Talk:Demographics of Hong Kong

Several odd things about Tallungs' 2021 "Population pyramid of Hong Kong in 2020" chart
If you travel down the chart and compare each bar on the left (males) to the corresponding bar on the right (females), you'll see that each bar is almost an exact mirror image of the other (leaving off the "male surplus" and "female surplus" portions). In any given population of sufficient size, this is not only extremely improbable, and very likely impossible, in the real world. The only explanation I can think of is that either the numbers of males of each age, or the numbers of females of each age, or both, were calculated using a ratio from another set(s) of data. Which means the "surpluses" must have been calculated as well. There is a great deal left out of the extremely short explanation provided re. how Kaj Tallungs created this chart, and why he/she did it the way they did. And, at present, the value and trustworthiness of the "data" presented in this chart is extremely questionable. Thanks. 2600:6C67:817F:F9C1:D437:B6EF:3ED8:9AAC (talk) 02:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I am not getting your comment here? Or maybe I am misunderstanding, The bars on the right and left for 'Males' and 'Females' will be the exact same population because they are not including any surplus population within them (of whatever gender), if you exclude the surplus section deliberately then ofcourse it won't make sense as to why they are all the same. The surpluses are calculated from deducting the Male and Female figures together either producing a male surplus or a female surplus, there are no uses of ratios. (?) We then input the lower figure (for my example the base female figure for 0) onto the corresponding figure which had the surplus (the male figure), here is an example; before, after, the final result for 2022, it is not overly complicated. Tweedle (talk) 12:06, 9 February 2023 (UTC)