The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
I've removed some content featuring heavily editorialized comments that seem to be hate pieces especially on certain premiers (ahem). Also, a lot of Province-specific info/controversy/commenting that should just on their page if they're newsworthy at all. I'm going to work on some cleanup here. CaffeinAddict (talk) 19:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of engaging in some edit-warring, I'd rather discuss this first, I removed Province specific info, and put any relevant information in their respective pages. Asking for mediation. Magnovvig. CaffeinAddict (talk) 21:09, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CaffeinAddict Thank you for your maturity. As I indicate here and here and here, the nature of the news is extra-provincial because of the decisions of the Newspaper Editors. I'm glad at your constructive (not destructive) edits. As a rule if someone has taken the time to adequately source an event in a timeline, I try my best to leave as-is their work so as to give the readers of the page the opportunity to think for themselves. Magnovvig (talk) 21:57, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This has nothing to do with my maturity, but keeping the article neutral and relevant to the discussion at hand. I'll also remind everyone this is not the first time you've been engaged in disruptive editing and edit warring: hereherehere and hereCaffeinAddict (talk) 04:00, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At this point I don't see where it is productive to "remind everyone" of past mischaracterizations, as the transcripts show. You cherry-pick headlines at your own risk. You are right when you observe that I need to withdraw my comment about of your maturity. Magnovvig (talk) 07:30, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the information about province specific information should be kept out of the article, and only apply to the nation as a whole. This is why I originally removed this information, and it already HAS been placed in the individual province's articles. However, there are some pieces of the article for example "COVID-19 concentration camps" which are simply baseless misinformation.
This article has now been fully protected while we come to a consensus on this issue.
I haven't read the Timeline article before now, so I don't have too much to say. The province-specific details do carry some importance, but I think that longer prose should be moved to province-specific articles, while a few lines for summary can be kept on here. Anything that is opinion (whether pro-reopening or pro-lockdown, for or against forced masking, etc.) should either be removed or cited from attributed quotes. As for the concentration camp accusations, they should be attributed to the respective accusers (I believe Randy Hillier is one) if this info is warranted. Hillier and several notable politicians and groups are certainly against excessive measures, more lockdown, etc. but is it helpful to point this out in the article? What about the lockdown protests in the west? On another note, sections from June 2020 to August 2020 (where reopening and forced masking gained traction) are missing a lot of content. Other months (May 2020, October 2020 and November 2020) seem quite large, and may need to be reduced in length. This is my advice, and I hope it helps. --LABcrabs (talk) 00:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there should only be overviews of provincial content. If the details did not make the national news, it should definitely not be in this article. Leave that for province-specific (or region-specific) articles.
Os if a barbecue made the national news (The National and whatever the equivalent would be on CTV and Global) or was carried by a paper in a region outside of where it happened (The Toronto Star covering the "lockdown protests" (not that we have had lockdowns out west)), then it's newsworthy at a national level. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:30, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't check this page much, though from a cursory glance it looks like it could benefit from a lot of copy editing and quote reduction. I think that it depends on how noteworthy events are at a national level. Declaring states of emergency or lockdowns? Sure. An outbreak in a region where there had been no cases before? Possibly, but should be discussed. Vaccines arriving or select groups of people being allowed to take vaccines in an arbitrarily chosen province? Noteworthy. Things like protests are more iffy, as they are not worth drawing attention to unless there's evidence that it is the origin of a superspreading event.
I'm not too concerned with PEIS limits (roughly 55% as of now), but minimising the amount of templates used (such as in citation) will be helpful in the long run. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 03:05, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Suggested edits to conform to the focus of the article, many of which I had previously made and didn't delete entirely but merely put in the province's specific COVID articles:
May 2020 - [1]Remove: "On May 5, it came to light that the mayor of Huron-Kinloss township ..." (Ontario centric, I had previously removed this information and placed it here [2]) Remove: "It came to light on May 11 that problems at an oil sands plant in Kearl Lake, Alberta..." (Alberta centric)Remove: "On May 20, a resident of Nova Scotia who was barred from attending her mother's funeral in Newfoundland..." (NFLD centric, I already removed and replaced the information here: [3])
November 2020 - [4]Remove: "Alberta Premier Kenney ignored that advice and relied largely on voluntary measures while he argued that such restrictions represent "massive" infringements of people's rights that do more harm than good. Toronto Mayor John Tory and Medical Officer of Health Eileen de Villa..." (This is a whole paragraph about local issues that is covered in depth in each Province's respective pages) Remove: "On November 29, three Fraser Valley churches defied an order to "suspend in-person religious gatherings" from BC Provincial Health Officer Bonnie Henry..." (BC specific, place into COVID-19 pandemic in British Columbia page)
December 2020 - [5]Remove: "On 2 December, Ford was in hot water with businesspeople who disliked the policy..." (Not only Ontario centric but editorialized) Remove: "On 3 December, it was disclosed that Kenney in Alberta was planning to house up to 750 coronavirus patients in purpose-built coronavirus sanatoriums, which would take up the slack from mothballed university sports facilities. The military would be asked to help staff the sanatoriums." (Field hospitals, Magnovvig is using weasel words to support what was formerly "concentration camps" and now sanatoriums. These are in fact just field hospitals.) Remove: "On 18 December, the Ontario Superior Court..." (Ontario centric information that should be in the page for Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic in Ontario)
In short, most of these changes were made by myself previously before edit warring began. I did not delete most of the information, simply moved them to their respective pages. CaffeinAddict (talk) 18:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support the above removals including Remove: "A columnist observed that "We don't want a barbecue guy with a backwards ball cap making health policy" and that government subsidy programmes were designed to offset the cost to business owners and cost to the unemployed restaurant workers not to mention the inconvenience to the frustrated would-be restaurant-goers so the restaurant owner should be happy.[208] The restaurant owner's GoFundMe legal aid pool had reached $150,000 by the next day.[212] A lifestyle editor from the Huffington Post said that "White privilege" had been "in action"." (Ontario-centric and other problems noted above). Vaselineeeeeeee★★★19:17, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I was pinged so I'll just say while I don't exactly understand what's the problem, I agree with removing all of the above. Thanks, SixulaTalk22:14, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for weighing in. I have begun cleaning up this page as I originally intended, until I was interrupted by a disruptive editor... who is currently blocked from editing for 1 week for another matter coincidentally. CaffeinAddict (talk) 02:31, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
