Jump to content

Talk:Sweden: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 105: Line 105:
:::2.3% is just out-right false information. Read the Pew report. Or talk to any political scientist/expert from the region. Or ask any Swede. Or just go for a walk in Malmö or Stockholm. @[[User:Sjö|Sjö]] [[User:Policynerd3212|Policynerd3212]] ([[User talk:Policynerd3212|talk]]) 21:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:::2.3% is just out-right false information. Read the Pew report. Or talk to any political scientist/expert from the region. Or ask any Swede. Or just go for a walk in Malmö or Stockholm. @[[User:Sjö|Sjö]] [[User:Policynerd3212|Policynerd3212]] ([[User talk:Policynerd3212|talk]]) 21:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:::"The latest statistics [1] puts the number belonging to Muslim congregations at a little more than 224.000, which is close to the 2,3% in the infobox and also counted in the same way as the percentage for Christians" - This is not actually what your source says though. '''It just shows the number of registered members/employees in the religious communities eligible for state subsidies in 2021.''' It doesn't claim to show the actual numbers of muslims/representative percentage of religious groups in Sweden. These sorts of statistics are not available for Sweden - and we know the number is way off. So why have it in the info-box? When we know it is completely misleading/false? @[[User:Sjö|Sjö]] [[User:Policynerd3212|Policynerd3212]] ([[User talk:Policynerd3212|talk]]) 21:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:::"The latest statistics [1] puts the number belonging to Muslim congregations at a little more than 224.000, which is close to the 2,3% in the infobox and also counted in the same way as the percentage for Christians" - This is not actually what your source says though. '''It just shows the number of registered members/employees in the religious communities eligible for state subsidies in 2021.''' It doesn't claim to show the actual numbers of muslims/representative percentage of religious groups in Sweden. These sorts of statistics are not available for Sweden - and we know the number is way off. So why have it in the info-box? When we know it is completely misleading/false? @[[User:Sjö|Sjö]] [[User:Policynerd3212|Policynerd3212]] ([[User talk:Policynerd3212|talk]]) 21:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
:::Change the percentage to atleast a range, so for this it would be 2.3-8% and then give a footnote explaining why on estimates. [[User:Tweedle|Tweedle]] ([[User talk:Tweedle|talk]]) 22:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)


== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 January 2024 ==
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 January 2024 ==

Revision as of 22:01, 14 January 2024


Discussion regarding immigration section which has been repeatedly deleted by TylerBurden

The immigration section which contains important and relevant information regarding the demographics of Sweden as well as contribution from several users has repeatedly been by deleted by TylerBurden - without gaining consensus.

I have restored this section, as I don't see any reason as to why this is not relevant information to maintain on the main page. Sweden has received hundred of thousands of immigrants in a very short time span. According to Statistics Sweden, over 2 million of Sweden’s inhabitants which is 20% of the population, are born abroad. This is significant and has changed the political landscape, culture and demographics in a major way. I would certainly argue that is very important to the country.

