File talk:Irreligion map.png

For example, Sweden has 34-85% atheism according to the data that this image is based on. But it is coloured black = 85%. Why not blue?

This interval does not seem to be very accutate. Is it the agnotic that causes the interval?

Can these data be considered as scientific? I have seen data that about 33% are atheists in Sweden a few years ago, and about 33% agnostic. 193.10.250.5 14:26, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the data for this file is not interpreted in an NPOV way. Sweden is also something I reacted to. 34-85% should not be interpreted as 85% (dark blue), but rather the average of this (51%). This seems much more reasonable, and also matches my general conception of the people of my own country better... /PerLundberg (talk) 08:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

One additional comment: if someone decides to improve the quality in this regard, please change the file to be a .svg file as well, since it is much more maintainable than a "dumb" pixel-based format such as .png. If you don't have any .svg editing tool, try googling for Inkscape. /PerLundberg (talk) 08:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad this got changed to an SVG, but this needs a percent sign somewhere on it to specify the units of the numbers. --Calvin166 (talk) 00:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Azerbaijan's irreligious, again..

The change comment of 14:45, 3 August 2012 says Reverted to version as of 01:04, 7 February 2009 to the edition of Emilfaro while the image was in fact reverted to 18:06, 26 June 2011 version where Azerbaijan is marked as being one of the most irreligious countries in the world. Typo? Antimirov (talk) 20:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

This map is misleading

This map implies that there is data from everywhere, but that there are a number of places where there is 0% irreligion, such as Greenland or Somalia. That's kinda weird. I checked the sources this is based on, and neither of them have data. Countries without data should be differently coloured than countries with 0% irreligion.

Also, stepless colouring might seem like it's more accurate, but it in fact makes it harder to tell how religious a country really is.

Please, for the sake of readability, introduce steps (5% or 10% each should be good) and mark the countries without data differently. Because this image is just confusing in all the worst ways.

Also, there's the problem that the data that were used for this aren't on the same subject. One is about belief, and the other about religion. Irreligious people can believe in a god, and religious people can be atheists. You're combining two sets of data that, while they can be said to be related and often correlated, really don't measure the same thing at all, further working to make the graphic more confusing.

I'll be honest, it's probably better if this one's redone from scratch. There are too many things wrong with it: the assumption that belief and religion are the same, the interpretation of the data, and the way the data is represented in the graphic.

84.87.181.27 08:05, 23 September 2018 (UTC)