Talk:Chinese virus

RFD discussion: June 2020–September 2021
The definition has been neutered to the extent that it is NiSoP. ("Any of various viruses originating, identified, or causing outbreaks in China") DCDuring (talk) 02:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, SOP. This phrase has been used to refer to a variety of viruses since 1895. The current (2020) political controversy about the phrase does not make it dictionary material. —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:13, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * An older definition "COVID-19", removed out of process, was not SoP. I'm sure that we could get quite a few citations for this in this hot-word sense, with the definite determiner the. Whether it will live more than one year is an empirical question. DCDuring (talk) 02:18, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that 2020 uses of "the Chinese virus" to refer to COVID-19 are SOP, just as much as older uses referring to other viruses. —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:33, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Accordingly, I have added an RFD tag to the other sense too. —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:34, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You've accused me of removing the COVID-19 sense out of process. I'm sorry if I gave that impression, which was not intended—as I indicated in my edit summary, I was trying to broaden the definition to more completely capture how the phrase is used. It seems to me that use of the Chinese virus to describe "COVID-19" is just an instance of the broader "virus originating in China" sense. Is there any reason to think it isn't? (You or I may approve or disapprove of the use of this phrase, but that doesn't make it idiomatic.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:08, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The generalization to the point of SoPitude led to my RfD which you support. It looks like a two-step deletion of an entry you don't like, that would have been under color of a legitimate process. But the COVID-19 sense is distinct, though obviously derived from the SoP term. If we can't handle politically controversial material we should get out of the business of providing definitions for novel terms in living languages. DCDuring (talk) 13:40, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence that usage describing COVID-19 represents a distinct sense rather than the general sense? —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:18, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I have observed that I and people I talk to tend to say "[the] coronavirus" instead of the several other names. We all know which of the many coronaviruses is meant.  "Chinese virus" works the same way in my opinion.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:36, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * As I pointed out in the coronavirus RFD discussion (now at Talk:coronavirus), there are uses of coronavirus that cannot be explained by the general sense, so the specific sense is needed. Do uses exist for Chinese virus that cannot be explained by the general sense? I don't think I've seen any. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:43, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Sense 2 says "(politics) COVID-19". What is that trying to say? That this word is specifically used, in a technical sense, among politicians generally, to refer to COVID-19? Yeah? I thought it was just Trump. Equinox ◑ 04:05, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * It certainly isn't just Trump. Users includes his minions and allies. DCDuring (talk) 13:40, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Users include conservatives. Does anybody really know what the man on the street says?  (Or would say if he were allowed on the street?) Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:03, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete for now. Far more generic than Wuhan virus, which I would keep if it is still used next year.  If kept, rewrite the definition of the COVID-19 sense and delete the Wikipedia link related to Donald Trump.  Perhaps change the definition to  because it has exactly the same meaning and essentially the same connotations.  And while we're on the subject, what do people think about the recent addition of "derogatory" to Wuhan virus?  Most people dislike the virus and any name could be derogatory.  I think the usage note explains sufficiently the fact that use of the term may suggest a political affiliation (for better or worse) and I would delete the new label. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:53, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * What CFI rationale for deletion? Reasons for deletion do not include "inaccuracy", controversy, or use by unpopular political figures or their followers.
 * Usually directs a user to the most common term for the referent, which, in this case, is COVID-19.
