@DallasFletcher: Are you still planning to do more with this "Fourth wave 1920" section

of the article? I'm glad it no longer includes one of the unsourced statements that was
questioned above: "Mortality rates were very low." However, our article still says "a very
minor fourth wave", without a suitable citation. The section's Guardian reference calls
the fourth wave "less severe". Should we use this wording instead? Or do you have a ref
that would support keeping "very minor"? Thanks. —24.191.101.221 (talk) 04:55, 9
August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I am still planning to do more with this section but unfortunately good refs are
difficult to find. Let me see what I can put together in a the next few days and we can
figure it out from there. DallasFletcher (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
Updated now. I removed the "very minor" wording because it's ambiguous and
unsourceable. Also it seems like in some isolated places this fourth wave was
comparable to earlier ones, not minor at all. DallasFletcher (talk) 22:06, 16 August 2020
(UTC)
Thanks, much improved! —24.191.101.221 (talk) 02:38, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Better date information[edit]

Using Spring and Spring/Summer is confusing.
Is the northern hemisphere Spring or the southern hemisphere Spring being referenced, or
does wikipedia change what it is based on the geo location of the
user? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.210.252.77 (talk) 09:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Yes, quite right that WP:SEASON discourages seasons as a way of identifying the date
due to the difference between the northern and southern hemispheres. Terms like
spring, summer and fall are used in the article, and these should be replaced to comply
with WP:SEASON.--♦IANMACM♦  (talk to me) 10:08, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Also agree. Why don't we just use absolute dates, like March 1918 - June 1919 or even
just 1918-1919, since the flu occurred on different timelines in different parts of the
world? If nobody objects soon I'll change this. DallasFletcher (talk) 02:01, 12 May 2020
(UTC)

Name of the article[edit]

Why is the article still called the Spanish flu? Spanish flu should of course point to
this article, but if people want to have a geographic marker, the Kansas flu would be
more accurate. 1918 flu pandemic would be more neutral as a name and be more
accurate.Jochum (talk) 10:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
See Talk:Spanish_flu/Archive_3#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_11_April_2020 and T
alk:Spanish_flu/Archive_3#Requested_move_15_March_2020.--♦IANMACM♦  (talk to
me)
 15:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
Wow, looks like there've been multiple "waves" of attempts to change the name
of this article over the past few months. That's not surprising, since the current
global coronavirus pandemic has quite obviously inspired a great deal of new
 interest in, and discussion of, the broadly-comparable event of a century ago.
Six months ago, it's extremely unlikely that anyone would've suggested this
change, mainly because there really wasn't any particular reason for the subject
to be on anybody's radar. But, guess what, things have changed drastically in
the past five months. Clearly, there are a great many conscientious individuals
who have recently become educated about the history of the so-called "Spanish
flu" pandemic, including the origins of that counterfactual moniker. There's
nothing at all surprising, much less conspiratorial, about the fact that a great and
growing number of such people have come to the conclusion that the moniker
can no longer be considered appropriate for use in an official, formal, or
scholarly context — such as, indeed, the title of an encyclopedia article.
⋮
Reviewing the "discussions" of this issue in these Talk pages from recent
months, I've seen quite a lot of rude, irrational, knee-jerk rejections not only of
the title-change suggestion but of the individuals bringing those suggestions
forward, even including accusations of vaguely sinister "political agendas" that
are as bizarre as they are unsubstantiated. Such behavior is totally contrary to
the rules and community standards that Wikipedia editors are expected to
follow.
⋮
Given the principles that guide Wikipedians, and the guidance given by the most
authoritative of sources, there is no compelling rationale for failing to change the
article title at the present time. Nevertheless, it's not absolutely necessary for
the change to be effected immediately; the fate of the world is not hanging on
the outcome of any proposal to change the title of one Wikipedia article. I would
encourage those in favor of the title change here to be patient. Try again in four
months' time. If that fails, try again after another four months, and if necessary
once more four months after that. I feel confident that by this time next year,
consensus to change the title will have coalesced sufficiently to make it happen.
— Jaydiem (talk) 05:55, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
The article actually hasn't been called "Spanish flu" long, and it's called that because of
a recent decision to change the title over to "Spanish flu". The article actually was called
"1918 flu pandemic" for years, then was moved to "Spanish flu" in a June 2018
discussion which didn't attract a lot of attentiona-only a few people voted. (The final
result seems to have been 7-2 in favour of a move. I would have voted oppose but found
out about it too late; I was grumbling about it in 2019.) My impression is a lot of modern
scholarship avoids the term or puts "Spanish" in scare quotes, but recent political
debates aside I think "Spanish flu" is the term best-known to older readers, people
coming from a history background, and readers in the USA, making a big coalition of
readers who prefer it. Blythwood (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
@Blythwood: "[T]he term best-known to[...]" sounds to me like a great reason for a
redirect from "Spanish flu" to what I would consider to be a more appropriate
encyclopedic title. Also worth noting, as I think others have mentioned elsewhere, is that
there is a distinction to be made between the "Spanish flu" pandemic, as a historical
event, and the "Spanish flu" virus, the infectious pathogen that was the pandemic's root
cause. The title "1918 influenza pandemic", having that last P-word, avoids this
ambiguity, whereas the title "Spanish flu" does not. For that reason, for as long as
"Spanish flu" remains part of the canonical title of this article, I would submit that it
should be redirected to the more descriptive (and encyclopedic) "Spanish flu pandemic
of 1918". But then, who am I to blow against the wind? — Jaydiem (talk) 18:38, 26 June
2020 (UTC)
"the popularity of an opinion does not make it valid" (attributed to Socrates). This page
should not reproduce the falsehood that the pandemic of flu in 1918-19 could in any way
be blamed on Spain. The story of misapportioned blame merits a section, but it should
not be emblazoned as fact in the title. See for
example https://www.sciencefriday.com/articles/the-origin-of-the-spanish-flu/,
and https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/03/23/fact-check-how-did-1918-
pandemic-get-name-spanish-flu/2895617001/. – Timlev37 —Preceding undated comment
added 12:06, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

 AFAIK, the disease was "Spanish" because Spain reported it forst

(amidst the WWI events).Uchyotka (talk) 07:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Greetings: In article after article at the World Health Organization (WHO) website, they
refer to this event by the awkward term "1918 influenza pandemic known colloquially as
Spanish flu". Here's their criteria for naming future viruses and
disease: https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/notes/2015/naming-new-diseases/en/ H
ere's a Snopes article on how it became known as "Spanish flu" for lay
interest: https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/09/how-did-spanish-flu-get-name/ Than
k you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 21:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
Edited to add this link - https://www.who.int/home/search?
query=1918+influenza&page=1&pagesize=10&sortdir=desc&sort=relevance&default=A
ND&f.Countries.size=100&f.Lang.filter=en&f.RegionalSites.size=100&f.Topics.size=100
&f.contenttype.size=100&f.doctype.size=101&facet.field=RegionalSites&facet.field=Topi
cs&facet.field=doctype&facet.field=Countries&facet.field=contenttype&facet.field=Lang&t
une=true&tune.0=3&tune.1=2&tune.2=2&tune.3=3&tune.4=180&tune.5=75

If we're naming 1918-20 H1N1 flu the Spanish Flu because it was first
reported in Spain when it came from Kansas, America, then we should
rename Covid-19 flu China-flu/Wuhan Virus because it was first reported
in Wuhan, China. Hypocrite. Naming both viruses after a region/nation is
super bigotted and racist and a horrible violation of WHO"s medical
law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.74.20 (talk) 00:45, 13
October 2020 (UTC)