Talk:Aging of China

Cleanup

I did some cleanup to make this article look more encyclopedic. I'm sure there still are a lot of inaccuracies and materials that need further verification using RSes. Normchou ^💬 23:06, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

thank you for information i appreciate wikipodia

Misleading graph

There are a couple of problems with the graph here. The future population figures it displays seem to be based on one bank's speculation, not any kind of authoritative or scholarly projection, and this is not indicated in the image or its caption. Moreover, the graph is misleading as it uses a different y-axis for the United States than it does for China. The graph makes it look as though the United States' working-age population is projected to be much higher than China's in 2050, when in fact (according to this speculative source) China's is projected to be more than three times that of the United States (about 800 million vs. 240 million). I don't see any reason to present this source's speculation as if it's fact, and we certainly shouldn't present it in such a misleading graph. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 17:07, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Keep: The chart is not about the level, but about the trend, which is exactly what the related paragraph is about. One can also use the percentage and/or logarithmic scales to avoid multiple y-axes, but the implication will be exactly the same. Also, please be informed that the World Bank is not some random "bank", and WB data is not some random data that one can easily discount. Normchou ^💬 19:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

The Charles Schwab source where the graph seems to come from does not mention the World Bank, and I cannot find these figures at the World Bank page you linked. Could you please clarify how you determined that the Charles Schwab figures came from the World Bank?

Either way, we should not be presenting the projections in such a misleading graph. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 17:48, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

The WB URL does not support a direct link to the source, but it's easy to figure out for any reader who wants to verify: Data & Resources -> Databank access -> select the Country, Series, and Time variables -> Apply Changes to see the results. The level and the trend are the same as what is shown in the chart, all the way to 2050. Also, the chart clearly shows the two y's and what each means, and it is arranged precisely the same way as one of the sources. The purpose of the article is not to tell some Wikipedians how to have basic numeracy, but to provide well-sourced information. So stop calling it "misleading" without evidence. Normchou ^💬 13:50, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the source. The graph is misleading because it uses two different y axes even though both represent the same unit (working-age population in millions). To a casual reader, the graph gives the impression that the United States' working-age population is projected to exceed China's, when in fact this is the opposite of what the projections say. Just because Charles Schwab decided to present the projections in a misleading graph doesn't mean we should too.

I think it's fine to include the World Bank projections in the article, but not in a misleading graph like this one. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:31, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

OK. [1]. Normchou ^💬 16:29, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, that's an improvement. It would be better, though, to use a y-axis starting at 0, for the reasons explained at Misleading graph#Truncated graph. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:10, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Sure, see the latest update. Given your seemingly genuine endeavor in eliminating every bit of "inaccurate" and "misleading" presentation of information, I hope next time you will be consistent in your pursuit by voting to deprecate Chinese state-owned propaganda outlets on RSN. Normchou ^💬 04:37, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for improving the graph. I do my best to evaluate sources at RSN based on their track record rather than their ownership. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 09:46, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - RPM SP 2022 - MASY1-GC 1260 201 Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 February 2022 and 5 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bettyhwt (article contribs).

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU22 - Sect 202 - Tue

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 July 2022 and 16 August 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sss88891, Cindyhong123 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by OneGoodNut (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - FA22 - Sect 201 - Thu

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 September 2022 and 8 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Riven3388 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Riven3388 (talk) 13:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)