 * Perhaps we should include a derogatory label on Spanish flu, French disease, Ebolavirus, Rocky Mountain fever, etc., too. DCDuring (talk) 15:35, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the PERSON on the street says COVID, half as many syllables as COVID-19, not readily mistaken for any other topic such person might discuss. DCDuring (talk) 15:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete as sum of parts. If kept because its meaning has narrowed, then what it's a synonym of depends on what you think the template means.  Stripped of connotations, it does mean COVID-19 or SARS 2. (I drop -CoV- in speech.)  In a discussion in the Beer Parlour (last of May, 2020) editors thought a synonym meant you could freely substitute one word for the other.  Some people use choice of word as a means of signaling their tribal affiliation.  You could almost swap Chinese virus and Wuhan virus, but you couldn't swap Chinese virus and COVID-19 because in certain circles one is offensive and the other is not.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:28, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Other reasons you can't swap Chinese virus and COVID-19: the phrase Chinese virus is also used to refer to other viruses/viral diseases, and COVID-19 is a proper noun (doesn't take a/the). As I said above, use of the Chinese virus to describe COVID-19 appears to be an instance of the SOP sense (roughly "any virus originating or identified in China"). If anyone can provide evidence to the contrary, that would be great. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:41, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
 * You can swap 'the Chinese virus' and 'COVID-19' as for semantics since 1) semantics and synonymy does not care about whether something is offensive, and 2) the definite article in the phrase lets the context help pick which of the multiple candidate viruses is meant. (I am not sure how much what I said is relevant to keeping or deleting; it is relevant to things said in this discussion.) --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I rewrote the COVID-19 sense and made it not so much about Trump, although the quotation I picked does have a headline about Trump. I also added a transitional form from an AP News story before "Chinese virus" disappeared from mainstream reporting outside of quotations.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 12:40, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete the "any virus from China" definition as SoP, keep the COVID-19 definition (not SoP because people use the phrase to mean specifically COVID-19 and are excluding, say, the 2003 SARS outbreak even though that was also a Chinese virus). Khemehekis (talk) 06:29, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
 * This phrase has been used for SARS, actually: "the dreaded new Chinese virus has gone desi with a vengeance", "SARS, too, had a dual genetic identity: it was a Chinese virus". Would you say we should add another sense for that usage? —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:28, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Interesting! My answer, though, is probably . . . unless you can find collocations of "the Chinese virus" for just about any notable virus that originated in China. Maybe an epidemiologist can give us more examples of viruses that originated in China, and we can use Internet search engines and see whether they were are referred to as the Chinese virus. Khemehekis (talk) 03:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The entry has five citations of the phrase being used to refer to other viruses. More can be found by searching online and limiting the publication dates to years before 2020. —Granger (talk· contribs) 10:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pointing me in that direction. I really don't know what to think. It seems there may be some merit in pointing out the COVID-19 isage of this term, since it has its own political overtnoes, as Sonofcawdrey points out below. One thing I'm sure of is that we don't need to create SoP senses for every virus associated with China, even if we keep the COVID-19 meaning. That would be like creating a sense for every way it's physically possible to fry an egg at the entry fried egg. Khemehekis (talk) 14:30, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Regretably, keep the covid sense. RWNJs like Kaley Macanney have given this word life. Purplebackpack89 12:25, 26 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete both senses, SOP. - -sche (discuss) 19:10, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete both senses. The second sense isn't properly attested. One of those quotes is actually a headline (which don't follow normal English rules) and the other two both use "the Chinese virus" which is arguably just a purely SOP adjective-noun formation. -Mike (talk) 08:01, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete the "any virus from China" definition as SoP, keep the COVID-19 definition - this is a politically charged sense that continues to be given life by Trump's dogged use of it, which, I imagine will continue for some time yet as the election year hots up. I think it should have a "deprecated" label and a clear usage note attached to explain the significance, as well as specific non-SOP sense, of the term. - Sonofcawdrey (talk) 13:15, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think if we keep the specific sense, we should also keep the generic sense (an if). --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:10, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * At least leave a &lit definition for the first sense if the second is kept. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 12:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that if the second sense is kept, the first sense must also be kept (at least as an &lit). —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. I hate the fact that the far-right FOX-loving scum in the US coined this but this is useful information to understand US political discourse in 2020. -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 16:25, 4 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete, SOP. J3133 (talk) 18:00, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep the COVID-19 sense; render anything else an . —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes it is sum of parts so we should delete
 * (Moved from new section.) J3133 (talk) 23:21, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete both, per Mihia. This is much like the definition pair "Any brown leaf." and "A brown maple leaf." for an entry brown leaf. A SOP phrase that is something of a fixed phrase for a specific referent is still a SOP entry. I don't think this can be considered a vernacular name. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  15:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep but with a separate entry for Covid-19 and heavily qualified: US, colloquial, vulgar, 2020-2021... Facts707 (talk) 02:45, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete both, SOP.--Tibidibi (talk) 14:51, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep the COVID sense with appropriate labels if attestable, delete the other generic one. &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 13:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * As suggested by others, keep 2 senses: the proscribed one, and the literal one. Delete the rest. DAVilla 04:49, 6 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep the COVID-19 sense. It is racist and discriminatory, and I detest it. But it has idiomatic use, and is (sadly) not so difficult to attest. It's probably not even a hot word any longer. And since that has idiomatic meaning, keep &lit for comparison. (The "any virus" sense is arguably SoP, though.) Cnilep (talk) 01:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: Edited down to 2 senses, first of which is literal. Page, not just the sense, should either be kept or deleted. At this point I would suggest closing as no consensus. DAVilla 02:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

No consensus to delete sense 2; sense 1 is therefore maintained solely as an &lit signal. bd2412 T 04:31, 25 September 2021 (UTC)