Talk:List of countries by Human Development Index/Archive 3

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2014
124.253.73.111 (talk) 11:09, 23 June 2014 (UTC) Sir, Monaco is not at Top Of HDI Rankings. Top is Norway. Please edit this

Monaco is on top, as it was written in the article of Monaco (0,956, Monaco). And even if it is not on top, it was not included to this list at all earlier.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Sam Sailor Sing 12:41, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

But anyway Monaco is a state and should be included into this list! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.140.210.25 (talk) 07:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It's really included in the article, in another chapter. HOOTmag (talk) 08:49, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 June 2014
124.253.162.54 (talk) 11:37, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 12:20, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Change in rank: the reality vs. what they claim in the new 2014 report
It seems like in the new report they introduced a new methodology, because they say e.g. HDI of the USA rose by 0.002 points from 0.912 to 0.914 and its rank didn't change, while objectively, compared to the last report here on Wikipedia, it dropped by 0.023 points from 0.937 to 0.914 and its rank decreased by 2. The latter approach was used by User:Gonzalochileno when he updated the article. Do you think it's correct?--Liongrande (talk) 19:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I have corrected it according to the report, so now the list should be fully updated, except for the map.--Liongrande (talk) 05:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

From the 2014 report: "Because national and international agencies continually improve their data series, the data—including the HDI values and ranks—presented in this Report are not comparable to those published in earlier editions. For HDI comparability across years and countries, see table 2, which presents trends using consistent data calculated at five-year intervals for 1980–2013."--Liongrande (talk) 23:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2014
HDI 2014 has been released, please update the information thanks! http://hdr.undp.org/en?qt-home_page_quicktabs=2#qt-home_page_quicktabs

175.136.175.38 (talk) 12:47, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks likes this has been fixed, otherwise it's no longer protected... 85.230.140.118 (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 July 2014
Please replace India to Rank 135 in the table for Ranks. Source: http://hdr.undp.org/en/data

Sasiurfrend (talk) 15:11, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks likes this has been fixed, otherwise it's no longer protected... 85.230.140.118 (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Spelling mistake
The word "categorie" doesn't exist in English. I'm not allowed to edit the page. --2.245.111.186 (talk) 14:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Wrong HDI and Rank change
Guys, you should look the HDI and Rank 2013>2014 comparisons, unless the UN change the calculation, they are totally wrong.

In the history database, there are the right numbers in past editing, someone change. I see the article enter in protection from editing wars, so maybe the articles still unfinished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.66.209.149 (talk) 05:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

European Union
I've removed the European Union from the HDI table, as this is not calculated by the UNDP and not included in the report. This should go under "Countries missing from latest report" with a note about how it was calculated. However, the UNDP does not provide data for the EU as a whole, but for individual countries. Calculation of the HDI for the EU would involve using data from the individual countries and this would be equal to original research. Pristino (talk) 04:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Edit Needed Aug 22, 2014
 * In the table for top ten European Union Countries, the data for Austria, Belgium, and Luxembourg, in the three way tie for 8th place, needs to be fixed -- it should be 881 for all three from the data from the main table. 69.123.3.243 (talk) 15:21, 22 August 2014 (UTC)larK

Updates for External links section
Hello, I suggest updating the External links section with newer references, that also seems to be used for the current article. And the link still points to the 2011 report, but 2012 and 2013 reports also exist.


 * 2014 report informative page (maybe the best choice):
 * http://hdr.undp.org/en/2014-report


 * PDF downloads of it, English version:
 * http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/corporate/HDR/2014HDR/HDR-2014-English.pdf
 * http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr14-report-en-1.pdf


 * Download page of this report, in a few different languages:
 * http://hdr.undp.org/en/2014-report/download

Rapidim (talk) 11:30, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Separate Continents
I propose the separation of the Americas and Asia & Oceania, it would look like this;

America, North
10 highest HDIs

10 lowest HDIs

America, South
6 highest HDIs

6 lowest HDIs

Asia
10 highest HDIs

10 lowest HDIs

Oceania/Australia
6 highest HDIs

6 lowest HDIs

I don't think there's anything wrong if S. America and Oceania only have 6 countries on each side, because so does the list of Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. --ShadowRenegado (talk) 17:31, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 September 2014
please add Taiwan on the list of very high human development index countries, if Hongkong is on the list, how come Taiwan is not, Taiwan is not part of China.