TylerBurden Please refrain from deleting this section unless you gain consensus to delete the section. Policynerd3212 (talk) 19:04, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Policynerd3212 The massive section was removed for several reasons, for one there is already a Demographics section covering the topic of immigration, there is an entire article on the topic Immigration to Sweden (that readers can find as a link in the relevant section even on this article). The section also contained WP:SYNTH issues and WP:OR, both policy violations. WP:ONUS clearly states the burden is on those who seek to include content on articles, which is you. You are throwing numerous personal attacks at me and deforming my user page, all the while maintaining your purpose as an WP:SPA, which appears to be to add WP:UNDUE content about how horribly criminal and full of immigrants Sweden is. You may notice there is a "too long" tag on the top of the article, it was added precisely because instead of going in depth on a general article, for articles such as this in depth coverage are more suitable as individual articles. Obviously immigration to Sweden is a big topic, so it makes perfect sense why it would be covered on its own article, rather than shoehorned into the main article when there is already content covering it more succinctly. Your policy violations and edit warring are doing nothing to improve the article, and you have zero consensus. TylerBurden (talk) 05:16, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree way to much details for a overview article Wikipedia:Too much detail Moxy- 05:29, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you could make this argument for any section but the religious section can be trimmed. The Eurobarometer stuff from 2010 can go Tweedle (talk) 13:12, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
By that logic all the sections in this main article of Sweden are irrelevant and should be deleted. Nearly all of the sections are longer than the section regarding immigration and there are also entire articles containing information regarding these for example 'recent history',"modern history", "foreign relations" etc. - Should all these sections also be completely deleted without explanation? @Moxy@TylerBurden
If not, why are they different from the immigration section apart from the fact that you seem to want to hide this information on a lesser visited site? @TylerBurden Just as you deleted the crime section. Policynerd3212 (talk) 07:57, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with keeping the section, the information is important and its relevance is poignant. Most country pages to my knowledge atleast discusses the topic of immmigration/foreign origin (France, Italy, Norway) (albeit I understand this is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). You could trim down it largelly though. I would keep (alongside the graphic):
In recent centuries the country has been transformed from a nation of net emigration, ending after World War I, to a nation of net immigration, from World War II onwards. In recent years the country has received a massive influx of refugees and immigrants mainly due to the Syrian war. Sweden received more refugees per capita in 2013 than any other OECD country. In 2015 alone a record-breaking 163.000 people applied for asylum to a country of barely 10 million people. In 2022 one in five people (2.145.674) in Sweden were born abroad.
There are no exact numbers on the ethnic background of migrants and their descendants in Sweden because the Swedish government does not base any statistics on ethnicity. This is, however, not to be confused with the migrants' national backgrounds, which are recorded. Immigrants in Sweden are mostly concentrated in the urban areas of Svealand and Götaland. In 2022, just over 102.000 persons immigrated to Sweden. This was an increase compared with 2020 and 2021, but the number was lower than the years before 2020. The immigration is expected to decrease in the next few years but is estimated to just over 100.000 per year in the long-term. Tweedle (talk) 13:11, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again there is already a section covering demographics where immigration is covered, even the "recent history" covers the aspect of immigration, as well as obviously the link to the main article where in depth coverage is appropriate. To create another entire section is repetitious and undue, and does the opposite of solving the article's length issue. Policynerd has made it clear that content building along Wikipedia guidelines isn't the goal here, they simply want to plaster their content where they perceive most people will see it, that is why they are not happy with working on the topic specific articles of the content and POV they are pushing. "Important and poignant" therefore doesn't seem convincing, the latter being frankly an odd choice of words. TylerBurden (talk) 08:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@TylerBurden I must have missed that sentence, my bad. I could not care less what Policynerd does or wants, we have already been through this before, so why are you attaching this onto me? I still believe the graphic should be kept at the least. Tweedle (talk) 11:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to attach anything to you, I am just letting you know who you are "agreeing" with as well as generally responding to their rant above. What graph are you talking about specifically? TylerBurden (talk) 12:06, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I understand you, that's fine. The graph is this one which was present on there before being removed but perhaps this one would be better to demonstrate the extent of foreign origin. Tweedle (talk) 16:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really opposed to adding it assuming it is placed appropriately, which would likely be the demographics section. The section already has some images but it might fit on the left hand side? It would obviously also need a clear caption on what definition of "foreign" is being used. TylerBurden (talk) 09:25, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Double checked the %'s given on it when I did it, It is all those who were Foreign born + Born in Sweden to two foreign born parents. I have changed the description on the file itself and submitted a name request on it for a rename to demonstrate more clearly but the caption can be:
Percentage of the population which is foreign born and born to two foreign born parents in Swedish counties in 2021.
Tweedle (talk) 10:35, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. TylerBurden (talk) 10:55, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still hasn't been updated with a proper immigration section and the deletion of the crime section is seemingly increasingly out of touch. The violent crime is rising exponentially. The prime minister Ulf Kristersson has put in the military in the fight against gang-violence, as children and women are being killed. More information can be found here on Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/6b470a3a-178b-4f9a-95af-2d4a59b4c982
Just in 2023 nearly 70 people have been killed already. Explosions left right and center. How is this not relevant to mention? 25% of the population is now foreign born.
Sweden is the only country in Europe that has these problems. It is a significant part of Swedish reality. Why is not mentioned if not to censor an inconvenient truth? Policynerd3212 (talk) 18:16, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 September 2023

Sweden has 5 official national minorities. They are the Jews, Roma, Sami, Swedish Finns and Tornedalers. Add this to the demographics section.

https://sweden.se/life/equality/swedens-national-minorities

https://minorityrights.org/country/sweden/ 103.164.138.55 (talk) 22:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 22:40, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 September 2023

Miniature update, based on the linked article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population the 86th next to population in the popup box is no longer accurate, it should list 87th. LadislavLouka (talk) 07:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Elli (talk | contribs) 16:24, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article have extended-confirmed-protection on it?

I'm just curious. MisterN1C022 (talk) 14:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There was an intractable, long-term edit war involving non-EC user Policynerd3212 (talk · contribs). The log entry seems to reference a WP:AN3 report that does not exist. –LaundryPizza03 (d) 15:17, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. MisterN1C022 (talk) 17:58, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you're still curious, the relevant ANEW report seems to be Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive452#User:Policynerd3212 reported by User:TylerBurden (Result: Blocked). Liu1126 (talk) 19:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the information. MisterN1C022 (talk) 00:57, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox change

I propose that in the history section of the infobox that the independence of Sweden be added seeing that it is probably the most important event in the modern history of Sweden, even more important that that of being part of the ”Swedish-Norwegian Union”. The date of independence is also celebrated as the national day in Sweden, while the Swedish-Norwegian union is barely known in Sweden and is only briefly mentioned in elementary school if even that. Sebmg16 (talk) 13:51, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 December 2023

The Muslim population figure is outdated, it is now 8.1% which translates to 850.000, according to https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/441219-SWEDEN-2022-INTERNATIONAL-RELIGIOUS-FREEDOM-REPORT.pdf 217.27.186.212 (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 00:49, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately a few wiki-moderators do not want to update factual informations on the page regarding immigration/changing demographics. But yes - the muslim population is certainly not 2.3%. It is just false information. According to a Pew Research estimate the muslim population was around 8.1% in 2016. And it is certainly higher now. Policynerd3212 (talk) 21:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

France has a tax percentage of GDP than Sweden - so do some other countries.

In the article it is claimed that only Denmark has a higher tax as a percentage of GDP level than Sweden, this is not true as France and some other countries also have a higher tax as a percentage of GDP level than Sweden. The idea that Sweden is an exceptionally high tax country is out of date. 2A02:C7C:E183:AC00:F983:2396:697:CC50 (talk) 12:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The percentage of Muslims in Sweden is much higher than "2.3%".

In the article it is claimed that 2.3% of the population of Sweden are Muslims - this is clearly a gross underestimate. 2A02:C7C:E183:AC00:F983:2396:697:CC50 (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately a few wiki-moderators do not want to update factual informations on the page regarding immigration/changing demographics. But yes - the muslim population is certainly not 2.3%. It is quite misleading. According to a Pew Research estimate the muslim population was around 8.1% in 2016. And it is certainly higher now - my guess would be 15% - 20%. But there are no official figures on the matter. 2.3% is definitely wrong though. Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2017/11/29/europes-growing-muslim-population/Policynerd3212 (talk) 20:56, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Islam in Sweden has several percentages from different sources, and it is not obvious which percentage we should use. There is also the question of defining "Muslim", which is part of the reason the percentages vary. One source (Sanders) uses "belongs to a Muslim people by birth, has Muslim origin, has a name that belongs in the Muslim tradition, etc.", others use "religious Muslims" and one source uses the number of people registered as belonging to a Muslim congregation. Any discussion about the right percentage needs to consider that. The latest statistics [1] puts the number belonging to Muslim congregations at a little more than 224.000, which is close to the 2,3% in the infobox and also counted in the same way as the percentage for Christians, i.e. based on membership in a congregation. So, I wouldn't say that 2.3% is completely wrong, but there could be other numbers that are better. Sjö (talk) 12:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's easier to blame "wiki-moderators" than it is to consider Wikipedia policies and its approach to sources. TylerBurden (talk) 21:05, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2.3% is just out-right false information. Read the Pew report. Or talk to any political scientist/expert from the region. Or ask any Swede. Or just go for a walk in Malmö or Stockholm. @Sjö Policynerd3212 (talk) 21:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The latest statistics [1] puts the number belonging to Muslim congregations at a little more than 224.000, which is close to the 2,3% in the infobox and also counted in the same way as the percentage for Christians" - This is not actually what your source says though. It just shows the number of registered members/employees in the religious communities eligible for state subsidies in 2021. It doesn't claim to show the actual numbers of muslims/representative percentage of religious groups in Sweden. These sorts of statistics are not available for Sweden - and we know the number is way off. So why have it in the info-box? When we know it is completely misleading/false? @Sjö Policynerd3212 (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Change the percentage to atleast a range, so for this it would be 2.3-8% and then give a footnote explaining why on estimates. Tweedle (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 January 2024

Change Islam percentage to 5%. The clickable link states that the percentage is around 5% as well as the demographics on this same page saying the Muslim population being around 600k (which translates to approximately 5.6%). It's a bit confusing for readers to have the page say 2% when the same page also says an entirely different number a few paragraphs later. Otterstone (talk) 07:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The estimates in the Islam in Sweden article and in the Sweden#Religion section come from older sources, while the statistics in the infobox are from a 2020 source. Per WP:OLDSOURCES, newer sources are preferred, especially in fields where information can change quickly. Arguably, even the data in the infobox is outdated, as the Religion in Sweden article is using the 2021 version of the source, but I don't feel like crunching the numbers right now. Liu1126 (talk) 20:03, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition the source from 2020 do not not even contain any actual statistics stating that muslims are 2.3% of the population as far as I can see. Where in the source do you see this? Policynerd3212 (talk) 21:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They will never change it. A few wiki-moderator old-timers do not want to update factual informations on the page regarding immigration/changing demographics. But yes - the muslim population is certainly not 2.3%. It is just false information. According to a Pew Research estimate the muslim population was around 8.1% in 2016. And it is certainly higher now. Policynerd3212 (talk) 21:14, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 January 2024

So that I can fix grammar mistakes Nadinoda (talk) 11:14, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Liu1126 (talk) 11:34, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]