Talk:Demographics of Australia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Demographics of Australia is part of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
 |
This article is not assigned to a WikiProject or workgroup. Please help with your suggestions. | ||
|
WikiProject Australia To-do:
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] Ethnic Groups
"In 2020, Australia is expected to have 91% of the population as White, 10% as Asian, and Aborigines may very well reach 2%."
91% White, 10% Asian, and 2% Aborigine. Clearly these figures are from Pauline Hanson because they don't add up to 100. If you're going to make up percentages then at least make them add up to 100.
The ABS does not collect statistics on ethnic groups. The quote above seemed to have no sources.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.133.87.46 (talk) 12:57, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Olympic medals
Just watching the Athens Olympics... Australia has an amazing medal production to population ratio! How do they do it?
[edit] Sports Mad
Why do we do so well at sport? We're apparently all sports mad!... That and generous government support (via the Australian Institute of Sport and various state institutes for instance) might go some way to explaining this anomaly. But then the government support tends to be somehow representative of us too I suppose. A relatively high standard of living (by economic standards) tends to contribute also.
Note that Australia doesn't obviously do as well as it should, since as Australia does well in team sports I've thought that the medal count should count individual wins by each member of those teams. On this basis Australia would even more anomolously(?) be doing well. In the last few olympics Australia has won gold in mens and womens (field) hockey (substitute at least 11 gold for the 1 counted), mens water polo (at least 5?... water polo expert anyone?), many swimming relays (4 instead of the 1 counted), rowing (especially the fours, again 4 to 1), womens softball(?), not to mention silvers and bronzes in womens basketball, rowing again, swimming again, etcetera. The medal tally would go up by at least 50. But then I don't like the medal count anyway! If we're going to have one though, it should be fair...
Does the weather have something to do with it? There are few extremes of cold. And generally the extremes of hot are relatively temporary. I assume that this is more likely to encourage activity.
However, there are a number of sport (particularly Australian rules football) haters (the Anti-Football League) as a consequence of the over-emphasis on sport. It is to such an extent that of a weekend it is sometimes difficult to get anything other than one sport or another on ALL FIVE free to air channels.
Ultimately, I think it has come down to the LA olympics where New Zealand did so much better than Australia and decided to rib Australians with the question as to what does Australia and Carl Lewis have in common? Answer: they both won 4 gold medals. That rivalry will always spur us to action!
- Australia's unhealthy obsession with sport is basically an attempt to compensate for our underachievements in other fields, such as the arts, sciences and business. For example, Australia doesn't have a single university in the top 100 universities in the world. Nor do we have a single company in the list of the top 100 global brands (in contrast to smaller economies like Switzerland, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Finland). Frankly, I think it's time the nation reassessed its priorities. The first step towards correcting this "anomaly" would be to end taxpayer support for the Australian Institute of Sport.
[edit] Relevance of graph
The initial image in the article is a graph (Image:Australia-demography.png) showing population growth from 1961 to 2003. While the data might be impeccable, what is the significance of the dates? How is the image linked to the text? I don't think it adds anything. The graph should cover a broader timespan, for example census data since Federation is available (and I am happy to prepare such a graph to replace the existing graph if it is agreed to be appropriate). The graphic was added in February but without accompanying commentary and there seems to have been no commentary added since, nor has that editor otherwise contributed to the article.--A Y Arktos (Talk) 10:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that the cutoff dates on the graph are rather arbitrary, presumably based upon only the dataset which was to hand at the time. One, or several, graphs charting demographic data from their first availability would be a more useful replacement.--cjllw | TALK 05:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Religion
For specific reference, the reverted addition was copied from this ABS page.--cj | talk 09:06, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Cultural Achievements
The sub-heading "Cultural Achivements" is really out of place here. While it is interesting, this is afterall, an article on the Demographics of Australia.
It should be transferred into another article.... like "Culture of Australia".
P-Chan, March 8th 2006
[edit] Country of Birth and Indigenous Population data added
I've added the Country of Birth and Indigenous Populations data, which pretty much covers ethnicity.
