Talk:List of sovereign states by sex ratio

Table doesn't sort
Has anyone noticed this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.87.2 (talk) 14:57, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Something's...wrong
i dont think that is right
 * 88.105.55.70 (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What do you mean?
 * 88.105.55.70 (talk) 09:22, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Islam bad for women?
Except for British Virgin Islands, Nauru, Vanuatu, and Bangladesh, only Muslim nations seem to go against the trend of an increase of women amongst the elderly. Why? Also although there are a few Christian nations (British Virgin Islands) animist nations (Vanuatu, Nauru) Buddhist nations (Bangladesh) Hindu nations (India) atheist nations (China) with a serious imbalance (1.03 or higher in my opinion) most of these appeared to be Islamic. No offense to Muslims, but why? What's going on?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.177.7 (talk) 18:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Bangladesh is a mainly Muslim nation -_-. But to your point, I suppose immigration plays a role there. Look at the ratios for the former Soviet Muslim-dominant countries, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Pakistan. None of these have odd ratios. Why? Because immigration from poorer countries don't come to these countries. In the rich Arabian nations, immigration from South Asia plays a significant role in the population distribution. --Hamster X (talk) 14:25, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

In Andorra the sex ratio at birth is normal 1.05 but very high men in working-group (108 men per 100 women in group 15-64 compare with 101 men per 100 women in same group in neighbour countries such as France and Spain) and especially in age over 65 (around 99 men per 100 women compare with 70 men per 100 men in France and Spain).Cristiano Toàn (talk) 08:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC). The other reason led to the different distribution of population by sex in Arabian nations is the life-style of men, with the sharia law forbit alcoholic food thus the early mortality due to drinking-related such as liver cancer, cardiovascular is lessened.Cristiano Toàn (talk) 08:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Clarification...
Does the number in the table represent male or female? It's not exactly clear from what I can see. Supertin (talk) 09:09, 18 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Quote from article: "The human sex ratio is the ratio of males to females in a population." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.187.84 (talk) 03:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE
Found a new updated source from the CIA; https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2018.html

Please change the whole page with some new info.

Thanks. 88.105.55.70 (talk) 09:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Updated 9/13/2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.24.190.21 (talk) 22:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

What does a sex ratio of 5.06 in China translate to? I am a layman. Please explain. Obsessions28 (talk) 14:35, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

It translates to a typo, I guess. Should be 1.06. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.3.186.100 (talk) 03:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

New Discussion
A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries. Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 12:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Title of page is incorrect
Listing is not "by sex ratio" but alphabetical by country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.188.254.1 (talk) 09:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, this is a list of sex ratios by country. Why hasn't this problem been addressed yet?--108.124.20.244 (talk) 05:21, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

2010 Update
It needs updating as there is new information available at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2018.html from the C.I.A. 86.176.128.184 (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Nepal and Bangladesh
Nepal and Bangladesh have sex ratio of less than 1. Why are they colored blue in the map?
 * 'Cause clearly the people who made the map harbor anti-Muslim prejudices. 177.40.190.87 (talk) 02:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

China numbers crazy...
5.06 for total, 0.23 for one of the age groups. Thease are crazy nonsensical numbers that have nothing to do with the numbers in the source. More than one number being totally off is a bit suspicious. I've now changed the China numbers to the ones in the 2011 CIA Factbook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.3.186.100 (talk) 03:08, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I can imagine that in China, few female births are actually reported. So while 5.06 might seem a very off number (over five males born per female). The families that have a female infant carried to term and reported properly would be few at best. 74.15.59.195 (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Diffrencences
what is more accurate CIA or WDB ? Wanshiranui (talk) 22:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)


 * WDB is more accurate in my due diligence, CIA is okay in some cases. If you want the most accurate numbers google up the census office of each country, since birth records are created and kept for passport/school admissions/ etc; this is now common in many countries, and done every year. And if you do research it out for many countries, you are welcome to improve this wiki page by adding in respective census office numbers. ApostleVonColorado (talk) 00:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Inconsistent use of colour in maps
In the uppermost map, red means more females. In the others it means more males. D'oh.

SelectSplat (talk)


 * The map is hopelessly wrong, it doesn't match up with the actual numbers whatsoever.--90.200.42.37 (talk) 11:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Equal
What does equal number of males and females? I doubt this is possible.--2.245.187.254 (talk) 03:12, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Wrong data about Northern Mariana Islands
In the table: under 15 - 1.1, 15-64 - 0.85, over 65 - 1.08, Total - 0.74

Doesn't make any sense, does it?

