Jump to content

Talk:List of countries by intentional homicide rate/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4

Mexico violent death ONLY 10.6 IN 2009, new study

On: http://www.alianzacivica.org.mx/guia_transparencia/Files/pdf/seguridad/2_INFORMACIONSOBREINCIDENCIADELICTIVA/incidenciadelictivaviolencia2009CIDAC.pdf

Found very different information for Mexico, actually the Violent death Rate in 2009 is 10.6 according to these source.

It is a reliable study made by CIDAC.ORG based on SNSP (Mexico's National system for public security)

This study is also backed by "consulta Mitofski" a internationally known and very trusted statistical source:

http://72.52.156.225/Estudio.aspx?Estudio=indice-delictivo-cidac —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.169.118.4 (talk) 05:49, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the rate is 10.6 in 2009 and this is the correct link to the information:
http://www.cidac.org/vnm/pdf/pdf/IncidenciaDelictivaViolencia2009.pdf
The data table that was used to rank Mexico is very poor of information. This is much more complete. Please edit the article.--oyashirosama (talk) 01:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)


Those are for they year 2008, not 2009. The study was only released in August 2009. Enivid (talk) 13:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)


Yes, you're talking about 2008. 10.6 per 100,000 would be 11 per 100,000 if rounded. Basically, 1 per 100,000 lower than the 12 per 100,000 which I believe in another ICESI document available on site was 11.6 - rounded to 12 in the document here. Hardly any difference. Unfortunately, the murder rate increased 25% to 15 per 100,000 in 2009 and again increased significantly in 2010.

ICESI are hardly a poor source. Power Society (talk) 09:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

"Intentional"?

Is there such a thing as an "accidental homicide"? Corvus cornixtalk 21:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, why not? Some countries have "murders by accident" in their reports. Enivid (talk) 18:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


Many homicides are unintentional. The title is aimed at cutting out countries that may include a kind of culpable homicide that isn't intentional such as motor vehicle or workplace accidents. In terms of intentional deaths, some countries include killings in self-defense while others don't, though I suspect the order would be very similar if all countries added them together. Intentional homicide, rather than just murder or homicide, is the most fitting description. Power Society (talk) 09:17, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Countries including attempts?

I'm a little bewildered as to why countries whose digits include murder attempts are listed. Power Society (talk) 09:43, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

What do you propose? If it's not possible to find the data excluding attempts, it's better to at least provide data that includes attempts rather than not to provide any data at all. Enivid (talk) 08:37, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

The chart must have sub-province stats. For example Russia has VERY different statistics for regions. 195.218.231.67 (talk) 09:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the official German numbers it seems clear to me that they specifically include attempts (in 2009 there were 703) of which only a subset were successful (365 in 2009) [1]. Dividing by 80,000,000 people that would imply a intentional homicide rate of ~0.45 per 100,000 which is a factor two lower than the one in the list! Can anyone corroborate my reading of the German statistics?? (In contrast the USA/FBI statistics specifically state that unsuccessful attempts are listed as aggravated assault [2].) I think the difference between attempts versus successes is such a huge deal it really needs to be 1) pointed out in the very beginning of the article while 2) researched for each of the numbers in the list! For those numbers for which it is not clear whether the attempts are included or not I suggest putting an asterisk next to it and denote that very fact! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.117.133 (talk) 08:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Brazilian Homicide Rate Updated to 2009 data

I updated brazilian homicide rate data to the last research disclosed in 2009 by UN as you guys can see here:

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Globa_study_on_homicide_2011_web.pdf

I dropped from 25/100.000 to 22,7/100.00. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexcetera (talk • contribs) 01:34, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't care what the source is...

There is no way that Indonesia is safer than Canada. I have been to Indonesia extensively and the place is extremely dangerous and ridden with crime & severe poverty. Muggings are routine and the waterways are filled with pirates. This is just a ridiculous claim and this list has absolutely no bearing on reality whatsoever. I mean come-on, Madagascar is safer than Canada? You have to be kidding me.

Obviously whoever put this list together has never been to any of these places. This list should be revised so that you can provide some insight into which countries have decent reporting and which do not. This list may even inadvertently be putting people at risk who decide to travel to some of these destinations using research they find on this page.Yogiudo (talk) 13:35, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

So find a source and fix it. 59.167.194.48 (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

One:the list is only for homocide/murder, not for general safeness, muggings or piracy and certainly not for poverty (which isn't even a crime). Two:the list is sourced mostly to UN government crime statistics. It would be better if the list were sourced mostly to government crime statistics. These would be people who not just have been to the country but live there. Three:There is actually a problem with the countries' data you mentioned:they are not uptodate. Madagascars' is from 1995 and Indonesia's is from 2000. Curious:Were you mugged often in Indonesia? How about your Indonesian friends? Munci (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Uniform standards of reporting do not exist. Sometimes due to weak government abilities. But more often due to cultural taboo. Norway is just coming in to the modern age on domestic violence and murder-suicide as noted by their own internal Amnesty international and national mental health organizations. Japan is noted for a culture which reflects shame and suspicion on the victim's family and community such that reporting deaths as accident or suicide is usually preferred over investigation as murder or for this article double suicide. I suppose culturally and for many purposes dead is simply dead and no need to dig up embarrassing or uncomfortable circumstances. But to use and compare statistics with so many known defects and then rank cultures without comment is a bit disingenuous. 72.182.15.249 (talk) 02:52, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Andorra

Not a single homicide? Not one? And sources that carry no obvious relation? Not only does this sound too good to be true but I call bullshit.—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) — Preceding undated comment added an unspecified datestamp.

Because I fear it might actually be relevant to some other statistic involved here I won't be editting straight out, but those numbers can't be right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.213.168.136 (talk) 21:50, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Not a math guy, but it looks wrong to me, too. --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 22:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
85.000 inhabitants, "good" countries have a rate of less than 1 per 100.000... could be legit by the numbers alone. A single murder like 2004 lets the rate jump to 1.30. --89.204.155.64 (talk) 16:14, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Methodological problem.

Does the "List of countries by intentional homicide rate" include assasinations? In such a case, a foreign entity does engorge another country's homicide rate by doing hostile assasinations. For example I notice Iran is present in one of the stat lists in the article. USA and Mossad (and/or their ethnic kurdish rebel proxies) do over a hundred assasinations within iranian territory per year. Scientists are car bombed, while revolutionary guard officers and public officials are shot with silencers by scooter-riders. That way, if assasinations are counted in to the iranian homicide rate, it will appear higher than justified by the civilized, peaceful and well-educated nature of the persian people!

Similarly, if the large-scale american UAV drone missile cullings are counted in to the stats, then afghani and pakistani homicide rates will be represented by much-inflated numbers, even though it is a foreign entity that willfully engorges such stats in those countries. That is unfair statistics and paints certain nations more violent then they are! 82.131.210.163 (talk) 10:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Map

I realize that US MUST BE BLUE regardless. However, is it possible to change the color scheme to standard red-blue where red is high homicide rate and blue is low homicide rate? Yes, US will become orange, but the map will become more readable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.6.176.106 (talk) 18:36, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Some of these stats must be REALLY wrong.

For example: The United States of America crime figures list homicides as all confirmed events of criminally intentional deadly violence.

There are countries (and I know of several, but won't list them here, 'cause someone would just fix the figures and leave the problem) that list "convictions" under their homicide rate. A completely different number, and radically lower by definition.

Also, some of the countries w a political chip on their shoulder fudge the statistics - A LOT. Non homicide example: Cuba does not include an infant death in their statistics until the child has been registered w the party. Usually about two months. Completely skews any listing even if the original raw numbers were confirmable.67.182.175.134 (talk) 20:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to log in:Aaaronsmith (talk) 20:12, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

How is Somalia low on crime? It's not like there one of the most dangerous most corrupt country in the world, Luxembourg? WTF? How would it have high crime? Greenland... WTF??? Change it! --Ty Rezac (talk) 21:14, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

UN data outdated for Japan

Since we should like to have the most up to date data...I took a look at the UN's numbers and what their source is page 54 of Japan's official national police agency crime data: http://www.npa.go.jp/toukei/seianki/h23hanzaizyousei.pdf

They correspond perfectly and the numbers are identical 2006: 619 murders, 2007: 574, 2008: 646, 2009: 506

And there is the problem, the UN data stops at 2009..while the NPA has clearly released data up to 2011. 2010: 465, 2011: 442 (a rate of .3).

I didn't see any discussion on this but I imagine this is true for other countries as well, if we use the exact same source that the UN used with the exact same data shall we update the wikipedia list to the most recent? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SkyTree90 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes: there is new data on the source not only for Costa Rica. I do not know how to upload the whole table though... Maybe somebody else, more versed in the art of Wiki editing should update the whole table with the latest info.--Crio (talk) 23:06, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Costa Rica

I updated the data on Costa Rica for 2011 (latest info) according to http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/homicide.html --186.32.17.47 (talk) 23:40, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Yup: the data on the link "http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls" is more current than the data on the Wikipedia's table. --Crio (talk) 23:17, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


Needs to be updated

The data on the link: "http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls"

has more recent data.

I do not know how to go around updating the whole table myself, sorry!

--Crio de la Paz (talk) 17:44, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Vatican City, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands and San Marino

Is there a specific reason for not listing Vatican City, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands and San Marino? I understand from earlier talk entries that Vatican City was listed at some point. PinkShinyRose (talk) 01:26, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau are listed separately.

Considering the earlier discussion about the UK, where the countries are now listed together, should China also be listed as one country? At least Hong Kong and Macau are not souvereign, neither de facto nor de jure. Taiwan is separate in practice, and can therefore be listed separately, although when we use data supplied by the governments we could also consider using their definition (which is that China also comprises Taiwan). PinkShinyRose (talk) 01:38, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

OECD?

This article needs a section with data on the OECD countries' murder-rates, both individually and in the aggregate. This is a standard statistical category used in virtually all international data comparisons, with good analytical reasons. The purely geographic comparisons used here are mystifying -- history does not play out in a context-free orb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benefac (talk • contribs) 03:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Removed Malawi, Uganda and Zambia from list pending validation of data source

I have removed the entries for Malawi, Uganda and Zambia from the list as I was unable to trace their statistics to the supposed source cited by UNODC: they cite the WHO Global Burden of Disease statistics, but the WHO datasets do not contain entries for the aforementioned countries.. I have documented my process here: http://nonparibus.wordpress.com/2013/01/20/can-the-unodcs-murder-statistics-be-trusted/. I do not consider this to be a violation of the prohibition against original research as I simply attempted to verify the source - while I raise questions about all the WHO-attributed data via a Benford's Law test, I have individually checked those three countries and cannot find them in the cited Global Burden of Disease files. This issue may apply to other countries as well - I haven't tried to check all 50-odd countries attributed to that source. Jason Kerwin (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2013 (UTC)


Russia 2009

The source for Russian homicide statistics (http://www.gks.ru/free_doc/2009/demo/edn12-09.htm) shows 14.9 per 100,000 in 2009. Why is it shown as 15.6 in the article? If some other source was used then why the reference isn't listed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enivid (talk • contribs) 19:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC) Changed to 14.9 since no one gave a reason for the 15.6 number. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Enivid (talk • contribs) 07:42, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

upd: Stats taken from gov. website. According to stats murder rate fell 50% in the past ten years, while corruption increased ten-fold accompanied by disintegration of social institutions in Russia. All gov. media in Russia is strictly censored to present power structures in favorable light. Some would argue that Russia has de facto collapsed between 2002 and 2007. Numbers are obviously fixed, other sources needed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.205.215.25 (talk) 15:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Statistics of 2012 year: On official site MVD Russian Federation written 'As a result of criminal offenses 38.7 thousand people were killed (on russian "В результате преступных посягательств погибло 38,7 тыс. человек") Source:http://mvd.ru/presscenter/statistics/reports/item/804701/ Murder rate in Russia 27.2 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.98.8.12 (talk) 12:07, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Argentina

Argentina's statistics are false. Because in Argentina since 2009 that the government began to give false numbers in all statistics. You can see in the source that argentina Argentina went on to have very low murder rates compared to the previous statistics.--200.117.159.132 (talk) 00:41, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Are you going to give us a source for that, or are we supposed to believe it because you heard it from some guy in a bar? Magog the Ogre (t • c) 05:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I live in argentina but i can get source. http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1505475-alteraron-la-estadistica-de-homicidios. La Nacion is the second most popular newspaper of argentina.--201.253.226.84 (talk) 19:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 Done --Neo139 (talk) 21:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Lists aren't matching sources...

And will stay that way unless this page gets permanent wikislaves or someone takes action on my comment here. Krushia (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia

Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia among the countries with fewest murders by capital. For some reason I find that very hard to believe... --Oddeivind (talk) 18:03, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect data is corrected for Venezuela. The updated data of homicides per hundred thousand inhabitants is 953/3, 2, according to research results Gis XXI, http://www.gisxxi.org is desirable to avoid treacherous manipulations such as the data provided in the previous versions --Sapientiacr (talk) 09:08, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Venezuela Statistics

Someone has vandalised statistics from Venezuela, please revert it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.216.137.196 (talk) 13:02, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Syria, Iraq, Libya, and other countries at war