The CIA stats appear both vague and inaccurate (I suspect the 7% Asian population is based on an older ABS definition which lumped North Africa with Asia; also the indigenous population is 2%, not 1%, and that could also be undercounted)
[edit] Population density map
 |
It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in Australia may be able to help! |
I came here looking for a population density map...that would be quite informative. -- Beland 01:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- Google images finds maps of population density and population change, but I'm not sure what the copyright statuses of those images are. At least these are useful leads for data finding. -- Beland 02:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ethnicity and Homogeneity
Contrary to the intro, Australian is definately not "largely homogenous". In the 2001 census, only 34% of respondants identified their ancestry as 'Australian' (http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/6982D300E1715F1FCA256E9200011F3D?Open). Similarly to the US, Australia is multicultural and has experienced many waves of immigrants from around the world. For example, Melbourne has the largest Greek population outside of Greece! Furthermore, the heading "ethnicity" does this diversity no justice when 92% percent of the population is claimed to be "caucasian". Theres another census in August 2006: maybe when this data gets released then this section can be corrected.
Word! the caucasian population should not be witten as 92%, the percentage of the other ethicities is more or less akrite. Australia also has a large Pacific Islander population (eg. Marois, Samoans, Papua New Guinineans and Fijians) and like other countries demographics it should have an other ethnicities section. There has also been migrants from African and coutries in the Americas too. Unknown User 21:23, 6 October 2006
- What? The population is over 70% Australian born, and over 90% white. Sounds pretty homogenous to me. Also, this sentence makes no sence," In 2020, Australia is expected to have 91% of the population as White, 10% as Asian, and Aborigines may very well reach 2%." as the aboriginal population is already over 2%, and 91 + 10 + 2 = 103%. Could find a source and fix this up?I like Radiohead 15:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- The word "white" is really too subjective to use in an encyclopaedic article, especially as noone can agree on what it means. The presentation in the above makes it sound like that percentage are of Anglo-Celtic ancestry, which is patently untrue. The figures to me overall look dubious. 10% Asian sounds about right (it was 7-8 in the 2001 census) and the population of Aboriginals was *already* over 2% in the 2001 census (2.18, in fact). I'm not sure where the 2005 and 2006 figures came from, as they are unsourced. Orderinchaos78 11:10, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ethnic Groups
"Due to the large population of European ancestry in Australia, the kangaroo route generates high yield for airlines." I removed this coment because it is largely irrelevant to demography. Furthermore, what is the source of Australia's ethnic composition? Kransky 09:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Australian social classes
Section removed. It contained links to articles that don't exist, and a single sentence that doesn't really give much information: "Australia has a class structure that is at least on the surface simiar to Canada's social class strucutre, but regionally it may resemble the class struture of NZ." Kransky 09:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] LEBANESE
Lebanon is on the Asian continent. They are included as `white' according to this article, along with Iranians, Turks and Arabs. These statistics are based on The `CIA' fact book. In the U.S., Middle Easterners and North Africans are classed as `white in the census. Australia is about 80-85% Europeans and even less white if you exclude the darker Mediterraneans. According to the Eurasisan section, there are approx 300,000 Eurasians in Australia, all included as white in the Aus census! Please FIND MORE ACCURATE STATISTICS!!!
- Arabs and other Middle-Eastern 'Asians' are genetically/racially Caucasian, although not white in the adapted-for-the-very-low-sunlight-levels-in-Northern-Europe sense. Real Asians are still the biggest minority. I assume you object to being 'classed' with darker-skinned Caucasians because you find them distasteful, an attitude I find distasteful. --Kelly holden 07:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Indo-Aryans, Pakistanis and Afghans are mostly Caucasian but classed as `Asian' in the census. Are they `Real Asians' in your opinion? They would have more closer DNA markers to Europeans than Arabs, many of whom have Negro blood in them (e.g., Saudis, Yemenites.).
Furthermore, many people in Australian society do not consider dark Soutrhern Europeans as `white'. Like I said FIND ACCURATE STATISTICS!!!!!!!!
