| Revision as of 13:28, 13 July 2009 editReyBrujo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers40,722 edits →Re: 2009 flu pandemic / Argentina: -> Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:00, 13 July 2009 edit undoReyBrujo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers40,722 edits →Re: 2009 flu pandemic / Argentina: -> ReplyNext edit → | ||
| Line 112: | Line 112: | ||
| ] states we should not combine multiple sources to justify statements that aren't found in any source. This is because those sources come from different medias (which may have used different sources at the same time) and from different dates. I would prefer if the numbers were detailed in the ] article, while the {{tl|2009 flu pandemic table}} contained a link to it, like the USA numbers. I don't like the idea of combining numbers, but if you are going to do it, at least the Argentina article could be updated regularly and be the main focus of the updates, and not this table. -- ] (]) 13:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC) | ] states we should not combine multiple sources to justify statements that aren't found in any source. This is because those sources come from different medias (which may have used different sources at the same time) and from different dates. I would prefer if the numbers were detailed in the ] article, while the {{tl|2009 flu pandemic table}} contained a link to it, like the USA numbers. I don't like the idea of combining numbers, but if you are going to do it, at least the Argentina article could be updated regularly and be the main focus of the updates, and not this table. -- ] (]) 13:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :Can you show me the diff? I don't remember having done so (unless you refer to the 108 deaths reference, where I put the title of the blurb on the right instead of the main article). Also, remember that we don't care who is right or who is not, we only care about verification. -- ] (]) 13:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | :Can you show me the diff? I don't remember having done so (unless you refer to the 108 deaths reference, where I put the title of the blurb on the right instead of the main article). Also, remember that we don't care who is right or who is not, we only care about verification. -- ] (]) 13:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::No worries, we usually block all the advertisement. Turned the blocking off and noticed the ads moved the blurb pretty low. -- ] (]) 15:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 15:00, 13 July 2009
|
Welcome!
Hello, FHessel, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!
70.29.212.226 (talk) 04:14, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Nevada death
Bingo!
http://www.southernnevadahealthdistrict.org/press_releases/2009/061609.html
Public Health Update - H1N1 Influenza
June 16, 2009
The Southern Nevada Health District received confirmation of 57 novel H1N1 cases in Clark County, as of Friday, June 12. The health district posts updated case counts weekly, each Tuesday before noon. The next update will be posted Tuesday, June 23. To date, the severity of illness caused by the novel H1N1 virus is similar to seasonal flu. This case count includes four novel H1N1-confirmed samples from school children who were tested on Tuesday, June 9, to identify if an increase in absenteeism at a Clark County elementary school was caused by influenza or another virus.
On Friday, June 12, the health district reported the first novel H1N1-related death in Clark County. The patient was a 70-year-old woman and a New York resident. Her illness was identified shortly after her arrival in Las Vegas and she was hospitalized shortly after. Because this patient is a resident of another state, she is not included in the confirmed novel H1N1 case count for Nevada, but would be included the case count for New York State.
Only one death in Nevada!
CaninePitDog (talk) 16:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
A reference was listed beside the NY deaths for nearly a week prior to 2-3 days ago to the NV State Health Dept. Since then it has been removed. I do not know whether or not the actual death number was removed. The only way for it to make since is that the woman was from NYC and it was counted under the 32 deaths there. I found somewhere online that she was the 17th (?) death in NY state. So if it was added, it was a while ago. But I am in the dark, too. CaninePitDog (talk) 18:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Update: Based on what I've looked at through the edits of the template, your addition of the NY death is correct. It was first added under NY, someone deleted it and moved it to Nevada and left the reference. The reference was left there for a while and someone deleted it without removing another NY death. So I think it is all good. CaninePitDog (talk) 18:58, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Argentina death count
I've not touched the death count, and the revert goes to the number of confirmed cases. 100K is an estimate and not lab-confirmed. :-) - Xavier Fung (talk) 18:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
- This report from Xinhua refers to the 6th death case in Thailand. - Xavier Fung (talk) 18:37, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Re: 2009 flu pandemic / Argentina
WP:SYN states we should not combine multiple sources to justify statements that aren't found in any source. This is because those sources come from different medias (which may have used different sources at the same time) and from different dates. I would prefer if the numbers were detailed in the 2009 flu pandemic in Argentina article, while the {{2009 flu pandemic table}} contained a link to it, like the USA numbers. I don't like the idea of combining numbers, but if you are going to do it, at least the Argentina article could be updated regularly and be the main focus of the updates, and not this table. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 13:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
- Can you show me the diff? I don't remember having done so (unless you refer to the 108 deaths reference, where I put the title of the blurb on the right instead of the main article). Also, remember that we don't care who is right or who is not, we only care about verification. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 13:28, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
- No worries, we usually block all the advertisement. Turned the blocking off and noticed the ads moved the blurb pretty low. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 15:00, 13 July 2009 (UTC)