How come the numbers for said countries are so low in the list, when it's well known that the casualties by conflict in these countries can be counted by thousands (unfortunately)?. For one, Syria appears only with a few hundred homicides, but the article referenced next to that number ("Syrian Civil War") gives a number of 120.000 people killed during the conflict. JoacoCanal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.147.37.238 (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, I will update this for syria, we know that at least 100,000 people have been killing each other in Syria, there is no way it has. As for Iraq it needs to be updated as well, everyday they find mass graves of 100+ people or mass explosions in markets, its utterly ridiculous to say they have low homicide rate. http://newsbusters.org/node/9932 "Iraq's violent death rate in 2006 was 56.49 per 100,000 residents (16,273 deaths

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/node/9932#ixzz2bdFp5bzu

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Government officials on Monday reported that 16,273 Iraqi civilians, soldiers and police died violent deaths in 2006, a figure larger than an independent Associated Press count for the year by more than 2,500.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/node/9932#ixzz2bdFt9Saz

Syria numbers will be updated as well.

"Syria death toll now above 100,000, says UN chief Ban" bbc news.com http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23455760 100,000 for the population of 20,000,000 already listed on wiki means a murder rate of 20,000,000 over 200 = 100,000 100,000 homicides over 200 = 500

I agree the Libya numbers are way off too, we know that in just 1 day in a massacre in surt 200+ people were killed Libya 6.4 million people 25,000 murders all according to wiki So 6,400,000 /64= 100,000 25,000 homicides over 64 = 390 homicides per 100,000

Bahrain 105 killed based of the wiki table of deaths from the uprising http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Bahraini_uprising_(2011%E2%80%93present) Population 1.3 million

1,300,000 / 13 = 100,000 105 / 13 = 8.08

Yemen 2000 homicides according to the wiki page 24,800,000 population / 248 = 100,000 2000/ 248 = 8

Tunisia 338 homicides according to wiki page 10.67 million population / 106.7 = 100,000 338/ 106.7 = 3.17

Afghanistan 20,000 homicides according to the wiki page 30,000,000 population / 300= 100,000 20,000 / 300 = 66.67 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hernanday (talk • contribs) 05:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
2. newsbusters.org is not an authoritative source.
Enivid (talk) 10:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Mexico

The way the press is sounding statistics I have to wonder where Mexico falls in the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.104.12.46 (talk) 17:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

I dont speak english very well and i dont exactly understand what is the correct sense/direction of that question, but i interpretate that you are questioning the information, basing you on your own perception.--oyashirosama (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)


The issue with Mexico is the majority of homicides occur in a few high crime areas (Chihuahua, Nuevo Leon, Guerrero, Michoacan). 20% of Mexico's homicides in 2010 occurred in Ciudad Juarez! Overall, Mexico's murder rate is moderately high by world standards (close to Russia), but in a few zones, it is much higher. Still, Venezuela and Colombia have much higher national rates. 64.134.148.109 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC).


Updated data about Mexico's Homicide Rate point it in 18,1/100.000 not 18,0. 0,1 in a great number of homicides like mexico's make a great difference. The source is the 2011 Global Homicide Report of UN:

http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Globa_study_on_homicide_2011_web.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexcetera (talk • contribs) 01:45, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

The "by subregion" section lists Northern America ("not North America.) and Central America. Mexico is in neither, so which subregion does Mexico belong to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.114.193.181 (talk) 22:46, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with the fact that Mexico is described as "Central America" subregion in "By Country" listing, which makes me wonder if "Central America" and "Northern America" total statistics whould/could be totally wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.40.47.129 (talk) 16:27, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it might be.Enivid (talk) 07:50, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

England/NI/Scotland/Wales

Why are those here? They are not in any other lists. They are not at List of countries. The United Kingdom is the internationally accepted country and is already in the list. Having all five is very misleading and POV. At the very minimum I suggest that the four constituent parts of the UK be moved underneath the UK heading as a sub section such as the special territories part of the table on theMember State of the European Union page. If that can't be done I suggest their removal in order for the article to be NPOV. Otherwise there'll be no reason not to include US States and German Bundesländer.MITH 23:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Please see List of countries by incarceration rate. That list was copied from the reference article, and changed to the wiki format. It also contains England/Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
Also please see: File:Homicide-world.png.
It might be a good idea to start an article listing the US incarceration rates by state. The above map could be cropped to pull out only the USA map. It lists the source for the states. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:17, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Could you respond to at least one of my comments? The source for that completely makes my point. It doesn't include the four in the main list. It's
United Kingdom: England & Wales
United Kingdom: Northern Ireland
United Kingdom: Scotland
The article needs to reflect real world NPOV.MITH 07:47, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
On the vast majority of international lists the United Kingdom should be the ONLY country listed along side other sovereign states. However when it comes to crime we do have a very different system between England+Wales and Scotland. International organisations sometimes do record them separately as the source for this list does. I dont think England/Wales / Northern Ireland need to be removed however (UK) should be added after each of them or at the very least a note explaining above or below the table that they are listed separately because of the different systems. BritishWatcher (talk) 08:57, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good. I added "(UK)" after each region. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

