![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Human metapneumovirus be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
doi:10.1128/CMR.00081-15 JFW | T@lk 08:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
The 'Epidemiology' section has some pretty massive overciting. While there's nothing wrong with that, I know that it is generally discouraged. Can someone with expertise in these matters either expand the section to spread out what each specific ref is citing, or trim them down to the most relevant cites? I have zero expertise in these disciplines, so I can't make an informed judgement as to what is most relevant. Anastrophe ( talk) 22:42, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Post Covid patients respiratory response and length of illness to this virus seems much more severe than to those never infected with Covid 2600:6C40:1300:5BE1:564:19E8:99C4:27D1 ( talk) 01:41, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Afaik, Wikipedia does not speak in terms of first person pronouns. Several sections have "We ..." passages. I am in to place to correct this myself. Ellenor2000 ( talk) 22:18, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
The article should stick to one or the other in my opinion. I don't know which one is the 'official' designation. There are 59 iterations of the character string in the article (including in refs). 25 are "HMPV", 34 are "hMPV". cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 03:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC)