File talk:COVID-19 Outbreak World Map.svg/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. 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 |
Saudi Arabia
Hi, can you please remove Saudi Arabia from this map? Please see the discussion on the main outbreak talk page, it looks like the case in SA was falsely identified as nCoV-2019. Thanks!
Can someone add Lithuania to suspected
First suspected case in Lithuania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plienas26 (talk • contribs) 18:04, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Spain was false positive
https://www.diarioinformacion.com/vega-baja/2020/01/28/falsa-alerta-coronavirus-torrevieja-jefe/2228724.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calvin West Productions (talk • contribs) 08:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Can anyone change the status of Canada
Can anyone change the colour of Canada? There's already a confirmed case in Toronto.[1] --𝓧𝓩𝓣𝓓𝓮𝓪𝓷 𝕋𝕒𝕝𝕜 00:39, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Add confirmed cases color grade as the map for china
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019%E2%80%9320_Wuhan_coronavirus_outbreak#/media/File:2019-nCoV_cases_in_Greater_China.svg — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2620:10D:C093:400:0:0:4:6DE0 (talk) 14:54, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
La corse a été confirmée Anonyme001a (talk) 23:26, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Add Ivory Coast to suspected
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-51258014 --Charsum (talk) 01:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Requesting removal of Brazil as suspected
Hello, the Brazilian suspected case has been discarded as a possible 2019-nCoV case. Sources (in Portuguese):
https://g1.globo.com/mg/minas-gerais/noticia/2020/01/23/caso-de-coronavirus-em-bh-e-descartado.ghtml
https://saude.estadao.com.br/noticias/geral,mg-investiga-caso-suspeito-de-coronavirus-chines-em-belo-horizonte,70003168598
https://veja.abril.com.br/brasil/governo-de-mg-descarta-caso-de-coronavirus-em-belo-horizonte/
I apologize for not knowing how to do this edits myself. YuriNikolai (talk) 01:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Swedish cases were not coronavirus
The two Swedish cases have been confirmed not to be the coronavirus. [2] 2.110.215.216 15:50, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Remove Italy - false positive
Can you remove Italy? On 29 January 2020 the Bari's suspected patient Is confirmed as false positive. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 5.171.245.3 (talk) 00:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
Add Armenia- 2 suspected cases reported
Can an editor please add Armenia.[1][2] Many thanks, Archives908 (talk) 19:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)
North Korea
Wrong map link ? Best regards, Jatayou (talk) 13:20, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
References
- ↑ Two Chinese nationals placed in isolation wards in Armenia amid first suspected case of coronavirus. Armenpress.am (29 January 2020).
- ↑ No lab tests for coronavirus in Armenia yet, suspected samples to be sent abroad. Armenpress.am (29 January 2020).
— Preceding unsigned comment was added by 77.251.133.4 (talk) 15:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Peru no
https://rpp.pe/vital/salud/coronavirus-los-cuatro-casos-sospechosos-en-peru-salieron-negativos-noticia-1242831 --JersyJacob (talk) 18:09, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
Iran
Any source for Iran? No section on the main page… — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 103.70.152.26 (talk) 15:15, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
Remove Iran. Source in the version history says it isn’t coronavirus https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-30/iran-quarantines-two-chinese-suspected-of-carrying-virus — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 103.70.152.26 (talk) 05:37, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
Additional color for countries with zero active cases
Since several countries have no current infections anymore after all their cases have either recovered or died, I suggest giving such countries a unique color: perhaps cccc00 Xenagoras (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Philippines, India, Russia, Belgium, Cambodia, Egypt, Finland, Nepal and Sri Lanka have to be recolored currently. That would help to see current situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blamethrower35 (talk • contribs) 08:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds like a fine idea, but Ratherous seems to disagree. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
Map Inaccuracies
Hello.
Some part of the state of Pará in Brazil is not colored red (north east). It's a minor detail, but still :). — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 131.180.33.249 (talk) 17:18, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Map of the 2019–20 COVID-19 outbreak
Shade the Chinese mainland as the same colour as other infected countries. "Region of origin" is not relevant and does not improve the map chart. Other maps for disease outbreaks such as the 2009 H1N1 pandemic do not clearly mark the United States of America as the "region of origin". Clearly, we should standardise these maps to ensure that countries are not stigmatised. JMonkey2006 (talk) 07:57, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Support - @JMonkey2006: has got a point here that other maps don’t include the country of origin. Plus there have already been quite a few stories on the news about people being racist towards the Chinese because of a disease that does not stem from a particular race (you know, most people are dumber than rocks). This map certainly does not assist w/ combating, mitigating, or preventing such racism. Fluffy89502 ~ talk 15:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Oppose - At this point in time, China still has the overwhelming amount of cases worldwide (something like 92% of total). I think for that reason alone it should be distinctly labeled. That said, epicenters continue to migrate to other countries, so this is a discussion we should return to in the foreseeable future. Pharexia (talk) 18:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
Poland
https://dzienniklodzki.pl/koronawirus-w-polsce-jeden-z-trzech-testow-kobiety-ktora-wrocila-z-tajlandii-mial-wynik-dodatni-28022020/ar/c14-14819572 Ysku (talk) 18:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Suspected cases in Bolivia and Chile
Someone udpate the map, there are 250 suspected cases of 2019-nCoV in Chile and one suspected case also in Bolivia
https://www.telesurtv.net/news/bolivia-gobierno-facto-reporta-caso-sospechoso-coronavirus-20200226-0042.html --79.17.84.118 19:44, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
Updated legend
I updated the legend to detail the amount of deaths in each country. I've updated the description in Commons, as well as English, German and French wikis. I'll be back later to update more of them. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Since several countries have no current infections anymore after all their cases have either recovered or died, I suggest giving such countries a unique color: perhaps
99ff99Xenagoras (talk) 15:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)- Giving countries with zero active cases and non-zero all cases a different color seems like a fine idea. Not sure whether that should be green since green seems to be too optimistic, but again, seems a good idea. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- It should be broken down by number of all cases or active cases, not deaths. The deaths do not tell us much; it is the number of cases that is indicative of severity and likelihood of containment. The previous version was better, but it would be even better to color-code by ranges of numbers of cases, like in BBC's Coronavirus maps and charts: A visual guide to the outbreak. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi there. I have temporarily reverted back the colours of the map to the previous legend just so that users can participate in an active discussion regarding the change, however I definitely see some benefit in making the legend more detailed. I'm not sure the chosen colours were a good fit though, and it is also important on figuring out whether we want to make a map specifically detailing the extent of the outbreak (small vs. medium vs. large) or if we want to include separate colours for deaths. As for me personally, I would lean more toward specifying how many cases each country has reported. Also to respond to the comment left by the previous user, while initially it does seem like a good idea to include countries with no more active cases I do not think that giving them a unique colour in the map is a good idea as that would mean that all other countries should be reported by active cases which is often difficult to monitor. For example, with 25 cases reported Malaysia may seem like a medium outbreak, however with 20 recovered it would have to be changed to small. I would say it is best to avoid including recovered cases all together and just sticking to updating the map based on reported cases. --Ratherous (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- More detail and ranges: good; deaths instead of cases: bad; active cases instead of all cases: possibly even better, I don't know. Active cases can be had from worldometers.info; is that unreliable? --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:28, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi there. I have temporarily reverted back the colours of the map to the previous legend just so that users can participate in an active discussion regarding the change, however I definitely see some benefit in making the legend more detailed. I'm not sure the chosen colours were a good fit though, and it is also important on figuring out whether we want to make a map specifically detailing the extent of the outbreak (small vs. medium vs. large) or if we want to include separate colours for deaths. As for me personally, I would lean more toward specifying how many cases each country has reported. Also to respond to the comment left by the previous user, while initially it does seem like a good idea to include countries with no more active cases I do not think that giving them a unique colour in the map is a good idea as that would mean that all other countries should be reported by active cases which is often difficult to monitor. For example, with 25 cases reported Malaysia may seem like a medium outbreak, however with 20 recovered it would have to be changed to small. I would say it is best to avoid including recovered cases all together and just sticking to updating the map based on reported cases. --Ratherous (talk) 17:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Honestly from what I've seen, all sources differ on active cases. It is also difficult to distinguish between recovered and simply discharged as discharged patients are often still infected with the virus. I definitely think for this map it would be best to stick to reported cases altogether. --Ratherous (talk) 17:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I think coding for the number of all reported cases is fine. The best infographic I know of on Commons is File:COVID-19-outbreak-timeline.gif: it not only color-codes for ranges, but also shows numbers, which is super useful; its downside is that one has to wait for the last frame of the animation to arrive. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with Dan Polansky that the graphic File:COVID-19-outbreak-timeline.gif has the best color coded visual representation among all existing graphics. And I suggest to display the active infections (Total cases - recovered - deaths) and use a logarithmic color scale, plus use a unique color for countries with zero active infections but non-zero total cases. My initial proposal for that color was dark yellow