7ariez (talk) 10:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

❌ Taiwan is at the top of the "Non-UN members (not calculated by the UNDP)" List, but, not being a UN Member, does not appear in the UN report, so cannot be included in the analysis of that report. - Arjayay (talk) 12:06, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2014
Change the name of the United States to "America, United States of", because "United States" is not a name, we've had several countries with a "United States" as their type of government and today, Mexico still is a "United States", the name "America" is ambiguous as it can refer to North America, South America, or just the Americas as a whole, specially in the Latin-American continental model. Change the name of the United Kingdom to "Great Britain and Northern Ireland", again, "United Kingdom" is not a name, there have been several United Kingdoms in the past, such as the United Kingdom of Portugal, Algárves and Brazil.

Change Macedonia's name to "Macedonia, Former Yugoslav Republic of" as the name "Macedonia" can offend the Greek. Change China's name to "China, People's Republic of" as the name "China" can offend the Chinese from the Taipei island. Change Taiwan's name to "China, Republic of" as it can offend both the Chinese from the mainland and the Chinese from the Taipei island. Change Micronesia's to name to "Micronesia, Federated States of" because "Micronesia" is the name of a region in which Micronesia (the country) is in. Change Australia's name to "Australia, Commonwealth of" as "Australia" can be the name of a continent. Change South Korea's name to "Korea, Republic of" and North Korea's to "Korea, Democratic People's Republic of" because "North" or "South" can offend people from both Koreas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShadowRenegado (talk • contribs) 22:22, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Change Cape Verde's name to "Cabo Verde", Burma's name to "Myanmar" and Laos' name to "Lao" as they currently are in the UN.

"Republic of the Congo" and "Democratic Republic of the Congo" can both be changed to a more conventional "Congo, Republic of the" and "Congo, Democratic Republic of the" respectively, but they already are correct, so there's no need to change.

Take a look at the Talk section and think about my previous proposition about separating the Americas into North and South America and Asia & Oceania into, well, Asia and Oceania.

--ShadowRenegado (talk) 15:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: We use the common name of a country on Wikipedia. Our policies/guidelines on the matter are: For Macedonia related names, see WP:NCMAC. For the United States, see WP:NOTUSA. For all others, see WP:COMMONNAME. Stickee (talk) 04:37, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2014
Can I edit this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index? because Taiwan is not on the list of very high HDI whereas it's an independent country

7ariez (talk) 22:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Padlock-dash2.svg Not done: requests for decreases to the page protection level should be directed to the protecting admin or to Requests for page protection if the protecting admin is not active or has declined the request. Also, scroll down a bit to List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index, the non-UN member section. Taiwan is listed there Cannolis (talk) 00:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

New Taiwan data
The government of Taiwan has calculated their HDI using the 2014 formula and 2013 data, it being 0.882

http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/public/Data/491716362790WG0X9I.pdf

This can be put in the "Non-UN members (not calculated by the UNDP)" section, and replace the old 2011 data that is there.

It's already updated on the Chinese version of this page, if a model is needed. 01061919tr (talk) 13:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I already updated the page for you. Keep us updated! --ShadowRenegado (talk) 11:48, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2014
I propose the separation of the Americas and Asia & Oceania, it would look like this;
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 16:41, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

America, North
10 highest HDIs

10 lowest HDIs

America, South
6 highest HDIs

6 lowest HDIs

Asia
10 highest HDIs

10 lowest HDIs

Oceania
6 highest HDIs

6 lowest HDIs

Though, I can see that Timor Leste is more commonly associated with South East Asia, in that case, we can take out Timor Leste and add Indonesia, since they own half of the New Guinea island (which is entirely in Oceania).

Oceania
6 highest HDIs

6 lowest HDIs

I don't think there's anything wrong if S. America and Oceania only have 6 countries on each side, because so does the list of Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries.

