Talk:WHO declares global mpox emergency, UNICEF prepares conditional vaccine supply agreements

OR

OR consists of an email interview. I have forwarded the email conversation to scoopwn-reporters.org. Note that all titles of the topics were written by Prof. Ogoina -- Balabinrm (talk) 00:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Balabinrm

Is the title precise? Is this indeed 'everyone'? Also, general audience does not know who Dimie is. Is there a chance to clarify the headline?

It is possible that in interviews the Wikinews-authored part of the conversation is formatted in bold, this is minor edit.

Thank you and Regards Gryllida (talk) 05:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Gryllida

I took Dimie's quote as a title - but I am open to any alternative suggestions. And yes, from his answer, it seems that 'everyone' is at risk: smallpox vaccination was not proven to be 100% effective from mpox. Especially half a century later.

Thank you for your interest. --

Balabinrm (talk) 18:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Based on the lede and this joint news release[1], an alternate headline could be "WHO declares global mpox emergency, UNICEF prepares conditional vaccine supply agreements."

I know two reviewers are involved, so just as a heads-up; there is no source provided to support UNICEF's issuing of emergency tender, though it can be verified.[2] @Balabinrm, I would add it as a source myself, but since this is original reporting, I'll stay relatively hands-off except for minor editing such as style requirements. I already changed the formatting of dates and added image attributions per WN:Style and removed some emotive language (the word 'ravages' in an image discription) to make the image description more fact-based. Feel free to revert my changes. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:49, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your idea for the headline: I think it fits perfectly. I have also added a source for UNICEF's involvement. -- Balabinrm (talk) 20:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)

Email interview

Scoop has long been broken (for almost two years that I know about) and I don't anticipate it getting fixed any time soon. An alternative to get the ball rolling may be to use wiki-mail to get the interview directly into the hands of a reviewer.

I have also seen reviewers offer to authors their personal email to use in these situations, but that is up to the individual reviewer to offer their personal email. These three reviewers have been active recently and may be able to help: @Gryllida, @Bddpaux, @Heavy Water. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:23, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I can easily re-send our conversation with Dimie to anyone interested. -- Balabinrm (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Michael.C.Wright: Not sure where you heard that. Scoop isn't broken as far as I know. The problems are, respectively: Gryllida doesn't have access from any device they can use anymore, Bddpaux is trying to reset his password, and I don't think my wn-reporters account was ever given access. (It's possible you're thinking of the old scoop account, under the wikinewsie.org domain that we lost use of in 2020, if I understood correctly because of complications in transferring liability for payments after Brianmc died.) Heavy Water (talk) 04:49, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

For a long time, there was a notice in the header about one of the email systems being dysfunctional and I thought it said Scoop. I thought it was posted using Sitenotice but I don't see it in the history. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Either way, given what you've said, it is effectively dysfunctional—no currently active reviewers have access to what the author sent—and there are alternatives for the author to get the information to a reviewer so that this article can be reviewed. Maybe the author can remove any sensitive information from the email and simply post the interview here in the notes in the meantime. That way the content can be reviewed and the article polished to a point of being ready to be published once a reviewer can verify the email interview was legitimately with Ogoina (i.e., from his work email address), etc. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

I guess reviewer requesting the information to be emailed directly to reviewer is an option. Gryllida (talk) 19:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Scoop

I am trying to get into my WN email account to view those notes. We have some major breakdown in that department right now. Sorry. We'll see where it goes.--Bddpaux (talk) 18:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)

Can you request the notes to be emailed to you directly via EmailUser, @Bddpaux? Gryllida (talk) 01:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

The reason for UNICEF's emergency tender

UNICEF's stated reason for the emergency tender is "The UNICEF tender is issued to help secure mpox vaccines for the hardest hit countries..."[3] UNICEF doesn't mention pregnant women.

I think it will make the review process quicker and easier if we avoid assigning the reason to UNICEF's involvement and instead just state what they did or quote or otherwise attribute the statement as to why they got involved.

