This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

we now have 8 billion people on earth. 192.12.103.9 ( talk) 16:01, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Metaphorically using the endless downward pull-push of gravity on sand/humans and the passage of time in the image. I think this total number of humans that lived should not be on the article. It is not done for the dinosaurs (165 million years) or for the species of sharks to my knowledge. Please explain the relevance of the total number of past human deaths.-- Mark v1.0 ( talk) 13:47, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

There is a widespread misconception that, as a concequence of the population explosion, the majority of all humans that ever lived are still alive today. I think the rather harmless inclusion of this factoid serves to dispell that idea.-- Nø ( talk) 18:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

This edit request to World population has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The maths in this sentence are a little in error:

Approximately 4.49 billion people live in these ten countries, representing around 56% of the world's population as of July 2022.

Immediately above this sentence, the table shows 4,501,267,379 people and 56.22%. Could 4.49 be changed to 4.50, and 56 be changed to 56.2? Of course 56 is correct, but I think it would be better to use three significant figures with both numbers. 123.51.107.94 ( talk) 03:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

 Partly done: I changed the incorrect value. However, I think for the purposes of this table, 56% is very appropriate. Updating this kind of figure (which is here intended just as a rough reference) regularly to maintain three significant figures accurately would be significant workload for unclear encyclopedic benefit; I would hope that people are not expecting exact figures from the phrasing of that sentence :) Actualcpscm ( talk) 17:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Any reason for the 0s for the Americas in the first row of Past population? Wakelamp d[@-@]b ( talk) 12:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Isn't it correct that reliable sources set the population of the Americas to 0, where as all other continents (possibly excluding Oceania?) had non-zero populations at that time? If reliable source say so, but do not otherwise give numbers by continent that far back, the table makes sense as it is. Nø ( talk) 14:03, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

But do you think is there a difference between 0 and Nul? I think that Nul implies we don't know, whilst zero means we are certain. The current reference doesn't [1] explicitly specify zero

25k years may be the current [ estimate], but Indigenous_peoples_in_Canada#Paleo-Indian_period has 15 K Wakelamp d[@-@]b ( talk) 09:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)