be edited in Paint.
Not sure if I got everything right with the copyright part... --Elliskev 20:15, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I think we should go back to the SVG version to be consistent with the maps on other pages.--66.76.21.198 (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Editing the SVG version is very easy, once you download Inkscape. Here's how:
It's that simple! Abecedare (talk) 21:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Maryland and Alabama need to be yellow and South Dakota should not be coloured anymore.--Trendguy18 (talk) 22:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Utah Also needs to be confirmed on the map--216.194.116.178 (talk) 17:35, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Comment: Please don't use the instructions I wrote above to update the map any more. It now uses CSS, and it is much easier to use a text editor to add/move states from one category to another. Abecedare (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
This is a very nice map that is being updated: --OxAO (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
I moved this section here from the main article as it was not particularly relevant to the outbreak and was US-centric. If it should be kept in any 2009 flu outbreak article it should be this one I guess. Pontificalibus (talk) 09:29, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Connecticut should have it's own section, because it has had the most stories and it already has a confirmed case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.58.199 (talk) 20:51, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Wisconson and Rhode Island DOH officals have reproted confirmed cases with the CDC (see template for sources). I've tried editing the map svg but I can't figure out how to upload it. --PigFlu Oink (talk) 20:07, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
Who thinks I should move the page 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States to 2009 N1H1 swine flu outbreak in the United States Vote ends at 16:00 (UTC).--Parker1297 (talk) 11:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
How do you rename a page I cannot do it on the main page it won't let me Parker1297 (talk) 13:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
New Mexico DOH has a map of counties reporting probable or confirmed cases of this flu. (No change at present: 9 probable and 0 confirmed.) As I read it, the site copyright statement would permit using the map on Wikipedia but it cannot go on Commons. --Una Smith (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
New Mexico first confirmed case http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/health/health_krqe_albuquerque_case_of_h1n1_confirmed_200905022120 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerbzdude (talk • contribs) 04:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
I can't update the map, but here are some new official confirmations from state health departments:
Georgia - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.229.193 (talk) 01:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
According to the CDC, the Georgia confirmed case is a resident of Kentucky, but hospitalize in Georgia. CDC lists the confirmed case under Kentucky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.229.193 (talk) 02:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
New Mexico's first confirmed case http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/health/health_krqe_albuquerque_case_of_h1n1_confirmed_200905022120 [3]
i updated the Michigan part of the table if someone could look at the source i thank you!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 0xrandomx0 (talk • contribs) 17:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Puerto Rico has officially a new 'possible case', and my question is, how do we add PR to the US map?? Is it possible to add it? like in the right bottom? reference (is in Spanish).--Vrysxy ¡Californication! 04:05, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
School District | Schools Closed | Enrollment |
---|---|---|
Anderson-Shiro CISD | 2 (all) | 649 |
Austin ISD | 1 | 556 |
Chico ISD | 1 | 649 |
Cleburne ISD | 11 (all) | 6,935 |
Comal ISD | 21 (all) | 16,051 |
Corpus Christi ISD | 1 | 958 |
Cypress-Fairbanks ISD | 1 | 1,013 |
Dallas ISD | 1 | 799 |
Denton ISD | 33 ref | 20,826 (2007-08) |
Fort Worth ISD | 144 (all) | 79,281 |
Houston ISD | 3 | 1,973 |
Humble ISD | 1 | 794 |
Katy ISD | 1 | 1,363 |
Lamar CISD | 1 | 1,118 |
Laredo ISD | 31 (all) | 24,963 |
Lewisville ISD | 63 | 50,216 |
Marion ISD | 4 | 1,340 |
Total | Approx. 320 | 293,081+ (need to add in Denton ISD) |
Seriously, they're becoming the focus of the section. As such, I've created the table, at right, from the Texas Education Agency's website, so that we can remove all of the school closures that are minor/not top priority for this article right now. If anyone wants to help me add, just edit the table at right. CB...(ö) 16:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion underway at Template talk:2009-2010 flu pandemic table/Archive 3#Synthesis on the sourcing and figures used in this and similar articles and tables. Your input would be very welcome. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 09:58, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Just got off the phone with Maine state CDC; they stated as yet they have no confirmed cases. I've asked them to include a statement in todays Press Release expected at 4PM ET. --PigFlu Oink (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi. After looking at the table, the map needs the folowing updates:
I'd update it myself, but the software I use doesn't support SVG images. Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 22:33, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Please be advised Idaho has confirmed cases (http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/756422.html). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.167.152.67 (talk) 02:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
When did we decide to make the table alphabetical, rather than by number of cases, like the main article? hmwithτ 17:51, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
I dont even remember, they didnt even ask for that change. --Vrysxy ¡Californication! 21:03, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Per http://www.dhmh.state.md.us/publ-rel/html/2009/pr050409a.htm the number confirmed should be 4 total and the probable should be 9 total. Reference [23] should be updated to this link. Finally, the map should have Maryland orange. I'd be bold ... but I'm afraid I'd mess up the formatting! -Lissa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.9.8 (talk) 01:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
why isn't it in the affected states category? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.109.46.160 (talk) 12:21, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The map needs an update, Hawaii has 3 confirmed cases. --Vrysxy ¡Californication! 23:44, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I just saw it on CNN that there's another dead in TX of a woman. --Vrysxy ¡Californication! 20:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Someone altered the data on the dead ones and the suspected, writing them to be up to 10000 dead. It's been corrected.
