Talk:Percent of households with guns by country


 * Notes on editing the table: For some countries (such as Albania) GunPolicy.org does not have data for all the table columns. Table references use the short reference format "Guns in COUNTRY" since the long format used in the first reference does not need to be repeated. Add new countries to the table by adding the country name, and the data and years that are available. Then add the reference link (GunPolicy.org country page URL). Do not format the reference link, nor the combination link/flag for countries, if you don't know how. Others can do that later.

Arithmetic errors
Several countries have firearms < handguns; oops. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8080:2a0a:8300:e748:2808:ae5e:e8f (talk • contribs) 1 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I only see one country, Belgium. And it is for different years. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:07, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Country flags
Northern Ireland had the UK Union flag shown in table, but Scotland has its own flag. Both are constituent countries of the UK so they should either both use their own flags (which they now do) or should display the UK union flag (along with the UK which also has an entry in the table). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.191.182 (talk) 19:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Anastrophe revert war
Please stop reverting without logical explanations. Your revert was petty. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Change of article name to add US states
As I pointed out in my edit summary, changing the title of the article in order to force in a map unrelated to the article topic is just not tenable. The rationale presented was that the "US states are the size of many countries. So US map is relevant to this article." This is irrelevant. EU states are larger than many US states, and many non-EU countries. Secondly, User Timeshifter claims that I am 'revert warring'. That is now how it works. I removed material irrelevant to the article, Timeshifter reverted my changes. This matter needs to be discussed here. Disputed material stays out of an article until there is a consensus. That's policy. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:31, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The relevance of the size of US states and EU countries is obvious. Stop reverting. You are in the minority. Someone else put the US map in the article originally. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Size of a country is not a basis for including US states map, particularly when the DATA is not included in the article. You initiated the reversions. Claiming that I am in a revert war is neither civil nor even based on the policies. "You are in the minority" - excuse me? Please, show me the "majority" that supports inclusion? This is untenable behavior. You have done this previously - insisted on inclusion of this map where it is irrelevant to the topic of the article. I'll open a request for comment, so that perhaps your claim that I am "in the minority" might have more meaning than "I'm a bully". cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:40, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You reverted the editor that added the map originally. US states are the size of many countries. For example, the European Union population is in the same range as the US population. So this US map is relevant. See also: List of Latin American countries by population. And: List of African countries by population. The US covers a large part of a continent. So including US states is relevant. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Nope. First, it is uncivil to change another user's edits on the talk page, including the section name. You are free to characterize the discussion however you like - don't change my edits however. Using this yardstick that any removal of material equals a 'revert', then practically ever edit on wikipedia is a revert. You are using highly imprecise terms. You say "size of many countries". But apparently you are referring to populations of many countries instead. The EU population is significantly larger than the US population. Yet each EU country is included in the list of countries. By that rationale, every US state must be included in the list as well. But they are not. And it would be ridiculous to do so. I will open a discussion. I have regrettably come across this same behavior before, with personal barbs broudly made, weak rationalizations, and essentially bullying behavior to force inclusion. Changing the article name - well, it frankly looks silly now, since it doesn't conform to any of the other related articles at all. You're basically presenting 'the US vs the world", not simple lists of data. I'll only an rfc. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:52, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

See my previous replies. And see WP:TALK. It allows changing a biased talk section name. Others will determine whether adding US states is relevant or not. Percent of households with guns by country and US state. And you are still reverting. Let the discussion conclude first. 2 people added this map as relevant. added it first. Stop your revert war! --Timeshifter (talk) 21:11, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Stop mischaracterizing what is taking place here. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

This below is what Anastrophe keeps removing in his unsupported revert war. The "US states" section was after the main table.

--Timeshifter (talk) 21:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Statements justifying inclusion of material are never added to article space without a reliable source making the argument for relevance.  cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:37, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Article was stable with US map for a long time. There is no need to add "Estimated" to the article name. Most lists are estimates and they say so. Anastrophe is going on a "slippery dog" tangent that world chaos will ensue if the name is changed to Percent of households with guns by country and US state. The slippery dog will escape from our hands and the dogs of war will be unleashed.


 * The article is notable. The expanded article with US states is notable. People want comparative data between US states and EU countries. I don't have a problem with adding a section map for states of India. India is a country that covers a near-continental area. Then we could just go to a simpler title like Percent of households with guns by country, etc. We often add territories to such lists without adding it in the article title.


 * Until somebody creates separate articles for US states and states of India, then the map should stay here. This is typical WP:SPINOFF methodology., are you going to create that separate article for US states? --Timeshifter (talk) 21:54, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Again, I ask that you please stop immediately personalizing the arguments and mocking my position. Your personal statements that "X" is notable don't create notability. You claim to speak for others by saying "People want comparative data between US states and EU countries". According to whom? And this article isn't about EU countries, it's about the percentage of households with guns by country. Every article title and body should characterize the data accurately. Stating percentages without acknowledging that they are estimates - and in the case of the US, wildly inaccurate estimates - because there is no repository of such data - is misleading.  cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 22:29, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You are the one making wild claims. See Google searches:
 * People want comparative data between US states and EU countries:
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=People+want+comparative+data+between+US+states+and+EU+countries
 * People want comparative data between US states and other countries:
 * https://www.google.com/search?q=People+want+comparative+data+between+US+states+and+other+countries
 * Map is sourced. It says "estimated".
 * https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL354.html
 * --Timeshifter (talk) 22:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * You've been an editor here for a long time. You know that google search results are not a proxy that is acceptable to use for establishing notability. I have made no "wild claims". Can you please quote my text, where I did so? That should end this distraction. The map of the US by state says estimated. This article is about countries, and those are all estimates as well. The article itself must acknowledge that. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 23:06, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

