Jump to content

Talk:World population

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JLTrevinho (talk | contribs) at 04:46, 25 August 2013 (→‎Incorrect/confusing continent identifications). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:WP1.0

Incorrect/confusing continent identifications

1. The section entitled "Population by region" is very confusing. Continents (e.g. Asia and Europe), are compared to Regions (e.g. "Northern America" and "Oceania"). It is apples and oranges.

2. The table on the right says, "Top ten most populous (%)". Most populous what? It lists North America and Asia, which are continents, and Latin America and the Middle East, which are not continents. And only six of the ten entities are numbered.

3. The table on the right shows "Asia" and underneath it "+ China". There are several other "+" signs, which should be bullets, not the symbol for addition.

4. In the table on the right, the population of "North America" does not include Central America, as it should, because (presumably) Central America is included in "Latin America". And the footnote to "North America" mistakenly defines it as "US, Canada, Mexico".

5. In the table on the right, under "Europe" is "ex-Soviet Union". Since the Soviet Union no longer exists, it is hard to see how this matters anymore.

96.228.5.215 (talk) 00:05, 30 December 2012 (UTC) treplag[reply]

6. In the section mentioning "Continents" it is wrongly mentioned the existence of North and South America, in fact there is only one "America". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.67.61.249 (talk) 12:47, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


7. "Predictions of scarcity": This paragraph is misleading "In 1798, the British scholar Thomas Malthus incorrectly predicted that continued population growth would exhaust the global food supply by the mid-19th century." The facts are that the "Great Irish famine" (years 1845, 1852) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_%28Ireland%29 and other phenomena (previous and latter)confirm what Malthus said. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.249.148.1 (talk) 16:11, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]


8. In the table "UN 2012 estimates and medium variant projections (in millions)" of the section "Projections", there is an error in the row on 2025 year in both Europe and Latin America/Caribbean percentages. The european percent of that year should be 9.1 instead of 10.1 and the latin american/caribbean percent should be 8.5 instead of 9.2. That is why the final sum of the percentages of that year is 101.7 instad 100.

Simple issue with text should be fixed

Richard C. Duncan claims the that the world population will decline to about 2 billion around 2050.[126]

should be changed to:

Richard C. Duncan claims that the world population will decline to about 2 billion around 2050.[126]

or

Richard C. Duncan claims the world population will decline to about 2 billion around 2050.[126] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrpenner (talkcontribs) 20:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done RudolfRed (talk) 23:51, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No Valid Reference for 'UN 2008 estimates and medium variant projections' table

Reference for table is not available (see http://esa.un.org/unpp). Table needs to be removed or revised! Mindravel (talk) 05:35, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it'd best be updated for the new 2013 predictions, if these are already available in detail. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 15:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Updated link to the 2008 data source. 2012 Data are available, but I don't have the time to change the data table right now. These updates are not annual. Next update (after 2012) will be 2015. Meclee (talk) 00:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Haub's "40%" claim needs removed

This part is inaccurate: "His estimates for infant mortality suggest that around 40% of those who have ever lived did not survive beyond their first birthday."

The article mentions infant mortality, but the numbers are only representative of one time period (a very generic time period at that)

"Infant mortality in the human race’s earliest days is thought to have been very high—perhaps 500 infant deaths per 1,000 births, or even higher. Children were probably an economic liability among hunter-gatherer societies, a fact that is likely to have led to the practice of infanticide."

Using that as a basis for the 40% claim is wrong.

It's also important to note that the he says this in reference to the idea of projecting the number of people who have 'ever lived':

"Any such exercise can be only a highly speculative enterprise, to be undertaken with far less seriousness than most demographic inquiries."

clumsy superiority complex

From the section of "Modern Era" there is a quote: "Altogether, the areas of European settlement comprised 36% of the world's population in 1900." When you read what it says above it refers to a table of Europe + Ex USSR (26%), North America (about 5%) and Latin America (about 5%). This is a very cumbersome addition and assessment: Ex USSR included Siberia and Central Asian regions that were never dominated by European settlement. Both North and Latin America included non-European peoples and to lump them as "areas of European settlement" demonstrates a hidden superiority/inferiority complex. Azubarev2 (talk) 16:50, 5 August 2013 (UTC)Alex[reply]