Are these completely necessary? Also, wouldn't the states with the most cases be more deserving of maps than the ones currently represented? 70.129.20.202 (talk) 11:14, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree, CA, TX, Il, NY or even AZ deserve a map than those states with less or no cases. --Vrysxy (talk) 15:58, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't think these are strictly necessary, but they certainly do provide something more interesting than unbroken text all the way down. I'd agree that only the states with the most confirmed cases should have them, or in states where outbreaks are spatially separated such that a map makes things easier to understand. However, if people are willing/able to maintain these maps, then I don't see why they should be asked to stop.Banjaloupe (talk) 08:35, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Is it just me, or do the sections that break down cases by county clash unbearably? Specifically I'm looking at Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, and Oregon, who list county cases in entirely different ways (with New York taking the cake for egregious space-wasting and sub-section overload). Does Wikipedia have some sort of standard we can apply here? If not, I suggest using Oregon's system, as it takes up the least amount of space and is the least offensive to the eye. If states must have a section for each county, it seems only Massachusetts deserves it, as the others are just making glorified lists (which Oregon does much more compactly). Besides, wouldn't it make the most sense to list counties only in states that actually have a sizable number of actual cases (aka Illinois, California, New York, Texas, etc). I would make these changes myself but I know a lot of people must have put a lot of work into making these huge sections; it seemed polite to bring this up here first. If no one else cares, I'm going to try and transform the county sections to conform with Oregon's style, as it seems the most reasonable of the bunch. Banjaloupe (talk) 08:31, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I rewrote the introduction to provide a better summary and hopefully in a more encyclopedic manner. Also, I tried to avoid using numbers that are changing rapidly, since these are provided in the table and the details in the article body. Hopefully others can further improve it.
I’m having trouble with the references, even after reviewing the Wikipedia help. The introduction just needs to reuse the existing references, but I can’t get the ref name= to work properly, and I didn’t want to duplicate a bunch of references. Can someone help fix this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.209.144.202 (talk) 16:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
The article is now longer than the main article; I'll be working to cut out some excessive details. –Juliancolton | Talk 22:26, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I noticed above that some on has requested the artical moved to 2009 H1N1 flu outbreak in United States. I beleave that since they are no longer calling it Swine flu that the move sould go happen. What do you all think--Dcheagle (talk) 00:59, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Arkansas now has confirmed cases.[4][5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.209.144.202 (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
A new death in Washington state confirmed.--Vrysxy ¡Californication! 06:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add a county map? Their is one at the Washington State Departments web page. --98.225.48.221 (talk) 14:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
This site is hanging me here! I am growing nervous, and you don't have a county map for California!! Especially when some other states have one, California was the first to have the swine flu (H1N1) incident in the U.S., two schools in my county were closed down (as of 5/8/2009), etc. (!!!) I'm going to say this calmly, but this webpage should find and post a county map for California. I highly recommend it. Typingwestern015 (talk) 15:42, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I have created a special barnstar for swine flu related articles. I felt a special award was warranted due to the unusually large amount of effort required to keep these page up to date. Any user is welcome to award this barnstar to whomever they think has contributed a great deal to the various swine flu related articles.