There is a lot of notability in those Google search results. It is a common place to start. As a longtime editor like myself is well aware of. You keep ignoring the fact that most list articles are based on estimates. And few put "estimated" in the title. The fact that the data points are estimates is pointed out in the article. See WP:Article title and WP:CONCISE. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:02, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The reason the article notes that fact is because I updated it today to note that fact. Previously it did not note that they were estimates. You claim that most list articles are based on estimates. That's false, objectively, but immaterial. Google results from putting in a bare sentence are useless. But again, these are distractions from the matter at hand. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 00:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Many people editing list articles don't feel the need to state the obvious. But thank you for doing so in the article. It doesn't need to be in the article title as previously noted. I concentrate on the tables. I let others concentrate on the prose. In my experience most list articles are based on estimates when one looks at the sources. There are various levels of accuracy based on the methods used to gather the data. Feel free to ignore this fact. And continue to feel free to ignore the fact that many people are interested in comparing US states to other countries. You can lead a horse to water...
 * WP:SPINOFF still applies, especially since Abbasi786786 in the RFC said "Probably not anytime soon" concerning creating a separate article for US states. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

RfC about name of article and content
Should this article, formerly entitled "Percent of households with guns by country", then changed to "Percent of households with guns by country and US State", be "Estimated percent of households by country"? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

(Context) This arises unfortunately from a content dispute as above. User:Timeshifter created the article in January 2021, as "Percent of households with guns by country", where it remained largely stable until December 2021, when User:Abbasi786786 added his map of estimated gun ownership in the US by state, stating 'added relevant map'. I dispute its relevance - particularly since the actual list does not contain each individual US state within it, and since US states are not countries, notwithstanding their sovereignty within the U.S. construct. Today, I removed the map, and a list of FBI data of US homicide and crime rates, which is not the topic of this article. There appears to be 'creep' ongoing to emphasis information that isn't directly relevant to the topic of this article. Editor Timeshifter reverted my edit, then changed the article name to "Percent of households with guns by country and US State", in order to make the article conform to the data he wished to include. That is not my understanding of how wikipedia works. Furthermore, if that were to become a rationale applied elsewhere, it could lead to articles such as "Estimated car ownership by country and States of India" - breaking out specific countries in order to "compare" them to the rest of the world. Switzerland has 26 Cantons - shall we compare the EU overall to a map of Swiss Cantons? The variations could go on endlessly, with little value inherent. Fundamentally, should an article entitled as "list of" be re-shaped to wedge in a map (not datasets), where a link to a relevant wikipedia article would be more appropriate? Lastly, all data in the article is from estimates, so the title should state that very relevant fact. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:30, 29 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah it's fine remove the map, it's not that relevant to this topic. There should be a whole new article for the state-level stuff -- Abbasi786786 (talk) 21:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * See previous talk section., are you going to create that separate article for US states? --Timeshifter (talk) 21:56, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Probably not anytime soon. -- Abbasi786786 (talk) 00:14, 30 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Restrict article to countries US states or other non country entities should be dealt with in separate article(s). -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 01:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you going to create those articles? Do you understand WP:SPINOFF? Should we refuse to list dependent territories here also, in the hopes that someone will someday create a separate article on dependent territories? GunPolicy.org, the source of this list article has data on those dependent territories too, though no one has gotten around to that data yet here. See:
 * https://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/caribbean --Timeshifter (talk) 02:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Comment. Anastrophe in his "context" intro is completely distorting what I have said in the previous talk section. I was talking about states in near-continent size areas like the US. Not small departments in a tiny country like Switzerland. Go to the previous talk section, and read it before replying here. That is the courteous thing to do. Also, see: --Timeshifter (talk) 02:34, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia talk:Article titles.

This is a very confused RFC. The question of the RFC is about renaming the article. Then under the term context the RFC creator argues a particular side of an unlisted question regarding inclusion/ exclusion of state data. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes., please see WP:RFCNOT and amend this discussion to use . -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 21:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Redrose64 yes, correct, it's not a simple /direct issue - it's two issues which are directly tied together. I'll redo later I guess, as the rename is secondary to the inclusion. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 21:19, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Should this article be renamed to "Estimated percent of households with guns by country and US State", and include a map of the United States estimated household gun ownership rates? cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:05, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Restrict article to a list of countries The article is a list of countries by estimated household firearm ownership rates. The United States is a country, notwithstanding that US states are sovereign within the US structure. Including only a map of the United States seems to be making a "point", for those inclined to suggest that the US is the only meaningful comparator in this regard. I reject that. Keep list articles lists, without artificial inclusion of maps that don't have demonstrated relevance to the list (per sources, naturally). At best, a map of global estimates firearm owneship rates would be appropriate to include. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 04:05, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Comment. It seems like the same RFC to me. Trying to combine the same 2 issues. Admin Redrose64 pointed out that the requested move concerning Anastrophe's addition of "Estimated" to the article title should be separated out and done via . See also: Wikipedia talk:Article titles. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:34, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Just for clarification: the "estimated" move has already happened and the question is whether it should be kept this way or moved back while the question of whether to include US states is about a change that has not happened yet? If we're supposed to discuss both issues I agree that they should be separated (probably in a single RFC). -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 05:19, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, shouldn't it be "percentage of households [...]" instead of "percent"? -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 05:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

I give up. I've never wanted to learn the all the damned WP policy template horse-pucky, and I'm not going to start now, because I'm not an effing bureacrat. My arguments as I presented them above stand. Do whatever you want. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 06:23, 1 May 2023 (UTC)