Talk:List of U.S. states by population

Population per senate seat

An editor has requested that the column that contains population per senate seat be deleted. A portion of that request can be seen on my talk page (or archived depending on when you are reading this). I'm moving the conversation to the list's talk page to ensure an accessible record is kept. Etamni | ✉ | ✓  01:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm trying to delete the inappropriate column of data on "population per senator" which is irrelevant and of no more value than population per monarch or population per Prince. MacDonald-Ross says data may not be deleted without discussion, but I don't know where to discuss. Also I don't know what NPOV or Twinkle is. The irrelevant data was added by someone claiming "the U.S. is corrupt because each state has two senators" which is erroneously false, and added the column of population divided by two, which is irrelevant and duplicitous. The comment was successfully removed, but MacDonald-ross restored the irrelevant data. LearnCivics (talk) 21:47, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

@LearnCivics and Macdonald-ross:. I'll take a closer look at the list over the weekend -- it looks like I'll have some time to work on various projects here over the next few days. For those of us who live here, the fact that each state has two US Senators is pretty basic info; those who are not from the US, however, are less familiar with our form of government, and a column like this in this particular table or list may be encyclopedic. (The troll's claim that this somehow makes the US corrupt is just that: trolling. The claim may be disregarded and deleted.) FYI, Twinkle is a tool for fighting vandalism; it has scripts to automate certain tasks. The term NPOV is a reference to Wikipedia's policy that articles and other content (like this list) must maintain a "Neutral Point of View," which policy can be read by clicking here. Etamni | ✉ | ✓  16:21, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

When anyone asks that content be deleted, there are a number of things we look at. First, we look to see if the material violates any rules related to biographies of living persons. Nothing in this list does so. Next, we will usually look to see if the material violates other content policies, especially those related to maintaining a neutral point of view. Again, I don't see a violation here. (The motives of the troll discussed above notwithstanding, the material is accurate.) This leaves us with looking at whether the material is within the scope of the article or list and whether it is encyclopedic or not. Applying a mathematical formula to the population in order to obtain the population per house seat or senate seat is certainly within the scope of the list; indeed, nobody is claiming that the population per house seat data is irrelevant. As I noted above, those of us from the US are certainly able to figure out that the population per senate seat is exactly half of the state's population, but those from outside the US (and who happen to comprise a good portion of our readership on this project) cannot be expected to understand the intricacies of our form of government. Therefore, I feel that the argument can be made that the material is encyclopedic.

That said, sometimes other considerations come into play which go beyond what I've said here. In the past, we have made content decisions based (in part) on how easy or difficult something is to maintain. I think that if we look at this table from that perspective, updating it after the next census or census estimate is published will be time consuming, and is something that may languish for some time in an incomplete state. I think that if the prose (text explanation) is adjusted to include the fact that each state has two senators and that the population per senate seat is exactly half of the total population for the state, that the column could be removed without defeating the purpose of the list. Other editors may have differing points of view, and we should allow them time to respond before making this change. Etamni | ✉ | ✓  01:20, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

• I'd remove everything to the right of the population column. Those columns may be more or less population-related, but aren't strictly within the scope implied by the article title.

• The "House seats" and "Pop. per House seat" columns aren't meaningful because a state's representatives don't divide the population evenly among themselves. Each one represents the citizens in their individual district, and districts have different populations. (That would be the case even if we didn't have gerrymandering.)
• The "Pop. per Senate seat" column isn't meaningful because a state's two senators don't divide the state's people between them. They both represent all the people of their state.
• The columns related to electoral votes aren't meaningful, either. Electors vote in one of two ways, depending on the state. In some states, all electors vote for the candidate who got the most votes from their state in an election. In others, votes are apportioned according to the popular vote. In both cases, that is related to the number of votes, not the total population.

Those are my thoughts. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:37, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

I don't know about the other columns, but I definitely agree that "population by senate seat" is not useful if it is just the population divided by two. Lankiveil (talk) 02:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC).

Rank Change inconsistencies dependant on states and territories vs states only

The top 13 are consistent but Arizona is ranked 14th out of the 50 states and 16th out of states and territories while Massachusetts is ranked 15th out of 50 states but 14th out of states and territories. Since these are both states how can the rank order switch? Cravatitude (talk) 07:28, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

2019 population estimates source?

The table lists the 2019 population for each state, but the linked Excel spreadsheet only gives the population for each state from 2010 to 2018. What's the source of the 2019 data? Could it be a typo? 64.25.212.50 (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Mississippi is mississipping

Mississippi is not represented in the table!

Change/Clarify Article Title or Remove Territories

The article provides useful information on US States AND territories, which is all and well, but it's not what you would expect from the title of the article. It would be more accurately "List of U.S. states, territories, and districts by population" but that's a mouthful. The U.S. Census Bureau treats Washington-CD as a state-equivalent, and that may be a better term instead, but either way it's inaccurate to leave it as is

Slatmes (talk) 19:46, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Technical help in adding mini Mississippi flag image to table

I created and uploaded to Wikipedia commons a 23px miniature icon of Mississippi's new flag (Jan 2021) for the table. (source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Mississippi(23px).png)

Unfortunately, this does not match the format of other states' flags. Would a kind fellow Wikipedian please add the image to the now-naked Mississippi line? Thanks. MrArtC (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Unusual sentence in intro paragraphs

The final sentence in the intro paragraphs reads: "The most common state and the most popular state is the state of lilas." I don't think this makes sense. Apologies for incorrect etiquette - I'm not an editor, just a passing reader trying to be helpful... 82.1.194.246 (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)