I have handed out an initial batch, but I am sure I missed a number of deserving editors. Please visit User:ThaddeusB/Swine Flu Barnstar and correct my oversights.
Thank you --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:57, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Do you think I deserve one. Parker1297 (talk) 01:00, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I do not think the source for the confirmed cases in Florida is clear because it does not give locations of where so for all I know the county map could be outdated. Parker1297 (talk) 00:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC) I was right the map is outdated check out this link http://cfnews13.com/swineflu/default.aspx . Can someone update the Florida map. Parker1297 (talk) 00:18, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The little chart that shows the number of cases by date of onset of symptoms was published on April 27, and is now very out-of-date. A chart like this would be useful to be able to tell if the updates of total cases reflect new cases, or are the results of tests clearing out the backlog of samples gathered earlier. Is the date of onset information published anywhere, so the chart can be updated?Chuck Y (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
I'll be happy to replace it as soon as shown a study that swine flu is careful never to attack legal aliens -- or tourists. Or really, and credible study that supports this piece of ethnic calumny.
The deleted "some claim" text is below
I appreciate the article improvement made by PigFlu Oink in removing my "idiot" sentence, although it might have been more polite to call it an "unnecessary" sentence. I wasn't trying to be an idiot. At the time, the introductory section included the number of confirmed cases, which was changing very quickly and often didn't match the table. I replaced it with a sentence to see the table, which I thought was an improvement over the out-of-date numbers. However, I agree that it would have been better to leave it out altogether since the table is so prominent. Sorry. 199.209.144.202 (talk) 14:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering, I'll need some help. I looked at the 2009 swine flu outbreak page, and I saw that they have a map which actually reports the number of cases per country. Can we have one for this page, too, for the states? Here's my recommendation of categories:
And, if needed:
Thanks a lot, for hearing me out. Good luck! Typingwestern015 (talk) 15:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Here it is:
ADPH (Alabama Department of Heath):
http://www.adph.org/H1N1Flu/index.asp?id=3571
Status as of 5/13/2009:
Confirmed H1N1 cases = 27 Probable cases = 14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.42.228.26 (talk) 20:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
The CDC has changed their numbers from Confirmed only to Confirmed and Probable. --PigFlu Oink (talk) 20:10, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to intrude, but I saw that the California map was last updated in 5/8/2009, but the text article going with it goes all the way to 5/3/2009. Can someone update it for the sake of almost 37 million people? We would like that. Typingwestern015 (talk) 15:01, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
CDC says that there are probably more than 100,000 cases of the flu in the US and over half are Swine Flu. Should this be added to the suspected cases? See http://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/news/20090515/cdc-100,000plus-in-us-have-swine-flu-half-swine-flu Daveonwiki (talk) 23:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
This seems to be the CDC source for the article: http://www.cdc.gov/media/transcripts/2009/t090515.htm Daveonwiki (talk) 23:38, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
The map has not been revised since May 7, but the number of cases has increased vastly. I suspect that some of the cases are in new counties. If the map is outdated by several days, and states incorrect information, it is misleading and should be removed. In the meantime, I will note that it is only as of May 7. Edison (talk) 03:30, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
76.66.202.139 (talk) 06:37, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Should we put this estimate in the 'posible cases' table? .--Vrysxy ¡Californication! 04:50, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Mild U.S. Flu Cases May Exceed Official Tally
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/16/health/16influenza.html?hp
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
NYT Published: May 15, 2009
The real number of swine flu cases in the United States could be “upwards of 100,000,” a top public health official estimated on Friday — far higher than the official count of 7,415 cases confirmed by laboratories.
The official, Dr. Daniel Jernigan, head of flu epidemiology for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, said at a news conference that the official number gave an inaccurate picture of the outbreak because so few mildly sick people were being tested.
... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.101.142.131 (talk) 00:07, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
This article displayed information for only the first, second, third, fourth (or was it the fifth?), and sixth deaths in the U.S. Can we please put in information about death 5 (or was it death 4?)? I highly recommend it. Typingwestern015 (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
I added the Reuter's report of a death in Missouri of a patient suffering from A/H1N1 to the template/chart for the US numbers. If someone could add this information to the main article I feel this would be helpful. At the moment I do not have the time to write a proper addition to cover this. The article I used as ref can be found here : http://www.reuters.com/article/asiaCrisis/idUSN19445658 Also, can someone update the applicable maps? Der.Gray (talk) 21:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey guys. I've got some more cases for Nex Mexico. So can someone edit because i dont know how :/
http://www.koat.com/health/19507024/detail.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.181.215 (talk) 01:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
This is just an idea, apologies if it has been presented already or goes beyond the scope of what is here. However if we could have people who are able to, have the time to, and reliable enough internet to do so, perhaps we can have users who specifically check on what's going on in certain states daily? Or any wikiGnomes that would care to take on such tasks. Everyone's been doing great but thought if we had specialized tasks such as that we could make this more helpful as a resource for people to find updated information and links to news resources they might not otherwise find. I can take care of Louisiana when I have reliable internet, however I do not have stable internet connection so cannot maintain it on a daily basis. Der.Gray (talk) 05:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm thinking sub-sub-articles might be necessary for Texas, California, and New York. Thoughts? –Juliancolton | Talk 15:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Nah, we should split the article in two, like the main article but, by state, that's what i was going to do in the Spanish Wiki since is over 140kb :S--Vrysxy! (talk) 20:21, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The number of counties is irrelevant. A common sense approach based on the amount of information in the parent article is the only reasonable way to judge whether or not a sub-article is warranted. California and Texas both have large sub-sections with considerable amounts of information and given the size of the main article it may make sense to split them off. Massachusetts also has a long section and it may be wise to consider splitting it (or at least condensing it). New York, on the other hand, is a fairly small section and probably does not warrant a whole article at this point, as it would barely be a stub. Shereth 14:37, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Can someone update the other map with the new map? (the one without the date) The map is used in several different languages. Having to update each different language Wikipedia to a new map name each time it is updated would be very tedious. 76.66.202.139 (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I Update the map, and btw we should considred a standar name for those maps, like H1N1 Utah Map, H1N1 California Map etc. --Vrysxy! (talk) 21:22, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Now has been confirmed --Vrysxy! (talk) 21:21, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
The chart Image:H1N1 virus infection in USA 2009-05-06.gif is 2 weeks out of date, quite unacceptable for coverage of a rapidly expanding epidemic, since it gives undue weight to the first few cases, and no argument has ben made that those days are somehow more important than later periods. If someone is aboe to update the chart on a daily or even weekly basis, it would be a useful part of the article, but that is outside my experience. Edison (talk) 17:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
There are two versions of this map... the one on Commons isn't being updated as the one on English Wikipedia is updated... 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Would someone please put a map up for the State of Washington? Since over 500 cases in 17 counties have been confirmed, not to mention one death, I think it would be important to make one. Also, there is a map located at the Washington State Depart of Health's website under swine flu. --98.225.48.221 (talk) 00:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
The maps have gone out of sync again. AND the "county-2009-19-05.svg" now no longer makes sense, since it was updated on the 22nd. 76.66.196.85 (talk) 05:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
There are two versions of this map... the one on Commons isn't being updated as the one on English Wikipedia is updated... 76.66.202.139 (talk) 05:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Is this still necessary? Activity on this talk page is lower now... perhaps it should be increased from 48hrs to 10 days? or inactivated? 70.29.208.129 (talk) 10:03, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
updated information in the template regarding 2 newly reported deaths in NYC, and 9 new confirmed cases in Louisiana. If someone could create a map of Louisiana to show cases by Parish I think that would be great. Not a cartographer here :( Also if people could update on the state entries regarding these two this would be appreciated also. Trying to do what I can to help. Der.Gray (talk) 21:04, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
The Wisconsin map hasn't been updated in a really long time, even though Wisconsin has one of the highest number of cases. I'm not sure about the others. Hpswimmer (talk) 13:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I updated the confirmed CDC total for the US from this link http://www.middletownjournal.com/news/middletown-news/latest-swine-flu-figures-released-137511.html but could not find the numbers to update the individual states (that's a lot unaccounted for) can someone try and track down the individual state numbers that add up to the CDC number? If I can I'll update and append this entry. Der.Gray (talk) 20:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Illinois topic is out of date, there's been two confirmed deaths by Illinois State health agency in Chicago and suburbs as reported by the Chicago Tribune on May 27. This is now reflected in the CDC's published tables as of 5-29-09. Correct numbers are now 1002 confirmed cases, 2 confirmed deaths according to CDC as of 5-29-09.
