Talk:Demographics of Birmingham

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject West Midlands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of West Midlands 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.West MidlandsWikipedia:WikiProject West MidlandsTemplate:WikiProject West MidlandsWest Midlands articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Birmingham Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Birmingham, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Birmingham 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.BirminghamWikipedia:WikiProject BirminghamTemplate:WikiProject BirminghamBirmingham articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 3 April 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved Malcolmxl5 (talk) 04:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

– The difference, as I understand it, is the difference in presenting the "demographic study of ..." and the "demographic statistics of ..." The articles are not, at least substantially, about the way the information was assembled but what the findings were. This is as per the large number of articles with titles: "Demographics .." and as per other contents accessed via Category:Demographics by country. Greg Kaye 13:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I do not believe that is the difference, but that it is a matter of US and British usage. Demography is much more common in the UK and so appropriate for these articles.--SabreBD (talk) 13:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (edit conflict)This was discussed less than a year ago, in July 2014 - see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography/Archive 16#"Demography" being changed to "Demographics" as a section heading, which concerned article titles as well as section headings. As regards consistency, our guidance for UK settlement articles is to use "demography" as a section heading. The distinction made by GregKaye above was explored in that discussion and found to be a matter of WP:ENGVAR. NebY (talk) 13:59, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sabrebd, NebY

Thank you, I'm happy for this to come to a swift close if helpful. Greg Kaye 14:04, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As per SabreBD and NebY. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 14:16, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In case this ever comes up again I think that it is worth commenting that, in the linked discussion above, the justifying text reads, "Interestingly a TIME magazine article calls David Coleman "professor of demographics" at Oxford, but Oxford calls him "Professor of Demography". There is clearly a bias, as a google search for "Professor of Demographics" turns up more US institutions and for "Professor of Demography" includes most of the British institutions. However, most interestingly "Professor of Demographics" only gets 17,600 results, while Professor of Demography gets 200,000 results." The argument remains that Demography represents the subject of study while demographics represents the resulting "statistics". Greg Kaye 19:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I saw the title and I thought, that's so weird, it must be ENGVAR. And I think it is... Red Slash 23:54, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm English and the subject area is definitely demograhy. The designation for the result of the study is debatable. Greg Kaye 21:52, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Unless we also change economy to economics, geography to geographics etc. --Ykraps (talk) 13:45, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad that I stumbled across this discussion, because I often edit the demography sections of articles and I've been wondering what the correct word to use is for a while. I wasn't quite convinced by the British/American English argument, and was inclined to agree with Greg that demography is the subject area and demographics the resultant statistics. However, checking the OED, it defines the former as follows:

1.
a. The study of human populations, esp. the study of statistics, such as numbers of births and deaths, the incidence of disease, or rates of migration, which illustrate the changing size or composition of populations over time.
b. The composition of a particular human population.
2. Biol. The scientific study of the size and composition of populations of plants or animals, esp. in terms of their ages or developmental stages. Also: the size and composition of such a population, esp. of a particular organism.

So I think I now agree that "demography" can be correctly used to refer to the resulting statistics in British English. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:55, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For completeness, here's the definition of demographics:

1. The study of the human population and its composition; (now typically in advertising and market research) spec. (orig. U.S.) the study of statistical data concerning the composition or characteristics of a television or other audience, the market for a product, etc. Cf. demography n. 1a.
2. orig. U.S. Chiefly in advertising and market research: statistical data relating to a human population and particular groups within it; the composition or characteristics of such a population or group, esp. a television or other audience, the market for a product, etc. Cf. demography n. 1b.

So it seems that either demography or demographics can be used to refer to either the subject or the statistics, with the latter being more common in American English. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cordless Larry. I'd consider that both can be correctly used to refer to the resulting statistics in British English and I think that the current case is one of optional use. I minor argument remains that commonality of phrasing may make contexts like categories a little more comprehendable but its no biggie. I say this as a Brit. I certainly think that it would be worth moving the Roman empire article. GregKaye 10:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- No worries, Greg. Like I said, this has cleared up some confusion I had myself, so it's been helpful. Perhaps a separate request could be set up for the Roman Empire one? Cordless Larry (talk) 10:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Demography of Birmingham. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080609032140/http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=26205&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=11333 to http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=26205&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=11333

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) 20:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Demography of Birmingham. 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) 05:09, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Demography of Belfast which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]