Talk:Books published per country per year

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Misleading Text on Sources][edit]

The text of this article implies that the data are from UNESCO. However, it looks like none of the more recent figures are from UNESCO, and I cannot find any book production statistics on UNESCO's statistics website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.92.189.185 (talk) 21:06, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the name of Bangladesh? MD Mahabub Rahman Sheikh (talk) 13:36, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Untitled][edit]

This list is incorrect. It is missing substantial contributions by Latin America, including Brazil and Argentina, which are in the top 20.

Also missing South Korea. - AlexLibman 21:48, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And Iran, which publishes 10,000 to 15,000 new titles a year, according to UNESCO. 4 April 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.30.125.227 (talk) 15:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This list is so bad!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.235.169.148 (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand is also missing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.236.230.7 (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The figure for Australia is off by 10,000, according to the UNESCO reference cited as its source. I'm checking through the other figures. --Zaxios 00:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added all the missing countries from the UNESCO data and made some corrections. I would still consider the list incomplete, but it's a lot better. --Zaxios 01:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per capita figures[edit]

(copied from talk pages) Let's resolve this before it degenerates into revert war 1. Do newspaper articles constitute reliable sources per WK:RS? No. 2. Article is wrong on assertion since almost all EU countries have much higher book per capita book publication rates. 3. Article is also wrong on number of books in France (very doubtfull that '05 figure would be about 30% lower than '96 one, see trend in Unesco page). Additionaly the wording "published every year" just shows the person who wrote it is clueless. This is not a correct average (see Unesco statistics) and it's doubtfull it is even a correct figure for '05. 4. In light of the above I propose removing it completely per WK:RS. Xenovatis (talk) 06:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Of course newspapers are reliable sources. Haaretz is used all the time as a source. How do you know that almost all EU countries have higher book per capita rates?

Which article is wrong about France? SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, this would be better on the article talk page. Moving it there. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Haarez one. It's drivel and should be removed. Given the many mistakes the number quoted is probably wrong as well.
Just check the figures for 1996 in the table. For example and considering their populations The Netherlands, Hungary, Belgium, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Great Britain, Spain, Portugal, Bulgaria, Greece etc. And obviously France. Like I said most EU countries have a much higher per capita index. Only one would be needed to invalidate the statement. Some of the data is also reported here, although just using the table can make that plain.http://www.v-prc.gr/7/7/1_gr.html
The figures for France for the 90's are all over 35,000 in some instances going over 45,000. 25K "every year" is wrong, more so for 2005 given the increasing long term trend (28,000 in 1974 to 38,000 in 1996).
Please restore the figures you deleted for 1996. They are usefull for a direct comparison of production in the same year. You shouldn't have deleted them.

Xenovatis (talk) 09:58, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're absolutely sure of the math, then go ahead and remove it. But I see no point in adding figures for any year other than the most recent one. Otherwise, we'd be adding every year for some countries where they're available. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:27, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've brought 2006 numbers from the statistics compiled by the Jewish National and University Library. By law every book published in Israel has to send two copies to the Legal Deposit Department of the Library, and it publishes annual statistics. It also has statistics for 2005, 2004, and 2003 if you're interested. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding it. The most recent available for each country is probably enough. SlimVirgin ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:25, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Fiction Only?[edit]

Any information based on the UNESCO stats referenced at the bottom of the page would seem to be non-fiction only, looking at the various categories of book that UNESCO includes. Lokicarbis (talk) 12:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC) ][reply]

This page is useless[edit]

Comparing figures from one country in 1991 and another in 2005 is abusrd and usless. If there is no decently contemporary figures the page should be deleted. Even if there is, the figures should be done per capita as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.165.181.194 (talk) 23:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Make that 1990-2019. Three decade difference, wew. The entire re-edition/revised/total mess isn't helping much either 185.163.103.83 (talk) 18:12, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New Discussion[edit]

A discussion has been started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries/Lists of countries which could affect the inclusion criteria and title of this and other lists of countries. Editors are invited to participate. Pfainuk talk 12:25, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Romania[edit]

Where is Romania in the list??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nagyusha (talk • contribs) 00:52, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative formatting?[edit]

Is it just me, or would formatting this page something like the example below make it easier to read? At the moment, the left-justification of everything makes it hard (on my eyes at least) to quickly separate out the pertinent numbers. This formatting keeps all of the list columns separate and right-justifies the most important column so that the magnitude of the number is very clear. Anyway, if this (or a modified version) seems preferable, I'll make the change. Best regards, --PLUMBAGO 11:21, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

seriously outdated and lacking crucial info[edit]

like no ref to this http://www.bowker.com/en-US/aboutus/press_room/2012/pr_06052012.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.51.31 (talk) 22:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

United Kingdom	(2005)	206,000	^[1]
United States	(2005)	172,000	^[1]
China	(2007)	136,226	^[2]
Germany	(2007)	96,000	^[3]
Spain	(2008)	86,300	^[4]

References

^ ^a ^b Goldfarb, Jeff. "Bookish Britain overtakes America as top publisher", Reuters Entertainment, May 10, 2006.
^ General Administration of Press and Publication of the People's Republic of China [1], General information of the national press and publishing industry in 2007. (In Chinese)
^ "Wirtschaftszahlen" of the Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels
^ INE. [2]

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Lists of countries[edit]

Template:Lists of countries has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Cybercobra (talk) 07:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreliable Sources (Iran)[edit]

This article has used references from sources like state-run Raja News and IRINN for Iran, which are not reliable sources. As I've given up editing in Wikipedia, I wrote here to inform you to improve sources. 91.99.21.205 (talk) 19:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The list is incomplete[edit]

What about other countries? No book at all? I am surprised that the least developed country, Myanmar ranked 46. The reference link is dead. 404. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.81.67.182 (talk) 02:14, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the dead link. emijrp (talk) 17:15, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal[edit]

The source given for Portuguese data reffers to Spain. Come on!--von Tamm (talk) 14:52, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UN or local information?[edit]

40.000 books in Turkey every year is a highly inaccurate figure. The number is given by ministry of culture. Such numbers are often given by officials without sufficient evidence. Even so would most of this figure involve leaflets, religious or touristic works of state agencies which are far from being a book as one would understand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.55.184.20 (talk) 20:26, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Books published per country per year. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100525090726/http://mch.govt.nz/publications/book-export/books.html to http://www.mch.govt.nz/publications/book-export/books.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:54, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Books published per country per year. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Books published per country per year. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:26, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Books published per country per year. 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/20150103052501/http://ameblo.jp/nrs4702/entry-11931572408.html to http://ameblo.jp/nrs4702/entry-11931572408.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:35, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A stricter definition for inclusion[edit]

Hi, looking back through the entries on the talk page, and my own observations, this article appears to struggle from a lack of specific constraints. It needs to be better defined along these lines:

total number of books published, or per capita? Or should we give both?
If we do want to give both, there will be many countries for which we cannot find a secondary source which states it.
Do we include self-published books?
Do we include fiction/non-fiction?
Do we include digital-only books?
Do we include new editions or only new titles?
Do we unify them by year? ie when we update the list, every country is updated.
Or do we dispense with all of those, and only use a pre-chosen specific measure?
For example, the IPA–WIPO survey (no self-published, some specific topics aren't included), ISBNs (most non-self-published books), legal deposit surveys (generally no self-published, and only some countries would include digital-only), etc
If so, should we report multiple?

We should also state that just because a country is not listed it doesn't mean they don't publish books.

My view is that we should report a variety of statistics.

EG

Section: ISBN

Section: IPA-WIPO survey

And in the relevant section, explain the limitations of that data. A good source for updating this article is "The Global Publishing Industry in 2018" which includes multiple stats and explains issues with them. https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4488 For now I'm going to make a section named ISBN and report its stats from that link. --Xurizuri (talk) 11:11, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Reuters-1] Goldfarb, Jeff. "Bookish Britain overtakes America as top publisher", Reuters Entertainment, May 10, 2006.

[gappprc-2] General Administration of Press and Publication of the People's Republic of China [1], General information of the national press and publishing industry in 2007. (In Chinese)

[boersenverein-3] "Wirtschaftszahlen" of the Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels

[unesco-4] INE. [2]

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]