97.73.64.174 (talk) 13:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Trent L. 5/31/2009
User:GCMS1 split Kentucky off into a breakout article. I have remerged the contents here, since I believe it is insufficient to support a separate subarticle. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 08:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
The maps have gone out of sync again. AND the "county-2009-19-05.svg" now no longer makes sense, since it was updated on the 22nd. 76.66.196.85 (talk) 05:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I modified the map by User:Allstrak to meet the updated information of confirmed cases in West Virginia and deaths in California. Used citations from the article for basis. Not very familiar with dealing with images on Wikipedia or Wikimedia commons, so if this should be added to the article in some other way than I did please let me know and feel free to fix. Der.Gray (talk) 01:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
The old PNG and the new SVG don't seem to match... in particular, a red area on the old PNG is now yellow on the SVG... 70.29.208.129 (talk) 05:12, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
The map contains Puerto Rico but there's no section for it... 70.29.208.129 (talk) 12:40, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for the alarm, but the California part of this article has not been edited for a month. Edit it now, because I don't know what has happened so far, please. For example, when did the first Californians die? Please add that. Typingwestern015 (talk) 16:52, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I created an updated cases map. I see an older one in the article of a different color, so I'll let someone else decide if they want to use this one, or stick with the dramatic red and black. ;-) I'll leave it on the article for now. --Falcorian (talk) 04:18, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
The Wyoming section is using File:Map of Wyoming highlighting Laramie County.svg . This seems like an inappropriate map to use, since it's a county locator map, and not a disease outbreak map. Perhaps someone should copy the map and create a new file for the disease? 70.29.208.129 (talk) 07:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
File:H1N1 USA Map.svg update for 4 June needs fixing. It has Massachusetts in black, but the description says that Connecticut is the one with the death. The data table here says Mass. has 0 deaths, while Conn. has 1.
70.29.208.129 (talk) 09:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
With the death of a lady in Warren (Macomb County), Michigan, it is high time an updated map be put up. I am not good with such things, so if someone else could do it it would be greatly appreciated.Johnpacklambert (talk) 17:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
There are two versions of this map... the one on Commons isn't being updated as the one on English Wikipedia is updated... this means that this article in other languages is getting out of date if they use the commons image.
70.29.208.129 (talk) 00:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be a rather lot of these maps lying around...
70.29.208.129 (talk) 12:11, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Is there a freeware program similar to GIMP which can be used to edit vector graphics (.svg) that works on *nix and windows platforms? I would attempt to update the national map and local but I am unable to save as an .svg .
In that vein, can someone add the new states with deaths in them to the map? If I have time on my next few days off I'll try to map the counties in those states so any 'route' can be pieced together or predicted. Der.Gray (talk) 20:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
File:2009 Swine Flu outbreak in Utah.png has a problem, it's been nominated for deletion because it's copyright status wasn't specified. 70.29.210.130 (talk) 08:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
There seem to be two versions of the Florida map... one used on English Wikipedia, and one used outside of English Wikipedia...
Both of them reside on Commons... I don't know why the second one was created, instead of just updating the first one...
70.29.210.130 (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
An outbreak evolution bargraph might be good...
Look at the one under construction for Australia ( Talk:2009 swine flu outbreak in Australia/workpage )
70.29.210.130 (talk) 09:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
The most recent reference I see to the U.S. Federal Government Response Stage in the Response section of the article does not appear to have been updated since early May/late April. At that time the U.S. Response Stage was still at 0. However I cannot find a source for such and am not finding any recent sources via web for updates to this. With talk of the WHO going to Pandemic Phase 6 in the news I was wondering if anyone can find a source for the current U.S. Response Stage/CDC alert levels/etc.
Also, has the government stated what it will do if a pandemic is officially declared? This may be a good sub-article. Der.Gray (talk) 12:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Per Newsday. All 12 deaths weere in New York City. Edison (talk) 21:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
There seem to be two Wisconsin images... the "2" image is not used anywhere (not in other languages, not in English)...
70.29.210.174 (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I just read an article called Wikipedia:Splitting it and it displayed this table:
Readable prose size | What to do |
> 100 KB | Almost certainly should be divided |
> 60 KB | Probably should be divided (although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading time) |
> 40 KB | May eventually need to be divided (likelihood goes up with size) |
< 30 KB | Length alone does not justify division |
< 1 KB | If an article or list has remained this size for over a couple of months, consider combining it with a related page. |
After looking at the table I pressed edit page on the 2009 swine flu outbreak in the United States and it said this page is 138kbs long. So we should start making articles by state!!
Do something! The World Health Organization declared a Level 6 pandemic today. I have the source from a website I found , but I don't know where to put the info. Can someone do it for me? Besides, I'm busy typing info about all of the deaths in California. Typingwestern015 (talk) 20:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
I've been working on updating and improving the entire article as I am able to. As of writing this I've gone over the introduction and eliminated information that is better covered in other areas and outdated information along with adding some references and working on compacting the information. Now on to the rest and some more caffeine. If anyone wants to help please let me know. I'll try and update my personal progress here so no one will have to worry about overwriting a chance I'm in the middle of vice versa or seeing wondering where everyone else and myself are in progress. Clearing out the spiderwebs and putting the article on a treadmill - Der.Gray (talk) 06:24, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
I happened to be reading up on the number of deaths and confirmed cases in the United States. Now as I can recall, I don't remember Puerto Rico being a state in the U.S. If there is a reason to why its there then I would love to know because it is kinda bugging me. Thanks--KingRatedRIV (talk) 15:36, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
The United States map needs to be updated to reflect that there has been a death in South Dakota.Johnpacklambert (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/news/2009/jun/10/jo_swineflu_death_061109_54187/?news
texas has eight deaths according to this story —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.190.192.204 (talk) 00:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
It is on the Startribune website!
Twin Cities child with swine flu dies —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.9.101.200 (talk) 18:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Also can u update the Deaths maps because of MN Contributions/206.9.101.200 (talk) 19:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
And the Minnesota article
Contributions/206.9.101.200 (talk) 19:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
I've excised this map because it is falling rapidly out of date. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 03:59, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
What happed to the confirmed death in South Dakota? --Vrysxy! (talk) 01:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
There are two Utah maps... by the same author... the older one has been updated once, by the author... one wonders why s/he didn't continue. In any case, the older map is used in other language Wikipedias....
70.29.212.226 (talk) 05:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Nevada has reported a death, which originally was added to the template, however [] is reporting that the death was of an out of state resident. I noticed this after the death was removed from the total for Nevada. Also Maine is reporting cases in regards to citizens and out of state residents. How should these cases be reported/handled? Since they happen in the geographic area of a particular state but are not of residents of that state (this was the case for one of the first deaths in Texas) I feel these should be counted in the geographic area but annotated to the geographic origin of the victim. This seems logical as there is no way to discern if the initial infection took place in the geographical location of the victim or in the geographical region of reported infection and/or death. I will not adjust the template to fit with my idea until there is some discussion on the matter. Der.Gray (talk) 22:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Guess what! I decided to add a table of swine flu deaths by county to the California section of this article: 2009 flu pandemic in the United States#California. Before you shoot me off, I need to tell you that it could be a great plan. We could take track of all of the deaths in California this way, and I hope to expand on this project. Typingwestern015 (talk) 03:24, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering. Look at the California section of this article. It says: ((It has been suggested that this section be split into a new article.)) Who said that? I an neutral in this issue. I want California to have its own article, but California should have a massive upgrade first. Typingwestern015 (talk) 16:14, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
The maps currently have the US Virgin Islands, should they be on the maps? 70.29.212.226 (talk) 11:28, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on a county-by-county map of swine flu cases, but Alaska isn't giving me any info with regard to its counties and Virginia is driving me nuts, mainly because of all of the independent cities! Anyone have any ideas for those two states? Your help is appreciated. Mudkip201 (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Well... someone seems to have made the maps for you. 70.29.212.226 (talk) 05:17, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Another map has shown up, per county. 76.66.203.200 (talk) 07:10, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
and both discus this from the issue from the CDC. This should be added somewhere, and probably mentioned in the template, similar to when the CDC was saying there were more than 100,000 cases in April/May. Der.Gray (talk) 22:26, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
and discuss the first discussed cases of resistance to the antiviral tamiflu, which had previously been mentioned to work on the virus.