--ShadowRenegado (talk) 12:12, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Is the HDI A Joke?
The UK gives the most amount of foreign aid in the world after the USA and more than triple that of every other G8 nation, the nation also has the 6th highest gdp in the world, it has the highest growth of any western nation, subsequently the HDI is a mockery due to the fact that three nations that had to be bailed out by the IMF and yet are in the top twenty and one in the top ten! Three nations have far lower literacy rates than the UK yet again are in the top twenty while the UK is sitting way down at 26, a lot of this index seems to be about how citizens report how 'happy they are', Brits will say 'yeah okay' which I gather is reported as a negative when they really mean yes they are fairly happy. Also, political freedom, human rights and labour rights in the UK are higher than others listed in the top ten yet it sits at 26.Twobells (talk) 16:47, 21 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Highest growth in what? Economy? That would appear to be Canada. Personally though, I agree with you that there are some questionable aspects of the report. The US for example has historically been ranked lower but I believe after the 2010 or 2011 report, it suddenly and miraculously bumped up even surpassing countries such as Canada and Japan which have fared better than the US. Elockid  ( Talk ) 13:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Apologies you are correct, what I should have wrote was highest growth of the western European nations, I also noticed the USA's sudden huge leap up the list which traditionally was quite low. I wonder which exact category is it that has dropped the UK so far down the list and the USA so suddenly up? Because I did my research and as I stated earlier the UK statistically is way above many others in the top ten, is it this vague 'happiness' index? Twobells (talk) 10:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC) Edit. Okay, I found what they changed to give the US such a high score and drop the UK through the floor, its called the 'Composite Indices' which unsurprisingly is a definition for vague, a purely abstract concept that the UN has applied, prior to 2011 the USA had a low Composite Indice then suddenly after complaints and criticisms of the UN process by US experts it was raised to one of the highest, at the same time the UN has applied a low Composite Indice to the UK again based on this vague abstract calculation. Twobells (talk) 10:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * So understanding Twobells, HDI is a joke cos it does not give a place in the top ten to the UK ? Sweden has the highest growth of western European nations, not the UK...92.129.251.200 (talk) 06:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Foreign aid in the form of military intervention and investments are not humane by a long shot. Bataaf van Oranje (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Mistake Spotted!
On section 3 (list of countries by continent), subsection 3.4 (Asia), why is Cyprus featured? It belongs to the EU, both geographically and politically. Please correct this... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.130.112.183 (talk) 16:43, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Launch of 2014 Human Development Report
The 2014 Human Development Report 'Sustaining Human Progress: Reducing Vulnerabilities and Enhancing Resilience' will be launched on 24 July.

http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/media-global-launch-2014-human-development-report

Let's get ready for updating --Atcap (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2014 (UTC).

Will there be a 2015 report? Does someone know something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.134.70.111 (talk) 13:52, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, 2015 Human Development Report ("Rethinking Work for Human Development"), will be launched in November 2015. HOOTmag (talk) 14:04, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

new hdi
Isnt it time for this years hdi ranking to come? :/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.116.72.81 (talk) 15:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)


 * On 14 December, on which 2015 Human Development Report ("Work for Human Development") will be launched. HOOTmag (talk) 20:39, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Regions
The report doesn't mention the regions in the article.--146.199.195.183 (talk) 22:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2015
Note that the Flag alongside the entry for New Zealand is not the authorised flag for the country. As all the other flags appear to be the legitimate Country's flags, it would seem logical that the correct flag is shown. Thank you

118.93.194.144 (talk) 00:25, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. You are going to have to be more specific since I see nothing wrong with the flag. --Stabila711 (talk) 04:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

North Korea HDI
Rank and Map list N.Korea's 2013 HDI as 0.595, however in the citation the source is *not* the UN. N.Korea was not featured in the 2013 report. Last time N.Korea was listed was in the 1998 report (before changes to the method) for 1995 and its HDI then was 0.766. Could someone please correct the chart as well as delete N.Korea from the map (as all references are outdated by 20 years).100.1.46.6 (talk) 02:01, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

The new 2015 Index is out.
p.208. HOOTmag (talk) 10:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks to the page updaters, but I think it's incorrect to reflect "Change from previous year" based on change from the number there was on the page previously for every respective country, as HDI indicator values that used to be listed on this page don't seem to match the actual data for 2013 in the new HDI report.


 * For instance, http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2015_statistical_annex.pdf page 212 lists inequality-unadjusted HDI for Latvia in 2013 as 0.816, whereas it was listed as 0.810 on this page previously. The actual change in 2014, therefore, was +3, not +9. Estonia used to have 0.840 on this page, while the new HDI report lists its HDI in 2013 as 0.859, etc.


 * Most likely, the HDI calculation methodology had changed since the last report, changing the historical HDI data.


 * I suggest "Change from the last year" column to be updated in accordance with change data specified by latest HDI report.


 * Haevlock (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2015 (UTC)


 * In regards to the new 2015 HDI report, the footnotes say that the method of calculating Cuba's 2013 score was inaccurate, and now has 0.759 for its actual 2013 score. Should the difference in score from 2013-14 reflect this as well?


 * --Salakasto (talk) 06:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * What's with Rwanda having a lower score than last time? Is that really correct? --Darthdyas (talk) 20:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In the list it appears as Paraguay and Cabo Verde lost some points in development compared to the last report. I double checked in the original report (2015) and both countries increased their HDI index as compared with 2013 (report 2014). Is it a mistake in the list? Could you fix it please? BW rob — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.254.75.81 (talk) 19:55, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Some of the change rates are very wrong
India's is shown as 0.023. It's actually 0.005. Bolivia's shown as -0.005. It's actually 0.004. Peru's shown as -0.002. It's actually 0.002. Guatemala's shown as -0.001. It's actually 0.001. Tajkistan's shown as 0.017. It's actually 0.003. Honduras' shown as -0.011. It's 0.002. This list is not exhaustive. See page 214 for more. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2015_human_development_report.pdf Registered editors, please correct this. 177.158.108.28 (talk) 00:41, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

Timor-Leste in Oceania
Under the "10 highest HDIs for each continent" section, Timor-Leste is listed as being part of Oceania, while it is actually a part of Asia. Could someone bother removing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muffinlicious (talk • contribs) 01:49, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ HOTmag (talk) 10:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2016
Botswana should be classified as a high HDI nation because it development index according to you page has increased by 0.002 and it is at 0.698. The rating should now be 0.700. Wikipedia -(Pl106	Steady	 Botswana	0.698	Increase 0.002)

99.229.174.92 (talk) 00:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * No, the reading means that its latest HDI is 0.698 and that it has increased from 0.696. Jeppiz (talk) 00:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

INDEXES APPEAR AS SKYPE NUMBERS
Some of the HDIs under the world map appear as Skype links. Anyone that can take a look at that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.182.197.149 (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on List of countries by Human Development Index. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090403071425/http://hdr.undp.org:80/en/humandev/reports/ to http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/reports/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Cambodia
Hi... just noticed that under the section for Asia, Cambodia is missing from the 10 lowest HDI countries. (0.555) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.74.200.123 (talk) 13:40, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ HOTmag (talk) 17:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 June 2016
Jacklawler10 (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — Andy W. ( talk  · ctb) 15:44, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

What percentage in each range?
The article claims that just over 30% of the world's population live in "high" or "very high" development countries. However, the list contradicts that because China has about 18.5% of the world's population, USA about 4.5%, Brazil just under 3%, Russia 2%, and Mexico and Japan each around 1.6-1.7%. So that's over 30% right there before we even consider Turkey, Iran, or Germany, each of which is over 1%, let alone the UK, France, or Italy-- each around 0.8%-- or Thailand at around 0.9%. I'm taking out the sentence about percentages but I hope someone can replace it with numbers that are actually accurate. BeIsKr (talk) 17:35, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Hong Kong not a country
I think HK must be added with the note of part of China, because HK is not a proper o soverign country and it can be confusing (if it were like England, Greenland, Quebec, etc.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.24.96.246 (talk) 15:52, 12 February 2016 (UTC)


 * This article just reflects how the UN report presents the statistics. The statistics treat Hong Kong as a different entity from China. Adding such a note would indeed confuse the readers, as it may make readers think the HDI of China has already taken Hong Kong into account, i.e. an average of the mainland China and Hong Kong.--Quest for Truth (talk) 04:03, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Column's data.
What do you think about change from Change in rank from previous year to Change in rank from previous ten years ? Dawid2009 (talk) 09:53, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and try.Cantab1985 (talk) 09:56, 17 August 2016 (UTC)


 * What is in your opinion better version? Change of the parametr from one one year to ten year or added next column with data about ten year? Dawid2009 (talk) 10:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Where is Country Number 144?
Possible typo in between the list of medium development and low development as I noticed country number 144 is missing. Could this possibly be that it was Hong Kong and got removed? Happy Hunting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.254.132.48 (talk) 05:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Hong Kong is ranked 12th. Anyway, why are asking about 144 only, and not about other numbers? You could ask also about: 7, 10, 15, 33, 38, 51, 53, 54, and so forth... HOTmag (talk) 06:39, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Western Europe" needs modification
Finland especially but also Greece are NOT located in Western Europe. Please fix that. Best GizzyCatBella (talk) 09:14, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Our article Western Europe does classify those countries in Western Europe. HOTmag (talk) 18:25, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Then Western Europe article needs to be corrected also. It's misleading, especially to young readers who may not understand "cold war" divisions. I have removed "Western" from the first table since geographical location of some countries such as Greece, Malta, Finland etc. is completely wrong. "Eastern Europe and Caucasian region" are more or less correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GizzyCatBella (talk • contribs) 00:16, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Are you going to correct the UN classification as well? Please note, that all European UN members, belong to either of two groups: Eastern European Group, and Western European and Others Group ("others" i.e. non-European members), whereas the countries you are talking about are classified by UN in the second group. HOTmag (talk) 01:04, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You are right. I corrected myself.GizzyCatBella (talk) 04:23, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Look, Finland is not located in Western Europe, neither is Greece, Cyprus or Malta. If we continue to assign countries to its incorrect geographical locations it will only create confusion, that's my point. Referring to UN classification from 1961 to make the list is wrong. Why not to CIA division? The list should be combined into Europe as a whole or into EU and non-EU for example.50.67.24.94 (talk) 04:15, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't figure out why you mention Cyprus that is off-topic. As for the other countries you mentioned: Our article relies on our other article Western Europe, that relies on many sources - including UN classification which hasn't changed since 1961. So, if you want to correct our article, you will have first to correct the other article Western Europe (I'm not arguing about whether or not the other article is correct, I'm only claiming that if it's wrong then it should be corrected before you correct our article that only relies on the other article). HOTmag (talk) 09:39, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Please DO NOT get rid of the data on this article
DO NOT get rid of this data when the new data for the Human Development index comes out. Put it on a different article or something. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Socialistboyy (talk • contribs) 05:52, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Nigeria a medium HD country?
Nigeria is marked with a shade of blue indicating medium human development, but it is in the low HD category in the list? Unless I misunderstand something, there seems to be an error with the map. -- Darthdyas (talk) 22:50, 25 December 2016 (UTC) It's a map for an older report. They should probably update it Socialistboyy (talk) 23:02, 21 March 2017 (UTC)socialistboyy

Zimbabwe stat
In Methodology is says: "The country with the largest decrease in HDI since 1998 is Zimbabwe, falling from 0.514 in 1998 by 0.140 to 0.374 in 2010. " No citation. In the 2016 Human Development Index report it says on page 218: Zimbabwe 1990=0.499 2000=0.427 2010=0.452 2015=0.516 1990-2000= –1.55 2000-2010= 0.57  2010-2015=2.67  1990-2015= 0.13 Please correct 108.5.48.89 (talk) 18:30, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

This article is a disaster
The change in rank of countries is wrong, and so s the actual number they changed by. They revised the old Human Development Index, so the changes are... different than it shows here. This is true, as I have the phone app. Socialistboyy (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2017 (UTC)socialistboyy
 * Please give an example. HOTmag (talk) 11:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Who are the irresponsible and lazy editors of this page and why the page is locked?
Who is supposed to make the changes after the release of the 2016 report and when? The current edition of the page has no value as an encyclopedic source of information. Ben — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.63.15.194 (talk) 00:16, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Countries missing from latest report
What should we report for these? Certainly not figures by a hobbyist in dodgy book that the section previously included. The remaining option are:
 * 1) The 2009 "Filling Gaps in the Human Development Index" published by ESCAP (it's an UN agency but these "Working Paper" numbers are not official HDI figures at all).
 * 2) Latest official HDI found in a Human Development Report.
 * 3) Something else (e.g. some countries and territories try to calculate their own).

Currently, the section is a mix of options one and three. It used to be latest official figures (see ).

I think there are merits for both unofficial estimates (if they are reliable) and latest official figures. Perhaps coming up with a table format that displays both would be preferable here.

But please, no more blogs and dodgy hobbyist. These figures get copied to country articles and some of them still feature bogus "HDI"s. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC) HONG KONG IS NOT A COUNTRYHK is a Chinese province (special region), so it cannot be placed among the "List of Countries..."--88.16.159.158 (talk) 04:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Please notice that the report does give it a rank as a "country", while the article only quotes the report. HOTmag (talk) 19:44, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

If you're going to make a new HDI map fix all of the data
Not just some or most of it. Mixing 2015 and 2016 data is stupid. South Sudan has an HDI of 0.418 so it should be red like Ethiopia. Edit: Nigeria should be low development on the other map aswell. Socialistboyy (talk) 22:19, 15 April 2017 (UTC)socialistboyy

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of countries by Human Development Index. 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/20111005100501/http://www.unescap.org/pdd/publications/workingpaper/wp_09_02.pdf to http://www.unescap.org/pdd/publications/workingpaper/wp_09_02.pdf

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) 01:27, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2017
Under the "North Atlantic Treaty Organisation" section, Romania must appear under the "Very high development", with an index of 0.802. Otherwise, the information stated earlier in the article don't make sense. Paul 194 (talk) 12:20, 22 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Those figures are for 2014, which Romania was then listed as "high" HDI. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 00:53, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Average HDI, median HDI of the world?
What is the average and median HDI of all of the countries in the world? – Illegitimate Barrister (talk • contribs), 02:50, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

Monaco with HDI higher than 1 is ridiculous
in International Organisation of La Francophonie Monaco has a HDI of 1.074 which is by definition impossible.

Later on the article states that latest UNDP data for Monaco is from 2008 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.230.4 (talk) 07:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Proliferation of organizational groupings
Some users have been expanding the list with a multitude of groupings of countries by organization, including the NATO, Non-Aligned Movement, OPEC, former Eastern Bloc, International Organisation of La Francophonie, etc. These groupings are barely useful and make the article extremely unwieldy. And there are at least five lists for Europe alone: EU, Council of Europe, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and Europe. The situation is getting ridiculous. I propose to remove many of these groupings. -Zanhe (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I propose to stick to the groupings covered by HD Report only. HOTmag (talk) 20:12, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

China Listed as Increasing 0.010 seems incorrect.
China is listed as gaining a massive 0.010 from year to year. Since most countries gain in thousandths year-by-year, this seems like an impossibility. This is further enforced by the fact that China is only shown to have gained one place in the rankings, when in reality it would have jumped two or three spots at least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkhues (talk • contribs) 21:38, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svg Confirmed and Resolved: I have reviewed the Human Development Report and there is indeed an error in China’s HDI points gains: its improvement was just of 4 thousandths (0.004). ★ Iñaki ★   (Talk page) ★ 05:23, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Indonesia
Please,make the data HDI 2017 😊 HDI Indonesia 2017 is 0,701 and category high 😃😃😃 not medium again ☺ Cahyo Bramasta (talk) 08:13, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * But this article is about 2016. HOTmag (talk) 08:52, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Can you give a source for this new data? Alex of Canada (talk)

