Talk:COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and hesitancy

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and hesitancy article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

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.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

WikiProject COVID-19 consensus

WikiProject COVID-19 aims to add to and build consensus for pages relating to COVID-19. They have so far discussed items listed below. Please discuss proposed improvements to them at the project talk page.

General

Superseded by TfD October 2020 and later practice - consult regular {{Current}} guidance.

Refrain from using Worldometer (worldometers.info) as a source due to common errors being observed as noted on the Case Count Task Force common errors page. (April 2020, April 2020)

For infoboxes on the main articles of countries, use Wuhan, Hubei, China for the origin parameter. (March 2020)

"Social distancing" is generally preferred over "physical distancing". (April 2020, May 2020)

Page title

COVID-19 (full caps) is preferable in the body of all articles, and in the title of all articles/category pages/etc.(RM April 2020, including the main article itself, RM March 2021).

SARS-CoV-2 (exact capitalisation and punctuation) is the common name of the virus and should be used for the main article's title, as well as in the body of all articles, and in the title of all other articles/category pages/etc. (June 2022, overturning April 2020)

Map

There is no consensus about which color schemes to use, but they should be consistent within articles as much as possible. There is agreement that there should be six levels of shading, plus gray for areas with no instances or no data. (May 2020)

There is no consensus about whether the legend, the date, and other elements should appear in the map image itself. (May 2020)

For map legends, ranges should use fixed round numbers (as opposed to updating dynamically). There is no consensus on what base population to use for per capita maps. (May 2020)

To ensure you are viewing the current list, you may wish to purge this page.

COVID-19 Top‑importance

	COVID-19 portal 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disaster management Top‑importance

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Emergency / Pulmonology High‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Emergency medicine and EMS task force (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Pulmonology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Viruses Top‑importance

	Viruses portal 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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation was copied or moved into COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and hesitancy with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Mischievous use of the term "anti-vaxxer"

It is mischievous and opportunistic to describe all people opposed to the covid vaccine as "Anti-vaxxers". It is the same as claiming that all people who don't like icecream are "anti-sugar". 41.116.162.241 (talk) 13:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We go with what RS say. Slatersteven (talk) 13:04, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you oppose ONE specific vaccine, in this case the Covid19 vaccine, but you support, in general, other vaccines (like Measles, Mumps, Pertussis, Polio, Smallpox), why should you be considered by the plethora of WP editors as being 'antivax' ? 167.248.152.245 (talk) 15:59, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do such people exist? Source please! Bon courage (talk) 16:12, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've met many people like this! 88.97.160.176 (talk) 22:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:RS, we leave that decision to reliable sources. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced

This article streamlines the various conspiracies and complaints that have been disproven, but there’s no category in the article for serious legitimate criticisms. It comes across more like propaganda than well-balanced thoughtful research. J.P.Dill (talk) 10:28, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is because it is about misinformation. Slatersteven (talk) 10:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it is about what Wikipedia believes is misinformation; Wikipedia does not have the truth as anyone else does. AlexanderFreud (talk) 12:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is about what RS calls misinformation. Slatersteven (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COVID misinformation and AIDS denialism

Why for AIDS is defined denialism and for COVID misinformation? How many years Wikipedia needs to get COVID recognised as denialism as it has been for AIDS, which has a longer history? How Wikipedia knows what is information and what is misinformation? I think this encyclopedia would need some more philosophers of science to work on it. AlexanderFreud (talk) 12:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RS calls it misinformation. Slatersteven (talk) 12:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Misinformation"

Why are the vaccine "misinformation" articles NOT held to the 'Neutral Point of View' standard listed by Wikpedia above as one of their Article Policies? Russell G Jacquay (talk) 11:24, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Care to point out an example of where we violate npov? Slatersteven (talk) 13:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Addition: Before you point those out, you should actually read WP:NPOV. And WP:FRINGE. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather see what they thought was a violation, then we can tell them why its not. Slatersteven (talk) 11:16, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]