Also, mentions the death of a 33 year old man in Nevada who had no underlying health issues other than contracting the Novel 09/A(H1N1) virus.
Suggesting that both of these should be mentioned in article, with further developments as more news comes out in those areas. Already updated state template to reflect the above mentioned death in Nevada but not enough time to do more research/editing at the moment. Der.Gray (talk) 21:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I just made a table for the Spanish Wikipedia (based on the Canadian table) about the death rate in each state, it's in Spanish, but i think the translation into English is obvious, i dont know if u guys wanna use it. I used the latest data of each state and in some states i used the CDC numbers because they havent updated its State Health department page. --Vrysxy! (talk) 04:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Pos. | Estado | Población | Casos confirmados |
Muertes confirmadas |
Taza de mortalidad (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Nueva York | 19,490,297 | 2080 | 43 | 2.06 |
2 | Misuri | 5,911,605 | 58 | 1 | 1.72 |
3 | California | 36,756,666 | 1294 | 19 | 1.46 |
4 | Arizona | 6,500,180 | 729 | 10 | 1.37 |
5 | Utah | 2,736,424 | 874 | 10 | 1.14 |
6 | Carolina del Norte | 9,222,414 | 179 | 2 | 1.11 |
7 | Míchigan | 10,003,422 | 655 | 7 | 1.06 |
8 | Oregón | 3,790,060 | 138 | 3 | 1.03 |
9 | Nueva Jersey | 8,682,661 | 609 | 6 | 0.98 |
10 | Rhode Island | 1,050,788 | 137 | 1 | 0.72 |
11 | Oklahoma | 3,642,361 | 144 | 1 | 0.69 |
12 | Connecticut | 3,501,252 | 877 | 5 | 0.57 |
13 | Washington | 6,549,224 | 588 | 3 | 0.51 |
14 | Texas | 24,326,974 | 2982 | 15 | 0.50 |
15 | Illinois | 12,901,563 | 2858 | 12 | 0.41 |
15 | Nevada | 2,600,167 | 240 | 1 | 0.41 |
17 | Virginia | 7,769,089 | 249 | 1 | 0.40 |
18 | Maryland | 5,633,597 | 370 | 1 | 0.27 |
19 | Pensilvania | 12,448,279 | 1539 | 4 | 0.25 |
20 | Florida | 18,328,340 | 941 | 2 | 0.21 |
21 | Hawái | 1,288,198 | 503 | 1 | 0.19 |
22 | Minnesota | 5,220,393 | 565 | 1 | 0.17 |
23 | Massachusetts | 6,497,967 | 1287 | 2 | 0.15 |
24 | Wisconsin | 5,627,967 | 4390 | 4 | 0.09 |
Estados Unidos | 306,798,000 | 27,321 | 155 | 0.56 |
Someone has found a statement of Nevada health authorities (http://www.southernnevadahealthdistrict.org/press_releases/2009/061609.html), that they will not count the first death of a NY resident. Hence the first Nevada case has been removed in our table. Consequently it had to be checked, whether this case has to be added as a NY case or it had already been included in the NY count.
Our counting (32 NYC, 43 NY state, as of July 1) included only cases, which had been reported by NYC officials or other NY county officials.
When Nevada is saying 'NY resident' it could mean NYC resident, but also NY state resident. So we had to check all cases in NY state, whether there is an identity.
There are three cases where the age (range) and the gender (if given) is fitting:
* 1. An elderly person in Onondaga county, officially reported on June 2, being the first victim outside NYC or the 8th in New York state (http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--swineflu-newyork0603jun03,0,6596349.story)
* 2. A person >65 yrs in NYC, officially reported on June 5, being the 8th victim in NYC and the 9th in New York state
(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/06/nyregion/06flu.html?ref=nyregion)
* 3. A person >65 yrs in NYC, officially reported on June 10, being the 10-12th victim in NYC or the 12-14th in New York state
(http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/nyregion/11flu.html?ref=nyregion). CDC then confirmed only two out of these three last cases on June 12 (a total of 13 victims for New York state).
