Talk:List of states and territories of the United States by population density

Who divided residents with km²?

I just checked the german article for New Jersey where was mentioned its the state with most density (389/km²), and here I see something like 480 or so... but 22,608km² and 8,791,894 Population (2010 census) makes = 388,8842002830856334041047416843 which makes the german 389/km² correct, so the whole article is false because Rhodle Island is stated here with 389.1 for example... but thats impossible until NJ is at first place with 388,8. I know you Americans use square miles, but that doesn't matter... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilon22 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

The version you're referring to, which I won't even bother to check the math for, is based on 2007 estimates. I was just checking the talk page in order to replace these with numbers from the more accurate 2010 Census. Seems like a good idea so I should have them up sometime this weekend when I have time to input the numbers and double-check everything. 70.15.11.44 (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

What's the Wikipolicy on angry emoticons? I'm gonna have to redo the 2000 side as well ... someone decided to make 1 mile equal ~2.6 kilometers instead of ~1.6 .... ARGH! 70.15.11.44 (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

... also, the totals are conventionally calculated for the land area, not the total area. Just be aware of that. 70.15.11.44 (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

LOL, 1 sq mi is equal ~2.6 km2. Next time use your brain. I put Template:Disputed into the article until someone normal fixes the values.--Giornorosso (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

3 days 6 hours 51 minutes. 70.15.11.44 (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

GA?

I've just completed a series of edits to make this list a bit more engaging by adding flags and images. I'm wondering if it would qualify for good article status. I don't think it would make it as a featured list just yet, see List of U.S. states and territories by population for a similar list that has attained that designation. If someone who knows the subject could clarify the methodology used by the census in making it's determinations of density it would go a long way. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Buggy table

The table's 'sort by' buttons don't appear to actually work when you try to sort by population density. It seems to kind-of partially sort the list, but I'm not sure what it's doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LrdDimwit (talk • contribs) 07:08, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I see that. I think it has to deal with Template:Convert not rending the numbers in a way that can be sorted. The surefire way to fix the problem is to put the density by square mile and square kilometer into separate columns and then use Template:NTS to autoformat the numbers, but I'll wait to see if other editors have a better suggestion. -epicAdam^(talk) 15:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Alaska

The average of 88 is seriously scewed by Alaska is it not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.194.192.100 (talk) 20:36, 7 February 2012 (UTC) I see from the archive that it would be well over 100 now if Alaska isn't included. Shouldn't this be in the article. Also in general if you take out tundra, desert and mountains this is in fact a crowded country. The comparisons to Germany and South Korea look pretty silly when you look at actual arable land.