An item related to this article has been nominated to appear on the Main Page in the "In the news" section. You can visit the nomination to take part in the discussion. Editors are encouraged to update the article with information obtained from reliable news sources to include recent events.
Notice date: 14 August. Please remove this template when the nomination process has concluded, replacing it with Template:ITN talk if appropriate.
Why does the article refer to "monkeypox " as the former name?
In May 2015, World Health Organization (WHO) suggested naming practices for new infectious diseases to prevent offense or economic impact on any groups. In 2022 the WHO endorsed mpox as the new name for monkeypox. See Mpox#Nomenclature
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veterinary medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Veterinary medicine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veterinary medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicineTemplate:WikiProject Veterinary medicineVeterinary medicine
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Primates, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Primates on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PrimatesWikipedia:WikiProject PrimatesTemplate:WikiProject PrimatesPrimate
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica
Could we replace “formerly known as monkeypox” with “also known as monkeypox”?
“formerly“ is misleading because it is still known as monkeypox and many organisations (incl. official ones), media, and people are referring to it as “monkeypox”. 2001:4BC9:825:2ED3:88DC:FBD3:D7C5:DA7D (talk) 21:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Not only misleading, but false. It's more than a little concerning that wikipedia editors are comfortable subbing in newspeak terms and abruptly referring to the continued use of the now ungood term in the past tense to advance a POV. 24.237.159.220 (talk) 06:01, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello everyone this was extensively discussed a couple of years ago, the debate can be found in the talk archive. Here's the source:
Based on these consultations, and further discussions with WHO's Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO recommends the following: Adoption of the new synonym mpox in English for the disease. Mpox will become a preferred term, replacing monkeypox, after a transition period of one year.
I have restored the term "formerly"..... Because this word indicates to our readers that there has been a change in usage over them being used interchangeably. This indicates how the academic community has moves forward progressively in it's naming..... well emphasizing which is the preferred term currently. The old term should remain for research purposes for our readers. Source. Moxy🍁23:53, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The "preferred" term is already emphasized. The factually incorrect statement "formerly known as Monkeypox" is what was disputed. It is not sensible to say, both linguistically and logically, that a word is formerly used, when it is still used. Again, all the editing of my grammar revision has had no explanation as to why my choice of grammar is incorrect. I wasn't referring to anything on the medical side of it, but on the fact of the matter. And the fact is that people still (often and all over) refer to Monkeypox by it's original name. This is not helpful "indicating" of how health organizations changed the way they refer to the disease, as that is already covered elsewhere in the article. Misleading people about something being in the former when it is in fact in the present, to indicate something entirely unrelated, isn't what should inspire "edit wars". I'll stipulate that the taxonomy in the medical field has chosen to use mPox instead. Show me the part where the *present* is actually now the *former*, because presently, it is also known as Monkeypox. This part isn't disputed, so people should knock off the petty edits. 65.51.135.154 (talk) 00:25, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source is pretty clear as to why we don't want to use this derogatory term anymore. Formerly has a distinctive meaning..... as does also. Wikipedia's purpose is as an educational tool for our readers, thus we should indicate to them the change.... with a source educating them further so they can avoid a racist position in their terminology. As for a source pls review thisMoxy🍁00:34, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Source doesn't cite any guidelines. Actually it doesn't cite much of anything, including the word being derogatory. Also source doesn't apply any guidelines to the name "Monkeypox". Monkeypox isn't derogatory. It is just a factual name, based on how it was discovered. (I'll give you a hint, it's related to the word ;-) )
The word mpox derives from monkeypox. If monkeypox is derogatory (see above) then so is mpox. If someone has something that is factual (not formerly) that is better suited than "also", I'm open to ideas. Anything informative can be covered under "Nomenclature" in the article. Monkeypox is named after the virus that causes it, found originally in Monkeys. It is even more relevant than using "Chickenpox".
Also, Monkeypox isn't a racist position. It is not even a position . It's a word based on science, not race. Let's be correct with our language now. Anything else is merely fallacious rhetoric
I am reading the sources you are providing. I see an opinion piece and a cdc webpage. These are still about changing the name. The CDC one uses the phrase formally, but that's not accurate either. The other one doesn't specify that MPox is no longer known as Monkeypox. So the point which still isn't addressed, is that the use of the word former is just wrong. It would be wrong to say "mpox, no longer known as Monkeypox" or "mpox used to be known as Monkeypox, but is no longer known by that name". These are all the same thing as saying "formerly known as Monkeypox". I'm not saying people don't have good intentions in renaming. I'm pointing out the misleading and factually incorrect wording. 65.51.135.154 (talk) 02:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Professor Clarissa R Damaso and world health organization and below more academics vs random IP trying to chnage this for years to no avail.