Two maps
They seem redundant. I vote to keep the one that has more categories. Thoughts? Dryfee (talk) 01:21, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Malaysia increasing 0.010 seems wrong
This list shows Malaysia with an increase of 0.010, the biggest increase from previous year with the exception of India (0.009), but its ranking didn't change staying at 59 and unlike India the distance from the country bellow (Palau) is too small being only 0.001. It may be good to double check India's HDI increase as well.LD50-RJ (talk) 04:40, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 May 2018
0.681 is the Curent Pakistan's Human Development Index as per 2015 data (Source: UNDP http://www.pk.undp.org/content/dam/pakistan/docs/HDR/PK-NHDR.pdf 61.5.134.30 (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: The article currently lists the figures form 2015. Using the 2017 figures for just Pakistan would create anomalies.  When the figures are updated for the entire UN, then the article will be updated fully. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:12, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * How about we add a subsection for new national data? That wouldn't interfere with national rankings, and it would keep the article more up to date. Alex of Canada (talk) 00:51, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

When will new list come out?
This list seems fairly outdated already given that it is based on 2015 data. Will a new one be coming out anytime soon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.179.143.132 (talk) 01:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, please see the chapter about "Frequency". HOTmag (talk) 09:40, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Data
This article uses 2015 estimates from the 2016 pdf report.

I noticed differences between the values of 2015 taken from that report to the values the UN publishes on its website on the Human Development Data (1990-2017) section for the same 2015.

As they say: "We advise users of the HDI not to compare the estimates from Reports published in different years, but to use the consistent data given in Table 2 of the latest report or to use data series available in the on-line database http://hdr.undp.org/en/data."

I suggest we use the data from the Human Development Data (1990-2017) website to calculate the "Change from previous year" tab.

And also we need to update the data to the 2018 values. 143.107.174.1 (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 September 2018
The 2018 Human Development Index has been released, and I believe that this article should now be updated with the new data. The new data begins on page 32.

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2018_human_development_statistical_update.pdf &#32;Have fun on Wikipedia! (talk) 19:05, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Danski454 (talk) 15:40, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2018
Portugal's Ranking Is the same as Latvia's ranking (which is 41), just change portugal's ranking to 42 Sokoket (talk) 21:58, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * According to the report, Portugal and Latvia have the same ranking: 41. That's because they have the same HDI: 0.847. HOTmag (talk) 22:28, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: per HOTmag Danski454 (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2018
change "While the HDI remains useful, it stated " to "It stated that while the HDI remains useful"

because Wiki presumably doesn't have its own opinion about usefulness EatenRiper (talk) 13:48, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅, but Don't abbreviate "Wikipedia" as "Wiki"!. Graham 87 03:36, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Hungary is in the OECD
Hungary is in the OECD, and has the third lowest HDI in the organisation. This should be listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.190.78 (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ HOTmag (talk) 20:55, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Change from previous year
Are the 'change from previous year' values rounded to the nearest three decimal places? J ACKINTHE  B  OX   • TALK 06:09, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

The map of HDI categories is wrong
The map shows Rwanda and Burundi as "medium HDI", when in fact both are "low HDI". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.102.190.78 (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

It also shows Timor-Leste as Very High BeryAb (talk) 13:44, 28 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Actually they are low based on the list. Both are below 0.555. Jgalt87 (talk) 10:59, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Year Shown - 2018 vs 2017
The year used at the top of each table is 2018, the date of the report, which is based on 2017 data. Given it is “as of” 2017, might that be the better year to show? All the continent HDI articles (Europe, Africa, Latin America (yes, I know that’s not a continent), drawing on the same report, head tables with the most recent year at 2017 (and compare to 2016 numbers, released in the 2017 report). Should it be changed on this article, or should each of the continent articles be changed to 2018 and 2017. Jgalt87 (talk) 11:22, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

The original publication is using exclusively Czechia, not the Czech Republic
The original publication "Human Development Indices and Indicators: 2018 Statistical Update" is exclusively using Czechia in all tables, including the main Table 1 "Human Development Index and its components", which is reproduced here. Wikipedia should follow the original publication and not change any information at will, including country names.Geog25 (talk) 14:08, 3 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Disagree. Czechia refers to the Czech Republic, which in 2016 decided to change its official English short name to Czechia for easier branding on commercial products (the full name was considered too long). However in the United States, it hasn’t fully caught on. “Czech Republic” continues to be its official name (in English), so nothing is incorrect. Jgalt87 (talk) 11:41, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

