Talk:Irreligion in Australia

SO BIASED.

Also this article contains trains of logical thought - out of place in a wikipedia. I'll fix it when I have the time. Farthin (talk) 23:35, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Title
--I would have to say about the title of the article- the words "irreligion" and "irreligious" have in the past been used as a pejorative term for people with no religion. So I don't know whether the article title is unbiased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.9.49 (talk) 06:46, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Irreligion by country - standard used throughout wikipedia. If you have a WP:RS discussing irreligion as a problematic term then reference it on the irreligion page. -- Aronzak (talk) 23:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Irreligion in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080204235120/http://www.news.com.au:80/story/0,23599,21976369-2,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21976369-2,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:46, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

BUDDHISM NO GOD
When we are making totals of Australians that do not believe in God, we should remember to add Buddhists. The Buddha taught that there was no creator god; Buddhists believe in many 'gods', but do not worship them or believe in God as such.

I have not edited the page, but I would like this noted in future edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indigocat (talk • contribs) 17:10, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Irreligion in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.com.au/story/0%2C23599%2C21976369-2%2C00.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080302025448/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs%40.nsf/Latestproducts/3416.0Main%20Features22007?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3416.0&issue=2007&num=&view= to http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs%40.nsf/Latestproducts/3416.0Main%20Features22007?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=3416.0&issue=2007&num=&view=
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130117013643/http://www.fgi-tbff.org/sites/default/files/elfinder/FGIImages/Research/fromresearchtopolicy/ipsos_mori_briefing_pack.pdf to http://www.fgi-tbff.org/sites/default/files/elfinder/FGIImages/Research/fromresearchtopolicy/ipsos_mori_briefing_pack.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121016062403/http://redcresearch.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/RED-C-press-release-Religion-and-Atheism-25-7-12.pdf to http://redcresearch.ie/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/RED-C-press-release-Religion-and-Atheism-25-7-12.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.smh.com.au/polls/national/form.html%2C

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:30, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Irreligion in Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170710020910/http://abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Religion%20Data%20Summary~25 to http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Religion%20Data%20Summary~25
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160425232111/http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/2071.0Main%20Features902012%E2%80%932013 to http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/2071.0Main%20Features902012%E2%80%932013
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101213185101/http://www.scribepublications.com.au/book/theaustralianbookofatheism to http://www.scribepublications.com.au/book/theaustralianbookofatheism

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:51, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Meaningless Map
"People who are affiliated with no religion as a percentage of the total population in Australia at the 2011 census, divided geographically by statistical local area"

Unless census districts are sized strictly to all have the same number of people in them (which the ABS tries to do, but it's often kinda difficult), this methodology makes it impossible to disentangle "density of no religion" from "unevenness in the size of census districts". Very remote areas in the desert interior of Australia have so few people that census districts cannot be sized to the population because that would make the districts so large that the statistics would be of no use; or by the same token for city census districts in Australia to be sized proportionally to population, you'd have to have scores for every suburb. We have vast deserts with fewer people in them than a single apartment block, not to mention sparsely populated farmland that have to be subdivided into districts with small populations due to governmental boundaries.

That alone accounts for the apparent low density of no religion respondents in country NSW - there aren't many "no religion" people per census district there, because there aren't a lot of people per census district, because each town gets its own district regardless of population. That most likely is all this map is actually showing.

This map doesn't mean anything, apart from "your chance of seeing an atheist (or anyone at all) if you spend the day at a spot chosen randomly in this census district". A better measure would be "number of no religion respondents divided by the *population* of the district (rather than the *area* of the district)", which is simply the same thing as "percentage of 'no religion' responses in the district".

203.13.3.89 (talk) 00:57, 19 August 2020 (UTC)