Talk:List of U.S. states by population density

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 District of Columbia 2 Alaska 3 Alaska pt 2 4 Checked data against US Census page 5 Metric measures VERY wrong.

[edit] District of Columbia

I have added DC to the list without giving it a ranking among the 50 U.S. states. If DC were not included, the total average United States population density would fall to 74.0/square mile.

If it is not appropriate to include DC on this list, even though it is a wholly incorporated part of the United States, then please adjust the average U.S. population density accordingly to remove DC from the calculations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.47.126 (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Something is very wrong with the numbers for DC. The conversion between pop/sq.miles and pop/sq.km is incorrect, but I don't know which (if either) is correct. I am removing this until somebody get figures to correct it. -- dpotter (talk) 21:44, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

U.S. census bureau says that in 2000, DC had a population density of 9,378.0 people per square mile.^[1] That is the equivalent to 3,620.6 people per square kilometer. Since those are the numbers provided by the US Census as used for all the other states, I will re-add DC using those corrected figures. Epicadam (talk) 17:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alaska

What would our density be without Alaska? I think it really warps our idea of how much room we really have.

That's an interesting thought... as of 2007, the U.S. as a whole is 81.202 people per square mile, and the U.S. without our 49th state (which has a ridiculous 0.945!) is 98.624... which puts things in a slightly different light. But it's not wildly different. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 21:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alaska pt 2

Ah... Alaska's population is growing pretty rapidly; I don't think there's a problem there. It's not like it's all tundra. After all, we don't exclude mountain areas or desert or swamp areas from the "contiguous 48." Alaska is as much a state as the other 49, and no longer the least populated, either!

[edit] Checked data against US Census page

After finding an error recently introduced into the Massachusetts population density recently, I did a quick check on the other states. The New York population density has been wrong for 17 months; it was changed to the wrong number by an IP with no edit summary at 07:23, April 3, 2006. It's fixed now, and the other states' numbers all agree with the USCensus site listed as the second external link. --barneca (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Metric measures VERY wrong.

Someone did some very very wrong conversions. I will try to fix them. Bassgoonist T C 16:50, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, my brain is backwards. Bassgoonist T C 17:05, 20 September 2007 (UTC)