This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 17 April 2020. Further details are available here. |
My name is Aida Getachew, and I am a third year biochemistry student at Imperial College London. As part of my science communication module, I have selected this page to edit. This editing assignment will end by Friday 17th April 2020. Aida Getachew ( talk) 13:09, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Ok, I see that someone made Emergent Viruses a redirect to Virus and you're trying to deal with that, but making the main article be "Emerging viruses, the concept" makes no sense.
I put the latest version of the content back here in the Emergent Viruses article. I suggest you stick with editing this one, and if someone disagrees with the existence of it, they should nominate it for deletion and a debate can be had to see if there can be an article on this at all. Unless they do so, assume it's ok to have an article on this, and use the article name which makes the most sense, that being Emergent Viruses or Emerging Viruses, you decide. -- Xyzzyplugh 01:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Emergent virus. 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.
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 22:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello! This article is in need of citations. I plan to help find sources to add, however, if anyone would like to help, that would be great! LPW22 ( talk) 18:47, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
@ Aida Getachew: A couple of thoughts...
I'm wondering whether/how we can
- maybe frame/weight the Bat-man transmission content in a proportionate way (avoiding any perceived 'Gotham City bias' ;-)
- more clearly focus ===Influenza=== on the specific 'emergent virus' aspect and somewhat less on more general characterization (per the Influenza page).
Note (also to self :): I'm aware that the sentences giving examples of recent in the current lead is overloaded with technical links. Since some of the links might be usefully incorporated into the text further down the page,I've left them there for the moment. But I realize you may want to slim that part of the lead down in due course.
86.134.212.26 ( talk) 13:43, 14 April 2020 (UTC) [Robin]
A sort of thought experiment that I think might be worth somehow exploring (and you may already have thought of something along these lines yourself :) is to take a couple of mental steps back and *scan* some of the more general recent literature on the topic (eg [1]) to get a feel for all the various aspects/dimensions of the topic (eg public/regional/global health impact, epidemiology, spread, etc; ecology, environmental health, climate change, industrial farming etc, all affecting animal-animal, human-animal, human-human contacts; transmission mechanisms; ...... etc, etc... varieties of disease, and ideally also [haha :] some sort of a broad historical / history of medicine perspective) that may be calling for some sort of consideration somewhere or other on the page. You may find that you're picking up on areas which you might not otherwise have immediately been drawn to... Then, maybe you (and any other interested editors...) can form a bird's eye view, or somehow echolocate, an overall skeletal picture of the page, however sketchy (content can always be relocated/rejigged and, if necessary, better contextualized/weighted), with the *key* points briefly touched upon in the lead. Whatever the practical limitations, you'll be leaving something organic as a real legacy. Just a thought, 86.134.212.26 ( talk) 20:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
I was wondering about perhaps merging the content of the ===Definition=== section with that of the lead section, just to avoid any repetition - what do you think? Aida Getachew ( talk) 17:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
The lead will ultimately benefit from a brief mention of both the newly-detected and the re-emerging ones. I think re-emerging virus should definitely be a redirect to this page, and *possibly* (for now at least?) newly-detected virus, though I think an expanded Novel virus page might ultimately be a better target for the latter. We also need a redirect for emerging virus (there's already one for 'emerging viruses'). For someone editing as a registered user (like yourself :), creating a redirect page (like this one) is quite straightforward, and if you you'd care to put these ones in sometime that would be much appreciated. Thanks, 86.134.212.26 ( talk) 14:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)