Ulaeto, David; Agafonov, Alexander; Burchfield, Jennifer; Carter, Lisa; Happi, Christian; Jakob, Robert; Krpelanova, Eva; Kuppalli, Krutika; Lefkowitz, Elliot J; Mauldin, Matthew R; de Oliveira, Tulio; Onoja, Bernard; Otieno, James; Rambaut, Andrew; Subissi, Lorenzo; Yinka-Ogunleye, Adesola; Lewis, Rosamund F (2023). "New nomenclature for mpox (monkeypox) and monkeypox virus clades". The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 23 (3). Elsevier BV: 273–275. doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(23)00055-5. ISSN1473-3099. In May, 2015, WHO recommended best practices for naming new infectious diseases to avoid offense or economic effect for any ethnic, regional, or other groups. Although mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) is not new, WHO has endorsed mpox as the new name for this re-emerging disease and backed the scientific community to agree on neutral nomenclature for variants of viruses.
"Academics" should focus on clear and correct communication, before they delve into the redefining of nomenclature. You too, as you are still missing the point. The fact that someone is trying to change the wording "formerly", since this has been brought up before by others, should hint that your poor use of words should be resolved. Stop using whatever health organization using m-pox instead of Monkeypox as your reasoning, because it's not actually addressing the issue people have with the use of "formerly". I can find health organizations using the word Monkeypox as well (see edit history), and we can sling random sources at eachother. It's a useless waste of time. Please address any disagreements to the use of "also" instead of "formerly" to the actually issue.
"Formerly" isn't accurate. You would have to show that nobody uses the term anymore for that to be accurate. The fact that most people use the word Monkeypox (statistically speaking) shows plainly that saying it was "formerly known as" is just wrong.
Now does a health organization endorsing a different name justify using false statements on a Wikipedia article. Because "Formerly known as monkeypox" is a false statement. Neutrally speaking, logically speaking, and factually speaking. You seem to have a non-neutral aversion the word, but still cannot articulate why I (and those before me) am not allowed to alter a factually incorrect statement, into a factually correct statement.
1) It is factual to say, "M-pox (also known as Monkeypox)"
2) It is not factual to say, "M-Pox (formerly known as Monkeypox)"
3) It is not factual to say, "M-Pox is no longer known as Monkeypox"
4) It is factual to say, "M-Pox (most people know it as Monkeypox)"
It is factual to say, as you said, that various health organizations choose to use the word mpox, it is even factual to point out that they use the word formerly, but that doesn't really have anything to do with the topic on this talk page. Please stay on the topic "formerly vs also" so we can actually discuss if formerly is accurate (it's not yet, because lots of people still use it). 65.51.135.154 (talk) 04:10, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm struggling to sympathise with you, 65.51 135.154. First WHO changed the name, then the medical and scientific community followed, then the news media caught up. I'm not sure who's left ... I could go out and ask 100 random strangers but most of them won't have heard of it under either name.
The virus is still named "monkeypox" so the word will never go completely out of use.
The word "also" is very vague. There are people who also refer to Black people as "n*****", but that's not a reason to mention it on relevant pages. It's relevant to this article because almost all the vandalism edits on this page are attempts to insert the n***** word.
How about we change the wording to "renamed from monkeypox" and call pax?
If that's not accepted by the IP, then I prefer "formerly known as". The "also known as" language indicates that it is fully acceptable to use the old name, and it's not.
(As for "who's left", I would expect some people on social media denizens, especially those who match the stereotypical Angry white male persona, to use the old name, either because they haven't learned that the name changed or because they think the old name is better in some way [e.g., funnier or more insulting, depending on whether they are trying to make people laugh or stoke outrage].) WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Add this section as it is published recently:
Potential Treatments
Monotherapy with mycophenolate mofetil or myristoylation inhibitors or in combination therapies have been shown to completely inhibit mpox infection in human cells.
Reference
Witwit, H.; Cubitt, B.; Khafaji, R.; Castro, E.M.; Goicoechea, M.; Lorenzo, M.M.; Blasco, R.; Martinez-Sobrido, L.; de la Torre, J.C. Repurposing Drugs for Synergistic Combination Therapies to Counteract Monkeypox Virus Tecovirimat Resistance. Viruses 2025, 17, 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/v17010092Scientific observer (talk) 16:58, 16 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Scientific observer this is cutting edge in vitro research which is rarely suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. It may become suitable for inclusion under a "Research" heading if it progresses to clinical trials, but it's not reached that stage yet.
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