HDI update - Taiwan
Here's the HDI of Taiwan, calculated by the government.

https://www.stat.gov.tw/public/Data/81030161446GEYJEAG4.pdf

The 2018 HDI is 0.907, which would make it 21st behind Austria and before Luxembourg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greysholic (talk • contribs) 03:23, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * This article does not use individual governmental calculations. It is specifically based on the calculations done by the UNDP. -- Somedifferentstuff (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

HONG KONG IS NOT A COUNTRY, BUT A CITY OF THE PEOPLE´S REPUBLIC OF CHINA That is an insult to 1.4 bn. Chinese--88.3.142.33 (talk) 04:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hong Kong is calculated separately from China and ranked separately as well. J ACKINTHE  B  OX   • TALK 05:24, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Two colours on the HDI map chart is way too similar
The choropleth map at the start of the article has two colours that are way too similar. The colours that represent the HDI value ranges 0.750–0.799 and 0.700–0.749, which are #00F900 and #7FFA2A respectively, are way too similar. I compared those two colours side by side myself, and I almost couldn't tell any difference unless I tilted my laptop screen at an angle, but then the difference in colour is still very subtle. I experimented with some colours for the map on mapchart.net, and suggest changing the colour that represents 0.700–0.749 from #7FFA2A to #A4FF23. This colour is more intermediate between the #00F900 and #CCFF00. J ACKINTHE  B  OX   • TALK 13:17, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I just replaced the previous map with one I just created, based on the colours used in File:2016 UN Human Development Report.svg (I only changed the colour for 'data unavailable' from #B9B9B9 to a slightly lighter #D9D9D9), which I feel are much more suitable. Compare this revision of the article with the previous map and this revision with the new map. J ACKINTHE  B  OX   • TALK 15:36, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Year Shown II - 2017 v 2018
As I see it, it would definitely make sense to use the year in which the data was collected rather than the year the HDI was published. If I'm not mistaken, the data for the years 2016 and 2017 was only released in 2018 (no report in 2017), thus creating ambiguity when just saying 2018 rankings. Concerns? If not, please make it happen on every section of the article because otherwise, it will be even more confusing than before. Also, maybe instead of saying 201X Ranking, maybe something like 201X Data? I don't know. --Ouzhoulang (talk) 21:28, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
 * While I failed to correct all the 2018 chart column heads to say "2017," they should indicate "2017." That's how they're cited in the infobox of many WP country articles (like "United States"). The WP reference even states that these are 2017 figures published in midyear 2018. That means they are for the full year 2017 only. On remedy is "2017 data (2018 report)" or something similarly brief. I do think "2018" is an error. Mason.Jones (talk) 00:58, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree. Also, "2017 data (2018 report)" seems like a good way to put it, it clarifies exactly what is being talked about. --Ouzhoulang (talk) 07:58, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Will do. See changes to column heads. Mason.Jones (talk) 16:48, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Macedonia
I assume those who change the name are acting in good faith, but when the latest list was published in 2018, the name was still Macedonia. As soon as the next list is published, we will of course updated the article for all countries, including the name for North Macedonia. Jeppiz (talk) 19:57, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Flag of South Korea
Can someone tell me, why the flag of South Korea is only the own article? 178.43.89.167 (talk) 14:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Sudan wrong colour on the map
Sudan should be the same orange shade as Nigeria, not the same as Kenya. -- Darthdyas (talk) 21:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


 * As of April 14, 2019, the two are the same orange shade. 11:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jgalt87 (talk • contribs)


 * Yes, someone must have fixed it. -- Darthdyas (talk) 21:29, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

The 2019 Report for the Year 2018 was released.
Just a reminder that the article needs to be updated soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LivinAWestLife (talk • contribs) 13:42, 9 December 2019 (UTC)