cccc00because the map used only shades of red for countries with cases. Now that the map changed back to shades of red, I reiterate the dark yellow color proposal. Xenagoras (talk) 18:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)- I support the above dark yellow proposal for temporarily recovered states, with zero active infections. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with Dan Polansky that the graphic File:COVID-19-outbreak-timeline.gif has the best color coded visual representation among all existing graphics. And I suggest to display the active infections (Total cases - recovered - deaths) and use a logarithmic color scale, plus use a unique color for countries with zero active infections but non-zero total cases. My initial proposal for that color was dark yellow
- Fair enough. I think coding for the number of all reported cases is fine. The best infographic I know of on Commons is File:COVID-19-outbreak-timeline.gif: it not only color-codes for ranges, but also shows numbers, which is super useful; its downside is that one has to wait for the last frame of the animation to arrive. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Nguyen QuocTrung, you reverted the previous update as well, so I am definitely interested in hearing your opinion on this. --Ratherous (talk) 17:38, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Honestly from what I've seen, all sources differ on active cases. It is also difficult to distinguish between recovered and simply discharged as discharged patients are often still infected with the virus. I definitely think for this map it would be best to stick to reported cases altogether. --Ratherous (talk) 17:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
If we agree on changing the map by number of cases then let's also agree on the legend. I probably suggest 1-9 for small outbreaks, 10-99 for medium outbreaks, 100-999 for large outbreaks and 1000+ for the most severe cases. --Ratherous (talk) 17:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds fine. BBC has another bin split at 500, but maybe that is not necessary. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think if there will be enough countries in that fraction, we might need to include it as well, but until then let's not. --Ratherous (talk) 18:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. I think the red color for the least severe range is too strong and should better be much lighter, by my lights anyway. Right now, it is rather loud red. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:31, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think if there will be enough countries in that fraction, we might need to include it as well, but until then let's not. --Ratherous (talk) 18:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, I've toned it down. --Ratherous (talk) 18:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. That makes me see that it is the 2nd least severe color (e.g. Australia) that is too strong red. I think the saturation should never be 100%; I compared that to the BBC version and they use fine colors. I am not saying we need to copy BBC, though. The problem is that the fully saturated red looks like it is most in need of action. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:50, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, I've toned it down. --Ratherous (talk) 18:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- What colour do you suggest? --Ratherous (talk) 19:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Can you post a list of colors you are currently using? I'd like to work from there. (Is there a template that I give color in hex and it shows the color in a box or something?) --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Advise using ColorBrewer tool based on established color perception research and highly-regarded for dataviz.186.89.181.110 19:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Can you post a list of colors you are currently using? I'd like to work from there. (Is there a template that I give color in hex and it shows the color in a box or something?) --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- What colour do you suggest? --Ratherous (talk) 19:00, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
These are the colours right now
--Ratherous (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Cool. What about this (3 colors changed):
--Dan Polansky (talk) 19:10, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I feel like this version has too drastic of a change between the third most severe and second most severe cases. --Ratherous (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
What about this (c80604-->CC3333):
--Dan Polansky (talk) 19:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think I like 100-999 Confirmed casesmore for the second category, but I think10-99 Confirmed casesshould be darker. --Ratherous (talk) 19:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I like my last proposal but let's see (3rd: ee7070):
--Dan Polansky (talk) 19:25, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think I like this one the best. Very nice flow between categories. --Ratherous (talk) 19:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Fine by me. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
How about:
Xenagoras (talk) 19:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- As I previously mentioned, I strongly oppose the map following active infections rather than total confirmed cases. Sources differ on the number of active cases and they often group recovered and discharged patients, meaning it would be difficult to monitor how many people are still infected. --Ratherous (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- What do you think about the shades of red colors per se for being used for confirmed cases? Xenagoras (talk) 21:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Fine by me, but Ratherous may have a point, and I do not know enough about the matter to disagree on substance; I tend to defer to Ratherous. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- As I previously mentioned, I strongly oppose the map following active infections rather than total confirmed cases. Sources differ on the number of active cases and they often group recovered and discharged patients, meaning it would be difficult to monitor how many people are still infected. --Ratherous (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
I updated the map to the most recently agreed upon colours. What do you think? --Ratherous (talk) 19:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- I think it looks really good. Of course, people have different displays, and tastes. Thank you for all your work. --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Great. I'll update the legends. Thank you for all of your contribution. --Ratherous (talk) 19:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- As an emphasis for the reader: above, someone posted a link to "ColorBrewer tool based on established color perception research and highly-regarded for dataviz", very interesting. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
- Great. I'll update the legends. Thank you for all of your contribution. --Ratherous (talk) 19:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
