Talk:List of countries by beer consumption per capita

message: I've just updated the table with 2010 data, from the same Kirin source but the most recent version.
I've rounded off liters per capita values to the nearest integer because these are constantly changing (and have changed since 2010 no doubt), so having the decimal values gives an illusion of precision.
I've eliminated the rank column, because it has to be manually updated every time the table is updated or expanded, and because it's unnecessary with table sorting.
I've moved all references to non-Kirin sources to the column for the country name. This is because if references are attached to the other columns, they no longer sort numerically.
I haven't proofread my numbers against the original source, so please feel free to do so if you like.
I haven't revised the map to reflect the more recent values because I don't know how. Anyone want to tackle that?
Jbening (talk) 17:34, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major update and cleanup 

message: Guns per capita, GDP (nominal) per capita, carbon dioxide emissions per capita and personal income per capita are examples of wikis with an existing sorting structure that is very similar here. Readers go there to read the ranked number of something .  I don't see anyone on those talk pages discussing shuffling the order to make it easier on the editor(s).  <B>Erikeltic</B> (Talk) 10:47, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There are also many lists in alphabetical order. "Per capita" says nothing about whether a list should initially be in alphabetical order or rank order. People can click the sort button to order a column by rank. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:58, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading your per capita citation only further demonstrates that the order should "by head".  <B>Erikeltic</B> (Talk) 11:02, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "It is commonly and usually used in the field of statistics in place of saying 'for each person' or 'per person'." There are many lists that are initially in alphabetical order, including "per capita" ones. On Wikipedia and all over the web. I have edited and passed on many tables and lists. On Wikipedia and elsewhere on the web. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:07, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not saying there isn't any out there that are in alphabetical order, but most of the articles related to the ranked order of something per capita were listed in the order of the number, not the letter.  The one on GDP is especially interesting because it has multiple tables and multiple sources--and even that is by number.  I think the word "by" is what suggests the order be numeric.  <B>Erikeltic</B> (Talk) 11:10, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That does not mean anything necessarily. Many lists have "by" in the title. Whether they are alphabetical or not is another question. Sort buttons were not implemented in many lists in the past. But now most lists and tables have sort buttons. Or they can be easily added. So it is not necessary now to put lists initially in rank order. It just makes updating the list harder, and it makes the lists become incorrect over time. People do not want to change all the ranks each time they update just one entry. So they do not change the rank. They just update the data. Or they avoid updating the data altogether. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:40, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of similar articles 

message: The United States data is conflicting with this: http://www.beerinstitute.org/resourcelibrary/IconPDFDownload.gif
Averaging all states in the US, it would be 32.2 gallons (122 liters rounded up).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.95.38.164 (talk) 20:36, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States 

message: Poor France has simply been forgotten, ranking 41st, between China and Italy. (30 L per capita.]
http://www.bonial.fr/info/bierarchie/
Rabend1 (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  France 

message: I've just returned the value in the table to the value given by Kirin for 2012. My reasons are as follows:
:1) The Kirin value is six years more up-to-date than the 2006 value in the Wikipedia article on Alcoholic beverages in Canada
:2) The source used for the values in that latter article is no longer available online.
:3) This source gives a 2011 value for Canada that, assuming 34 million Canadians in 2011, is 69 liters per capita, which is much closer to the 2012 Kirin value than to the other 2006 value: http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/industry-markets-and-trade/statistics-and-market-information/by-region/canada/consumer-trends-wine-beer-and-spirits-in-canada/?id=1422297046469#d.
:4) Using Kirin values where available and reasonably up-to-date improves consistency. Jbening (talk) 22:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  How much beer do Canadians drink? 

message: I just updated the table with 2014 numbers from Kirin. I kept 2012 numbers for any countries that had been in the 2012 table but were missing from the 2014 table. The case of Russia is particularly mysterious. I see from the 2013 table (http://www.kirinholdings.co.jp/english/news/2014/1224_01.html) that there are a few more countries that didn't appear in either 2012 or 2014. If you'd like to make a contribution, you could add those to the table, citing the URL for the 2013 table, as I did for the 2012 table. Jbening (talk) 17:08, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Guess I'll do it. Jbening (talk) 01:28, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  2014 data 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of countries by beer consumption per capita. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140508082709/http://www.sitioandino.com/nota/6920-una-mala-para-el-sector-vitivinicola-en-argentina-se-consume-mas-cerveza-que-vino/ to http://www.sitioandino.com/nota/6920-una-mala-para-el-sector-vitivinicola-en-argentina-se-consume-mas-cerveza-que-vino/
*Added  tag to http://www.assobirra.it/press/wp-content/ar2012_assobirra1.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:47, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The table currently has rank numbers from 1-49, with a caveat at top that rank numbers may not reflect absolute rankings of all countries in the world. The Kirin data purport to be absolute rankings. In their most recent table, South Korea is 51 and Japan is 54. In our table, those countries are 37 and 39, because we're simply counting up from 1 for all countries in the Kirin table as well as any other countries for whom data have been cited. Alternatively, we could keep Kirin's absolute rankings and leave the rank number column blank for any countries that we don't have absolute ranks for. Having blank cells certainly wouldn't break new ground, as a number of other cells are blank for countries not listed in the Kirin table. And it wouldn't create a sort problem, because the table is already sorted by the per capita consumption value. This approach would permit us to remove the caveat sentence from the lede. What do people think? Jbening (talk) 15:51, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should rank #s reflect absolute rankings? 

message: See this diff. 
This version is much easier for the average reader to understand. Million litres per year vs mlpy.
I have had this type of discussion many times with developers, coders, etc.. They are so deep in the weeds they no longer know what the average reader understands. -- Timeshifter (talk) 07:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, fine, I reverted my reversion. Guarapiranga (talk) 07:35, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why make something harder to understand? 

message: I noticed quite a few figures are sourced from statista.
Is Statista a Reliable Source?
The answer is: no. Guarapiranga (talk) 07:58, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It is OK if the root source is also mentioned in the reference here on Wikipedia. -- Timeshifter (talk) 03:50, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it? I don't see it. And once it is, what's the use of mentioning the middling one? Guarapiranga (talk) 00:22, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Can't hurt usually to mention both the source data and the Statista representation of it. And sometimes the Statista representation of the data is easier to understand. But what is required is the reference for the source data. -- Timeshifter (talk) 07:39, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statista is not RS 

message: the 2019 data is now available. should we just replace the old one or add a new column for comparisons sake? 
https://www.kirinholdings.co.jp/english/news/2020/1229_01.pdf
jonas (talk) 22:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the reminder. I'm working on it. Jbening (talk) 03:36, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  update data 

message: https://www.kirinholdings.com/en/newsroom/release/2022/1223_01.html
I have found data for 2021 from the same source as the data on the current version. Published 23/12/2022. 2800:150:107:2B57:F447:D4A1:913C:426B (talk) 00:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 Data