Talk:Demographics of Croatia

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Demographics of Croatia has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 3, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Shameful

As an answer to the previous question, yes, absolutely! This article is shameful. The number of deaths in the WW2 is estimated only to 195.000. The number of executed Serbs is bigger, not to talk about the deaths on the battlefield — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.182.123.40 (talk) 21:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to 300,000 Serbs between 1991 and 2001? Democratized Croatian style! 2A02:A45E:72A7:1:DABB:C1FF:FEAC:7283 (talk) 15:39, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Factbook 2003 update

Someone should update the data from the CIA World Factbook 2003. --Shallot 12:46, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Done now. --Shallot 15:52, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Recognised Minorities

I keep coming across very small groups (Germans, Czechs) that are officially recognised minorities in Croatia. Can anybody get the complete list, or tell me where it is, and put it at the top or under ethnic groups. Also, that "other" of 4.1 is quite large - I'm guessing Germans, Romanians, Macedonians, and more all are under that umbrella. More info would be great. Adam Mathias 03:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Population density

I suggest the addition of a population density map. 70.171.46.92 (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1991 population census

HELP! does anybody have the results of the 1991 population census in Croatia? I have been looking all over the internet for it and cannot find it anywhere. I think it is highly relevant to include it in since it will show the prewar population of Serbs in various large cities such as Osijek, Karlovac, Slavonski Brod, Rijeka, Zagreb etc. If anyone has the information can they please provide it to me. Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.157.194.33 (talk) 10:15, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Demographics of Croatia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tea with toast (talk · contribs) 06:21, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changes needed before final review

Hello! It has been a pleasure to review this interesting article, and I am glad to find it in such good condition. I am pleased with the prose and it looks like the references are all in order. I find there are two problems that should be addressed before I pass my review.

The first is that the lead section is too long. Wikipedia's Manual of Style suggests 3 to 4 paragraphs for an article of this size, and generally no more than 4 paragraphs. While I like all of the items that you have included in the lead, I think the overall length may be too imposing for a general reader. As I said, I like much of what is written and so I don't want to dictate to you what to cut out, but hopefully if you read through it a few more times you might find some sentences that you can do without. Once you've finished with the changes you want to make, I'll come back and see if it is sufficient. If you need any help, see: WP:LEAD.

I trimmed the lead down, but I also added a bit about the economic indicators. Hope I got the balance right.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article could really use a section on economic-type data. Items such as personal income and unemployment would be the major things to have. Other items might also include the degree of urbanization, homelessness or housing information, and the types of jobs that Croatians have.

Done This has now been added as suggested.--Tomobe03 (talk) 13:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will place the article on hold for now. Unfortunately, I may not be available very much during the coming week, but feel free to leave a message here or on my talk page and I'll get back to you when I can.--Tea with toast (話) 08:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Other areas of future development

In order for me to pass this article as meeting the Good article Criteria, you only need to take care of the above, but if you are looking to improve the article further, I have some suggestions. I think it would be great to get this article to Featured article status because currently I do not think there is a "demographics" article at FA status yet.

The economic/personal finances is the biggest area that needs expansion. For GA status a paragraph or two would be sufficient, but FA will probably want something polished with more details.
The Health section could be expanded. While you state that there is no disease affecting more than 3% of the population, surely there are some diseases worth mentioning. Two other health-related items I find when looking at demographic information are tuberculosis and drug/alcohol dependency. I've read about other post-soviet countries that have problems with those two items. Mental health aspects like the occurrence of depression, schizophrenia, and suicide might also be worth mentioning.

I might add something along those lines, thanks for the tip.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You note that the 64+ age group has a male/female ratio of 0.64/1, which is very substantial. I suspect this is the result of World War II, is there evidence to support this?

Indeed, your suspicion might be spot on here, but right now I have not located a source which would support this theory or explain the phenomenon in some other way. I'll keep looking though.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:54, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not expecting you to take care of these immediately, but I think these would be good things to include in the future. Happy editing! --Tea with toast (話) 08:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the review. The comments were really helpful in improving the article. Also, thank you for the ideas for further development, those might really be handy later on.--Tomobe03 (talk) 14:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Final review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Great job! I'm impressed with the changes that have been made.

history

I am incredibly annoyed that the demographic history of croatia has been removed. Regardless of whatever happened in history it would have been great to see what the demographic movements have been. It seems that every article on croatia seems to be so controversial that articles are of less quality than they are of other places. Ante — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.109.83.216 (talk) 11:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The old article Demographic history of Croatia was removed because it was bad, but this article has a decent history section. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Languages

Linguists have reached a consensus at Croatian language and Serbo-Croatian about the linguistic facts of Croatian. I have brought the paragraph here on "languages" into line with that linguistic consensus. --Taivo (talk) 12:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Taivo. It is liable to be reversed, though - there is an ultra-nationalist editor who is replacing Serbo-Croatian with "Croatian" language on a medieval article about Croatia - and he/she is likely to try to put a revised face on your edits when they come across them. 50.111.211.140 (talk) 00:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Demographics of Croatia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:23, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Demographics of Croatia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Rjecnik hrvatskoga jezika.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cite to European survey is 404 and data suspect

Last paragraph of "Languages" says that four percent speak French and cites a 2005 EU survey, but the link is 404. Croatia article says ten percent speak French and refers to the same survey but without a proper citation. 伟思礼 (talk) 05:37, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]