There have been two possibilities:
* The case has been reported in New York several days before it has been reported in Nevada.
* The case has been 'deliberately' forgotten.
The former did not really look sensible, the latter would fit in with the overall strategy of the public authorities to "disappear" the fatalities in the public perception. Hence this case has been added as another case in New York (July, 1).
As it is now (July 2) we have counted the 'Nevada case' as a case, which is different from the three mentioned above and we assume, that it has not been officially reported by NY authorities.
FHessel (talk) 06:59, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
There are now 3 deaths confirmed in MN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.9.101.200 (talk) 22:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
here. And can bring the map to current? Der.Gray (talk) 03:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this death in Onondaga County included in the NY numbers? if not, then there are 64 deaths in NY. --Vrysxy! (talk) 01:16, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
On the map of states with reported cases and states with reported deaths Wyoming is being shown as having reported death(s) related to Novel 09/A(h1n1), however the table of reported numbers is not reflecting this. Was there a report that was pulled? Or did it no make it to the numbers yet? Der.Gray (talk) 05:45, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
First death in Guam http://www.pacificnewscenter.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=9393:a-26-year-old-woman-is-the-first-victim-of-swine-flu-on-guam&catid=34:guam&Itemid=141 --90.203.187.168 (talk) 15:11, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
http://www.swineflu.org/forum_posts.asp?TID=25283 --90.214.61.203 (talk) 14:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
how about adding a section to the graph or a map? deaths per million people? right now the current information that way it is presented exaggerates the situation for states with large populations. if you were to factor in population states like utah would rank near the top. 66.182.89.5 (talk) 02:20, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
hmm I notice that one section of the article says:
"On June 25th the CDC released information revealing that there were more than likely over nine thousand (9,000)"
It use to say that it was over one million. Is this vandalism? Also in the 'reported cases by state/territory' chart the total for state-reported confirmed cases reads "over nine thousand". Editors should be wary of "It's over 9000" vandalism. New Order (talk) 01:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
The total confirmed cases used to say 49,217. Now it says 'over 9,000'. Who cooked the book? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.151.29.7 (talk) 13:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
U.S. Influenza and Pneumonia-Associated Hospitalizations and Deaths from August 30 – September 5, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009, 6:00 PM ET Data reported to CDC by September 10, 2009, 12:00 AM ET Cases Defined by
Hospitalizations
Deaths Influenza and Pneumonia Syndrome* 1,097 168 Influenza Laboratory-Tests** 263 28 Totals: 1,380 196
This is what they report now. What number should be added on top of the 593 reported last week? 28, 168 or 196???? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.190.192.204 (talk) 22:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
The article says that the mortality rates for common flu and H1N1 are 18% and 5%, respectively. This is completely wrong, and was probably calculated using the death rates for hospitalized cases only instead of all diagnosed cases. The actual death rates are both less than 1%. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.93.230 (talk) 22:45, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
the flu is an inexpertal virus caused becausa of the pigs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.217.3.85 (talk) 22:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
per and the CDC is now reporting estimated infections at over 55 million (55,000,000) and deaths at anywhere between 7,500 to 16,000 in the US as of January 15, 2010. Being as we're basing the numbers for much of this off of the CDC data : how should we incorporate this into the article and tables? template and others use the statistics as a source, the 100,000 infected we are now reporting on here really seems very pale if the estimated is anywhere close to 55,000,000!!! Same with the deaths. A bit out of my depth here since I haven't been around this project for so long. Der.Gray (talk) 01:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
{{2009 US swine flu outbreak image}} This map and its legend don't match. The map has 5 shades of grey; the legend has 4 values, including 1 green.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on 2009 flu pandemic in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on 2009 flu pandemic in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{dead link}}
tag to http://65.19.187.189/nycschools/{{dead link}}
tag to http://www.flucount.org/When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:49, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on 2009 flu pandemic in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:25, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 2009 flu pandemic in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:09, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.