Talk:Chikungunya

Hi all, I'm doing some updating on this article -- Chikungunya has hit the big time since some of this material was written. I'm pulling a bit of info out of the article that I don't see in more recent sources and stashing it here for a moment. If I find it in other more recent sources I'll add it back:

Ajpolino (talk) 03:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Calebboudreau.

— Assignment last updated by Calebboudreau (talk) 14:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I see that the Accuracy Dispute template was added to this section last month. It says "This section appears to contradict itself on the existence of an approved vaccine. Please see the talk page for more information." There is obviously no discussion of this on the Talk page at present, and in reading the section I do not see any contradictory information; the section starts off saying that a vaccine exists, though preventing mosquito bites in the first place remains the best method of prevention, and nowhere else in the section does it mention anything about a vaccine not being available. Given that there does not appear to be a contradiction, I suggest removing the template as it is not necessary. Lumberjane Lilly (talk) 22:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

This is a procedural split proposal. User:Robertpedley suggested at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#Chikungunya virus that the Chikungunya virus section be split out into a separate article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:55, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles, the subsection Virology should be under the Causes section. Currently, it is under the Chikungunya virus section. I can't say anything about the weight of the information in the section, since I am not familiar with the topic, but a separate article about the virus would be notable. Here are some sources that can be used to write an article about the virus: , , , , . D6194c-1cc (talk) 08:43, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing thank you for moving this forward.

Here's the case in favour:

• As far as i know, all significant infectious diseases have a separate page for the virus or bacterium which causes it. Examples: tuberculosis, influenza, dengue fever.
• Different categories: tropical diseases / human viruses
• Different medical specialities: epidemiology / virology
• Different audiences. I assume that the virus article would be of limited interest to non-specialists. As an example, tuberculosis receives 140k hits per month, Mycobacterium tuberculosis around 20k.

As regards notability, chikungunya disease is a growing global issue, with an estimated 445k cases in 2025 up to September.^[1]. Bob (talk) 11:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

There are a couple of merged-up articles left, such as Human hepatitis A virus and Sabiá virus, but generally the years-long trend has been to split them. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Agreed, there is sufficient information on this virus and disease pair that splitting makes sense. I know of a range of useful sources, especially for the epidemiology. Feel free to ping me once the ball gets rolling. CFCF (talk) 10:20, 18 October 2025 (UTC)

Support there's plenty enough information on both the virus and the disease it causes that I think the reader is best served by separate pages. Ajpolino (talk) 14:56, 25 October 2025 (UTC)