Talk:List of states and territories of the United States by population density

Who divided residents with km²?
I just checked the german article for New Jersey where was mentioned its the state with most density (389/km²), and here I see something like 480 or so... but 22,608km² and 8,791,894 Population (2010 census) makes = 388,8842002830856334041047416843 which makes the german 389/km² correct, so the whole article is false because Rhode Island is stated here with 389.1 for example... but that's impossible until NJ is at first place with 388,8. I know you Americans use square miles, but that doesn't matter... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kilon22 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The version you're referring to, which I won't even bother to check the math for, is based on 2007 estimates. I was just checking the talk page in order to replace these with numbers from the more accurate 2010 Census.  Seems like a good idea so I should have them up sometime this weekend when I have time to input the numbers and double-check everything. 70.15.11.44 (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * What's the Wikipolicy on angry emoticons? I'm gonna have to redo the 2000 side as well ... someone decided to make 1 mile equal ~2.6 kilometers instead of ~1.6 .... ARGH! 70.15.11.44 (talk) 16:48, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ... also, the totals are conventionally calculated for the land area, not the total area. Just be aware of that. 70.15.11.44 (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * LOL, 1 sq mi is equal ~2.6 km2. Next time use your brain. I put Template:Disputed into the article until someone normal fixes the values.--Giornorosso (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 3 days 6 hours 51 minutes. 70.15.11.44 (talk) 12:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

In the density per square kilometer column, the result in the square miles column, which is correct, has been multiplied by .62 squared. It should’ve been divided by .62 squared. This would yield the correct number of residents per square kilometer. Mcmatt7585 (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Lista should be sortable
Sortable lists make it easier to easily distinguish important information. 83.250.128.97 (talk) 21:09, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Seattle downtown.jpg

Map scaled by population density?
If New Jersey has 5x the population density of California, why is it less than half the size of California on the map? Are we saying each states actual size is multiplied by a factor of density? That's some interesting math 2601:600:8780:70E0:C13E:C645:9081:5184 (talk) 06:25, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * The scaling is based on 2013 population and I would argue it's a bad picture to include. Mercator projection is also a factor at play. – The Grid  ( talk )  13:32, 12 September 2023 (UTC)


 * The caption was incorrect. The states are scaled by population, which is perfectly meaningful and relevant. I suppose you could say that the area is multiplied by the density, because area * (population/area) = population, but that's a pretty perverse way to explain it. Mercator projection is irrelevant here. --Macrakis (talk) 15:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Rank columns
The table currently has 4 rank columns. It only needs one, for density. If somebody needs the ranks for population or area, they can visit those tables.

Which density rank should be kept? Country lists tend to de-number territories, but somebody might want the overall rank. I think they're probably equally interesting, but lean towards following the country lists. Wizmut (talk) 16:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I think the 4 lists are sufficient. Density = population / area. There's not one approach to this. This list includes states and territories and seems to show the case of overall, states only, square miles, square kilometers. – The Grid  ( talk )  17:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * There's many approaches not currently on this list. Including/excluding coastal waters, federal land, reservations. The reason there's not as many as possible is for readability and pertinence.
 * See List of countries and dependencies by population density, which has only ever had the one rank.
 * Big tables are harder to read. Any more than four data columns and the eye and mind begin to wander. As WP is not a database, lists should be just like prose articles - meant to be read, perhaps in their entirety. Wizmut (talk) 17:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The list you provided is the same size as this one. It even provides the same type of data minus the ranks. I really don't see a sound argument here when somehow 3 additional columns becomes a readability issue. Also, list articles are lists. – The Grid  ( talk )  18:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * > It even provides the same type of data minus the ranks
 * That's what I'm suggesting we put here.


 * edit: something like this:


 * Wizmut (talk) 18:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * datata in this table doesn't seem to correlate with this article(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population_density ) which lists overall U.S population density at 91 per square mile. Wiki-efm (talk) 16:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * That is because different sources are used, which have different definitions. The big density list uses UN data which defines a country's outline by its coastline, while this list uses US data which defines the US by the area it territorially controls, which extends into the ocean. When that water area is taken away, the insular water area is also taken away. While the same definition of total insular area (land and water) could be arrived at, it's not what the source is directly saying.Wizmut (talk) 19:02, 9 November 2023 (UTC)