Talk:World population

Giant number

The article is "World Population". Nowhere near the top of the article does it even say what the current world population is estimated to be. There should, ideally, be a single giant ticking number at the top. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.73.113 (talk) 06:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The second sentence of the article is Template:Tq Belbury (talk) 13:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Such a ticker would be misleading because a figure this accurate cannot be given; the available accuracy is nowhere even close. As the article itself says: Template:Tq --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:21, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Billions

There are two possible Billion (short and long) so it could be improved by explain explicitely, which is used in the article, like changing the sentence to

It was estimated by the United Nations to have exceeded eight billion (8 x 10⁹ ) in mid-November 2022. or

It was estimated by the United Nations to have exceeded eight billion (8,000,000,000) in mid-November 2022.

(or 10¹² and 8,000,000,000,000 respectively)

Thanks for consideration 78.80.47.17 (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

The two billions are discussed here. No English-speaking areas commonly use long scale today, so in an English-language encyclopaedia, a billion is 10^9. One might wikilink billion on first occurence in the article (but I'm not convinced that is necessary, or if there is a wikipedia policy about whether or not to do this). Nø (talk) 10:53, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Wrong number

The articles says that it took 222 years to reach 8 billion. This is wrong. 1804 plus 222 is 2026. We are obviously not in 2026 but 2024. The number should be corrected from 222 to 220. 176.223.173.211 (talk) 06:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Eight billion estimated to have been reached in 2022, so the correct number is 218. Fixed. Thanks for catching this! CAVincent (talk) 05:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 August 2024

In the "Ten most populous countries" section, there is a sentence: "The UN estimates that by 2023 India will have overtaken China in having the largest population." This had happened and should be in the past tense with updated citations. Infraviolin (talk) 07:49, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: For edit requests, please provide the relevant citations and how the sentence should be restructured. —Sirdog (talk) 03:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 August 2024

10% of Cyprus is sigma written in Cyprus article. 139.130.61.126 (talk) 04:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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. Cannolis (talk) 05:40, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Billion(s) more?

This edit [1] was pporly formatted, but we probably need to address this: Recent reports covered in several media say that research indicates the rural populations may be grossly underestimated, so that the total population is underestimated by more than a billion (and perhaps has been so for more than a decade). I guess we need a better source; perhaps [2]. Nø (talk) 08:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I think a better, more balanced source is [3]. However, it seems all the recent reporting about it is linked to a single study in Nature Communications, so it seems a bit WP:FRINGE and WP:UNDUE. Unless other studies support the conclusions, I would leave it out. Vpab15 (talk) 08:59, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

What is the purpose of the section at the end?

It feels a bit like a rant about a pet project. It is not placed in the context of exploring possible causes of growth, it is just plopped on to the end. I feel like it should be removed or integrated into the rest of the article. Natoasto (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2025 (UTC)