Module talk:PopulationFromWikidata

Several population figures

The module (which is fantastic) seems to remove the visibility of Population 2 in the infobox. For example: Warragul Poketama (talk) 12:28, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

@Poketama: Glad you like it! The idea is that |pop2= will also be automatically filled. The module does handle outputting a list of populations when there are multiple available in Wikidata. There is some complexity to this, however; have a read of this bit of the documentation. Roughly, if an infobox type matches one of the ABS geography types (according to the mapping in the module) then only one value is shown, but if it doesn't match then more will be. This is definitely up for discussion! It's a balance between showing all available information, and only the most useful.

In the case of Warragul, it looks like you want to display the UCL and SUA populations. There is no new data for the SULSUA or UCL population yet, in Wikidata. It will be imported later this year for the 2021 census, or you can add it now manually for the 2016 census.

—Sam Wilson 12:57, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Fantastic! Poketama (talk) 12:59, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

If not manually supplied, I'd like to see pop2 used for the SSC data for towns which are also suburbs/localities. If there is both a UCL and an SSC, it would be useful to display both.

Jimbour East and 2 or more infoboxes

As one infobox is type town and the other a suburb, I think following the current strategy will work just fine in this case (UCL for town, if available, and SSC for the suburb); I personally think the problem there is due to a poorly-considered merge and not a general problem. In my experience double Australian place infoboxes are quite rare, I would suggest only worrying about the first Australian place infobox, and use AWB to seek out those articles with more than one and deal with them manually. Double infoboxes on Australian place articles more often a case of one being an Australian place infobox (as it is the name of a town/suburb/locality) and the other being a different type of infobox, usually for the significant geography feature from which the town or whatever takes its name and is within that town, mountains and islands being the most common scenario I see. We do sometimes have a 2nd Australian place infobox for a protected area but we don't have population data for these so this it's a non-problem (and can be dealt with by the AWB and manual decision process I suggest above). Kerry (talk) 02:01, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Non-census estimates and the larger statistical areas

I don't think anything needs to be done with these estimates. Firstly they are estimates and, while it's fine to include them in article content, IMHO they should not replace the infobox data which is drawn from actual census data (a more reliable source). Only a small number of larger towns have these estimates calculated and, in my observation, these get added manually quite quickly as most towns have a contributor with an obsession with "look how big my town is". The same comments apply to the larger statistical areas, which mostly do not have a natural mapping to the named places we have articles for, but again get seized upon by the "look how big" crowd and manually added (mostly inappropriately). Or to put it another way, the small number of larger urban areas will get manually updated population data without any automated/semi-automated assistance. The need for automation/semi-automation is to update the population of smaller towns and the suburbs/localities that don't get the same level of contributor interest. Kerry (talk) 02:54, 1 July 2022 (UTC)