If you would like to include the statement about severity in children and pregnant women, it would be best if that statement is attributed and supported by the sources. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 14:44, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment: you are right, news article about tender does not contain the reasons of UNICEF involvement. I have added an earlier source from UNICEF about mpox and children. I can also add /1/ if additional clarification is needed. -- Balabinrm (talk) 19:58, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

An alternative would be to make the second half of the lede state something like: "In response, the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) issued an emergency tender on August 31 to procure vaccines for regions hardest hit by the outbreak, aiming to protect vulnerable populations as part of broader efforts to control the disease." That, I believe, is closer to what UNICEF explicitly provided as the reason for the emergency tender and avoids being very (overly?) specific about defining vulnerable populations within the context of UNICEF's decision.

You could then, later in the article add that children and pregnant women are particularly vulnerable. That information would fit well in the general/background information of the inverted WN:PYRAMID. The source you most-recently added provides excellent support for that statement.

Also know that a reviewer may disagree with my assessment. I am not a reviewer—I'm just trying to help make the article easier for a reviewer to pass. We are currently short on active reviewers so their time is very limited and I think this article would be very good for WN to publish, especially given that you were able to get an interview with Ogoina. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree: it makes more sense to separate tender and children. Done. Thank you once again -- Balabinrm (talk) 16:51, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Questions from Gryllida

Hi @Balabinrm

Thank you for the article, it is a relevant topic affecting many regions.

• The justification why specifically a Nigerian person was interviewed is unclear. I am suspecting it would be good to describe where the outbreak(s) are taking or took place.

• There is sentence "Justification of Concerns About Mpox Neglect" in beginning of interview, is it like an interview title? Or what is it? I see it is mentioned a few times, there are such short notes, like section names in interview. They seem to be a bit opinionated to me, which could present an issue with reducing bias in published article. I would like to know whether I am alone in thinking like this.

• "You were among the very first to raise the alarm as mpox (monkeypox) spread through Nigeria’s cities in 2017." according to whom?

• The interview answers involve opinion, 'neglect' of mpox by WHO. Would it make sense to interview WHO about the same topic also for the sake of neutral point of view? I'm interested what other contributors, like @Michael.C.Wright, @Bddpaux, @Heavy Water, think about whether or not this is a requirement.

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 01:13, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Dear Gryllida:

Thank you for your interest in the topic.

1. Nigerian person: Professor Dr. Dimie Ogoina is the chairperson of the WHO Emergency Committee regarding the upsurge of mpox. He was interviewed in this role only.

2. "Justification of Concerns About Mpox Neglect" and all other sub-titles were written by professor Ogoina himself (see his email). They seem to represent his position.

3. He was among the first to raise the alarm as mpox (monkeypox) according to Jon Cohen and Abdullahi Tsanni (Science, 2024). That is why he is currently the chairperson of the WHO Emergency Committee. I can provide extra references on his role if needed.

4. To interview WHO: Well, in some way, that is what this interview is all about... )

Thank you once again. -- Balabinrm (talk) 01:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Balabinrm

1,2,3. Thank you for the clarification.

4. Maybe interview someone else in WHO who has an opposing view or was otherwise in charge of making decisions to ignore the monkeypox previously? Or a medical person in charge of a health system like Mr Anthony Fauci in the USA (maybe bad example, it is probably not that affected by outbreak; just indicating the authority/role the person could have)? Or a researcher who is developing some improved vaccines?

5. There is mention in last question that existing vaccines are not that effective, followed by bold claim that 70% of population is "at risk". Could a clarification on that be obtained from the interviewee? Some statistics? Is this because the vaccines don't work; is it because not enough people are vaccinated; what approaches are possibly being taken to improve the effectiveness of vaccines.

Regards, Gryllida (talk) 02:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Dear Gryllida:

4. That was exactly my intension in the second question, named "Consensus Among WHO Emergency Committee Members" by professor Ogoina. His answer was rather straightforward: "all fifteen members [of the WHO Emergency Committee] who attended were unanimous in advising the WHO Director-General that the upsurge of mpox constituted a public health emergency of international concern".