Mass migration? With a static population it wouldn't make any sense but there are multiple reasons as to why a generation of young men could leave an island. It is only a snapshot. But if anyone has any information of the island putting it on the relevant oage would be good as there's nothing to confirm this theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.113.214.154 (talk) 06:28, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Needs consistent update per latest numbers
Per tag I just put on, see there have been a couple large updates of table and miscellaneous other updates of individual items. I guess the graphics are quite outdated, though obviously a lot of work to update those as well. Nevertheless, an important topic I'd like to get back to, but time will tell. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 18:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Sex ratio at birth in Liechtenstein
The sex ratio at birth in Liechtenstein is less than the European average. The value "1.26" is wrong respectely misleading. Here the true figures:

Births at Liechtenstein

year	male	female

1950	131	144

1951	161	129

1952	135	168

1953	175	142

1954	152	164

1955	148	152

1956	167	150

1957	181	170

1958	205	167

1959	174	171

1960	195	185

1961	187	172

1962	182	178

1963	191	207

1964	194	192

1965	209	186

1966	188	182

1967	206	205

1968	203	228

1969	214	206

1970	232	190

1971	181	169

1972	177	182

1973	192	211

1974	160	166

1975	137	169

1976	196	151

1977	164	145

1978	156	157

1979	187	183

1980	204	189

1981	194	175

1982	199	185

1983	170	178

1984	201	204

1985	182	191

1986	171	180

1987	194	171

1988	230	186

1989	196	177

1990	191	188

1991	222	194

1992	167	208

1993	202	213

1994	191	167

1995	217	208

1996	202	203

1997	207	228

1998	176	206

1999	203	227

2000	219	201

2001	226	175

2002	204	191

2003	183	164

2004	186	186

2005	187	194

2006	184	177

2007	184	167

2008	190	160

2009	226	180

2010	165	164

2011	203	192

2012	189	168

Sum 1950-2012:

11845 boys, 11418 girls

ratio m/f: 1,037

easier to read at a glance idea
someone ought to write a script that makes all the values over 1 in the table blue and under 1 red. ya know? wouldn't that be nice? skakEL 17:18, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Data mismatch for China <15 year
Table indicates a male-leaning ratio of 1.17 for the below 15 year olds, while in the figure China is painted deep blue for (heavily female leaning). I guess the picture's off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.212.61.178 (talk) 10:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Someone seems to have calculated the total ratio wrong, it looks like they averaged the other ratios, 1.058 rounded to 1.06, rather than calculating based off total population which would be 1.027 rounded to 1.03 also the reference 404s, I am not sure which page they were trying to go on the world factbook but the above is the general page

Morph3us (talk) 21:31, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Data mismatch for EU-27, the overshoot of 1.05 in age stratum 15-24 is rather continued in the age stratum of 25-54 than the mentioned drop to 1.01
This is caused by X-linked disorders. Since women get two X chromosomes, a defect on one is unlikely to have serious effects, but men only have one. This is why men have a much higher chance of being colorblind than women. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK115561/ https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-linked_recessive_inheritance https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-linked_agammaglobulinemia https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-linked_severe_combined_immunodeficiency https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness

cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Missing_women#EU-27_about_5%_more_boys I also did some verification in the group strata 25-54 and the discrepancy is always rather 5% more males. Normally data can be found on the national statistic websites in strata of groups for every 5 years of age, not always easy to get a number for age group compounding 25-54. What would explain the spectacular drop of 1.05 in the age group 15-24 and then all of a sudden in the compounded age strata making up the ages 25-54, it would all of a sudden drop to 1.01? I know of no reason. By the way can anybody find a wikipedia article on the biological reason? I remember some scientific articles stating that indeed in the embrional stage, women embrios get rejected 5% more if the body detects something possible that is going wrong in the development of the embryo.

Thy, SvenAERTS (talk) 12:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

"All male" shows up at the top when sorted ascending
When sorted ascending, Vatican City shows up first because letters are considered lower than numbers. This is exactly the opposite of a logical progression; Vatican City should be the highest, not the lowest. Is there a way to do that? I could just put an infinity symbol in, but that's neither mathematically correct nor likely to solve the sequencing problem, because that's not how computers count. Maybe put a 9 in a tiny font and transparent in front of the "all male" text? Robert (talk) 08:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Map is wrong ""Sex ratio by country for population aged below 15." as if there would be more girls then boys which is wrong as per article itself and table ...
cf the map "Sex ratio by country for population aged below 15. Red represents more girls, blue more boys than the world average of 1.07 males/females. (2020)" - it is wrong. It is in complete contradiction to that table that shows the numbers: all countries have more boys except some islands and countries with abnormal regimes. It is just a natural phenomenon explained in the article itself. Can anybody confirm as a double check? I left a message on the discussion page of the map to the maker and also to find the source of the numbers or the map and it just reads "Own work" ... duh?, Thy, SvenAERTS (talk) 00:19, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Fertility of females in median age
I think the article should clarify that excess of women doesn't equate to fertile women with whom family can be established. In Russia for instance there is a constant deficit of women in middle-age group. See Demographics of Russia AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 21:22, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

US
The map seems to show more men than women for the US age >65, but the table shows the opposite. — THORNFIELD HALL (Talk) 03:16, 8 March 2024 (UTC)


 * @Thornfield Hall The map is probably outdated. Alexysun (talk) 03:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Thornfield Hall It's harder to create a map than change a value on a table, so no one updated the map. Alexysun (talk) 03:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC)