Template talk:COVID-19 box

COVID-19 box

Swept in from the pub

This comment at Template talk:Cautionbox made me wonder if it would be useful to have a designated COVID-19 template. That would help us keep track of which articles have COVID-19 information and keep the information up to date, for as long as that continues to be necessary. I've created Template:COVID-19 box, and I've added it to the Uruguay article as an example. What does everyone think? Is it worth using this instead of the various cautionbox templates about COVID-19? —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:37, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea, because sooner or later they won't be needed any longer, or at least will need to be updated. A separate type of warning box will make it easier to see in which articles COVID warnings are.

As an example why this is useful; a few weeks ago I ran into a warningbox where an Italian city was sealed off "since early March" (restrictions were lifted around May in Italy). Looking at the user contributions I found ten more such boxes in Italian cities which I deleted . Ypsilon (talk) 18:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

A few days ago I updated EU (or Schengen?), also lastedit=March. So not just small cities. I think Switzerland and Italy also were similar. –LPfi (talk) 18:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding the covid-boxes we get all noticed. But I think a maintenance category for boxes with lastedit more than three months ago is needed. –LPfi (talk) 18:29, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Assuming I wrote the template correctly, it should automatically put the articles in a maintenance category when the lastedit date is more than three months ago. I'll test that in a moment. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

It works: I edited Canada to use the template, and it was automatically categorized in Category:Has COVID-19 box with out of date warning. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Seeing support and no objections, I'll go ahead and start implementing this template in more articles. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:59, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Ground Zero (talk) 17:10, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Done. Anyone who's interested, please help update the articles in Category:Has COVID-19 box with no date and Category:Has COVID-19 box with out of date warning. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:03, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Already?! That was fast! --Bigpeteb (talk) 22:38, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Position of COVID-19 box in articles

When COVID-19 hit, the situation was evolving rapidly, and it was important to get information out to travellers quickly. Wikivoyagers responded well by adding Warning boxes and Caution boxes that have now been migrated into dedicated COVID-19 boxes. This information is valuable, and should be kept, but I think we should discuss where the box should be placed in the article. In some cases, we have a lot of detailed information on (a) restrictions on entry to the country, and (b) restrictions on movement and activities within the country. As a result, the first screen a reader sees might be filled up with COVID-19 information.

I don't think this is necessary or good at this point.

• First, everyone is now aware of the pandemic. This isn't urgent news anymore. We don't have to put it front and centre.
• Second, this pandemic is going to be with us another 6-12 months.
• Third, there aren't that many people travelling at the moment, but many may be reading Wikivoyage to plan for future trips, or to dream of a world in which travel is possible.

We should definitely keep COVID-19 information, but if there is a lot of it, I think we should move it to the Understand section, or under "Get in" if it's about entry.

Comments? Ground Zero (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I very much agree. As of now the coronavirus is a global problem, not something affecting just one or a few countries, so it's not necessary to mention it right in the lead section. But we definitely should mention the situation and the restrictions in country articles.. --Ypsilon (talk) 21:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I accept the arguments presented and largely agree. We could even have a (hopefully temporary) "COVID-19" subsection as a standard part of a country article's 'Understand' / 'Get in'.

But I wonder what you would think of keeping a small box at the top of articles that allows the reader to navigate to the relevant information in one tap or click. While many aren't travelling, for those who are, the pandemic is still the number one concern. Very scrappy demo:

COVID-19 information: Click here for advice on travelling around the United Kingdom during the Coronavirus pandemic.

The "here" would be hyperlinked to wherever in the article the information was stored.--ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 21:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

That would be a good approach -- COVID-19 box at the top, and regular text subsections below. Ground Zero (talk) 21:21, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

I would prefer keeping the Covid information in a box - either a single box as present, or the one line box at the top, and another box maybe in Stay Safe with all the details. The information is continually changing (restrictions change every few weeks), and often contradicts the rest of the article - the main text may say pubs close at midnight, when the Covid box says they close at 6pm. By keeping the information in a box, we can also track where it all is, and the box also shows that this takes precedence over the main text.

I travelled for a week in August, staying in hotels. When looking at websites to arrange this trip, I tended to ignore those that didn't have clear Covid information as this suggested that they might still be closed. AlasdairW (talk) 22:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

I have added a lot of info about COVID situation in Latvia. Is this too much or should we maybe separate information into sections. Same way it was done at reopen-EU for example. Soshial (talk) 19:05, 13 October 2020 (UTC)