5. My last question was based on the article of Karl Simpson, Andy Wapling (NHS England) et al. who "estimated that over 70% of the world’s population is no longer protected against smallpox, and through cross-immunity, to closely related orthopox viruses such as monkeypox" because "[s]mallpox eradication... led to the cessation of routine smallpox vaccination in most countries." Professor Ogoina seem to confirm this number. The paper of Simpson et al. is cited by 314 other articles (Scholar), so it will be of no problem to add extra sources if needed. I could also add more specific <ref> to this study. -- Balabinrm (talk) 03:00, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! Gryllida (talk) 03:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

How did you get a picture of the interviewee? It says 'own work'. Did you photograph him? @Balabinrm Gryllida (talk) 03:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

And what is your involvement in the area? It mentions you have 'Dr' qualifications, when your name is mentioned in the text. Thank you in advance! Gryllida (talk) 03:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Good morning, Grillida:

I am the sole copyright holder of the photograph. I am also trying to secure a Creative Commons (CC) licence for the NDU Teaching Hospital website; ideally, the entire Niger Delta University website. This may be difficult: even panorama freedom is quite limited under the Nigerian Copyright Act of 2022. In my spare time, I am reading Asein's "Nigerian Copyright Law and Practice" to see where this all leads...

I am a PhD in chemistry, currently working at Jiangxi TCM University (PRC). I am not involved in any vaccine-related research: I am working on completely different topics /1/, /2/. So, to be formal, I have no conflicts of interest to declare ) -- Balabinrm (talk) 14:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Pre-review

Status:    Unsure

Version evaluated: 4797479

• Copyright: Passed
• Newsworthiness: Passed
• Verifiability: Not ready: See notes below. More sources are needed.
• NPOV: Not ready: See notes below
• Style: Passed

Notes for author(s):

This is a very good article for the first article submitted by this author. It is also commendable that the author secured such an interview. I hope the author sticks around and continues to contribute to Wikinews.

Original reporting (OR) requires notes to be shared here in the collaboration/talk page of the article. In future OR, please think about the reviewing process as you compile your notes. An example of what I have done in the past to help the reviewer can be found here: Talk:Industry leaders see energy supply as the next hurdle for AI. It is important to fact-check the interviewee's responses, per WN:OR.

All facts must be properly sourced. For example, the paragraph about Ogoina is unsourced. I verified it and added hidden citations, but the author needs to include his sources in the "Sources" section for the article to pass review. Unnecessary sources can be removed to simplify the review. For instance, the source titled "Mpox IHR Emergency Committee 2024"[[4]] seems to be a general-info page. If it doesn't support any specific facts that aren't supported by another source, it can be removed.

Regarding WN:Neutrality; Ogoina's view of 'neglect' is supported by the Science article, which uses terms like "mpox was inadvertently [emphasis added] given an opportunity to spread." I don't think the use of 'neglect' needs to be challenged. One definition of neglect is simply "To fail to care for or attend to something." However, if others are concerned, it might be quicker to ask Ogoina for clarification rather than waiting for the author to arrange another interview with someone else.

The statement "...the chairperson of the WHO Emergency Committee, agreed to answer five queries from Wikinews reporter Dr. Roman Balabin via email" should be revised. Balabin should identify himself as an independent author or researcher as required by WN:OR, and hopefully he did the same in the email to Ogoina. If Balabin uses the title "Dr." in the article, the reviewer should privately verify that 1) the user is indeed Balabin and 2) Balabin holds a doctoral degree.

Notes for reviewer:

I have included in-line citations as <!--html comment-->, which can be seen using the source editor. I have set the status to "unsure" because I don't have access (and shouldn't have, as a non-reviewer) to the email containing the interview. Once the issues above regarding sources, the author's credentials and role regarding wikinews are addressed, and the email interview is validated, I think the article is ready to be published.

---

This is a pre-review only and is not part of the official review process. A pre-review is meant to help the author or authors improve the article and increase the likelihood of it passing a formal review. This pre-review was not done by a reviewer and represents a recommendation that can be heeded or ignored.

—Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 12:46, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright may I ask why you marked this as unsure? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 01:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

See the "Notes for reviewer" above: I have set the status to "unsure" because I don't have access (and shouldn't have, as a non-reviewer) to the email containing the interview. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 13:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Michael.C.Wright but you are a reviewer now (you forgot already?) Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I wasn't a reviewer when I evaluated the article for the pre-review. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 21:39, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Balabinrm, could you please read the above, looks like the following are expected to be done now:

• add citations where requested by the pre-review above
• identify yourself as an independent author or researcher within article text
• clarify your affiliation, and your qualifications

For your reference, @Michael.C.Wright, I don't mind 'neglect' word being used in final revision, as you noted. Gryllida (talk) 01:51, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Left a note on @Balabinrm's talk page to see reply. Gryllida (talk) 01:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Headline

This headline really needs rewording, it isn't fit for publishing at the moment. •–• 16:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

There is a proposed headline that the author is fine with[5]: "WHO declares global mpox emergency, UNICEF prepares conditional vaccine supply agreements"

I assume as a new editor here they aren't aware of how to change it. I didn't change it when I proposed it because Gryllida was already involved when I proposed the alternate headline and I'll default to them, as they raised the question as well. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 21:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Mpox seems not informative enough, monkeypox though works better in my opinion, thanks. BigKrow (talk) 23:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

The WHO recommends this: "Following a series of consultations with global experts, WHO will begin using a new preferred term “mpox” as a synonym for monkeypox. Both names will be used simultaneously for one year while “monkeypox” is phased out."[6] Our article uses both terms, with mpox the primary term and monkeypox the clarifying term. I used mpox in the title because it is shorter than using both "mpox (monkeypox)." Technically, we could probably just use "mpox" based on the WHO's recommendation in 2022 of using both for only one year. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 23:33, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok sorry for you having a long write up, thanks though for clarifying. @Michael.C.Wright BigKrow (talk) 23:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm not working on this. You're welcome to rename and/or edit and/or review. I am too frustrated with thinking how to present this neutrally (I'm happy with the author's clarifications, yet have very little understanding in the area). Gryllida (talk) 01:48, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Yep. This article doesn’t need to die —- but I am so tired and so busy with work. —Bddpaux (talk) 03:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Try something like "<Dimie Ogoina's position> Dimie Ogoina announces "Everyone is at risk of mpox infection" or something like that -- because as someone just browsing, I have no idea who is Dimie Ogoina or mpox. •–• 03:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Gryllida and @Bddpaux, have either of you received the interview email from Balabinrm and been able to verify things? Balabinrm, you can also send it to me; Wright.Michael.C (at) protonmail.com. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 15:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Balabinrm could you please email to scoop (again; I know you already did) and to Michael's email above ASAP? Gryllida (talk) 22:59, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I found the headline a little confusing because it is multiple events and probably not entirely recent. What about "Wikinews interviews World Health Organization [role] [name of person] about mpox health emergency: 'everyone is at risk'" or something similar? Gryllida (talk) 10:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Fact-checking Ogoina's responses

While revisiting Ogoina's 'negelct' statement in light of Gryllida's 'frustrated' comment above, I took a closer look at that statement, which includes "WHO openly stated that outside of contingency funds used during the 2022 outbreak, no donations were received for the mpox response in Africa."

I have so far been unable to find where WHO openly stated that.

I did find an article from the CDC[7], which states; "In fiscal year 2023, the United States allocated more than $2.65 billion in bilateral health funding to countries in Central and Eastern Africa and is the largest global health donor." That statement is under the heading "United States support to the global mpox outbreak."

Balabinrm, can you help get some clarity on this and fact-check the other responses? Feel free to change, remove, update my inline citations around those responses. —Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Published) 16:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Stale

It kills me for something like this to go stale, but it is either at that status or awfully close and I am absolutely swamped with work right now. Another reviewer needs to take some action. I'm sorry. An interesting (and sad) topic.--Bddpaux (talk) 00:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)