If one should complicate even more, why is EU (not a Federal State)listed as a State? Besides, England is singlehandedly nine statistical regions, not one. Australia does also consist of (large) states. The US does also consist of regions, like when they show basketball on TV. Maybe it's a good idea not to question how soon, or how late we are to stop disecting for more statistics.

Back to the UK question. I too would agree that it makes no sense to divide the UK into regions. No other country in the list is so divided. And if you compare the size of the populations of the British regions to, say the populations of the US states, it becomes even more non-sensical. As for "Scotland has a very different legal system..." Well, it used to, before the EU took over. But even if the EU hadn't superceded Scottish law, a murder is a murder is a murder.

Unless anyone can come up with good reason to the contrary, I'd say we should end the anomaly and combine the regional figures into a national figure. Like for every other country in the world....92.235.157.3 (talk) 19:46, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are countries. So is the UK. It's an unusual circumstance, but it doesn't mean it's invalid just because you don't seem to like it. Can you name another metastate in the world that is a group of countries held tightly within a supra-state? When the old USSR was around, it would have been fine to include it and it's member countries. Similarly, just because you say the EU supercedes Scottish law doesn't mean that their parliament has suddenly dissolved - and if your argument is that the EU supercedes everyone's law and that's enough, then there should just be one entry for the vast bulk of Europe. It sounds to me that you want the change more for personal reasons than informational ones. 59.167.194.48 (talk) 15:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Admittedly, this has been a very slow moving edit war, and perhaps I haven't explained it clearly enough. I added the subdivisions because they're the only ones I could find (see #The map). I am a big fan of "the more information you can communicate with one image, the better." I'm going to readd the map; if anybody can find appropriate figures for other countries, I will gladly add their subdivisions. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:14, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Try looking at http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Homicide_data_series.xls This lists N Ireland and Scotland as part of the UK. Compare that to the statistics at http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Homicide_level.xlsx The latter are the statistics that are used in the wiki article. The former article clearly lists N. Ireland and Scotland as a part of the UK, and the latter references the UK but doesn't include N. Ireland or Scotland. The lowest possible murder rate, however, is what is included in the article, not the one that would put it on par with the United States. N.Ireland and Scotland aren't even in the article alone, leaving an ignorant reader with the impression the UK column combines all three statistics. This is blatantly deceptive. N.Ireland and Scotland must be included, either in the UK or separately. With the murder rate being a sensitive Nationalist issue, I humbly suggest this be fixed one way or another and subsequently locked by a mod. - Shane — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.156.93.240 (talk) 04:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)


This picture represents Africa improperly. Let's find a better one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.82.81.252 (talk) 07:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Mathematically, the UK figures must be wrong

On the table, the latest per capita murder rates for the UK as a whole (2.03) are not equal to the population weighted mean of the rates for Northern Ireland (2.48), Scotland (2.13) and England and Wales (1.37). It's not even close. So at least one of these figures must be wrong.--Mongreilf (talk) 22:00, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The numbers for the UK are wrong because they do not account for Scotland and Ireland. Using 2002 as a baseline, the article states that the UK had 2.0% murder rate and the UNODC documents confirm this at 2.1, but ONLY for England and Wales. http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/Homicide/Homicide_data_series.xls Notice that they count N. Ireland and Scotland separately as 2.7 and 2.5 respectively. This raises the murder rate dramatically, to 7.2. The entire UK column should be updated.

While the UNODC itself seems to have made a mistake, and likely an honest one, I would also like to voice a concern. Murder rates can be sensitive in international politics, and nationalism might play a future role in altered statistics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.156.93.240 (talk) 03:41, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The figures are probably wrong because the British really, really fudge their reported crime rate (lie?). Check this by going to John Lott's blog and go down 8 or so to the posting about British crime reporting and a whole bunch of other Britishisms that are so bad even the British people are getting disgusted w their "low" crime rate. My amateur reading of the post would be to compare US and British crime figures, take the US figures and divide by 3. SOMETHING GOTTA BE inconsistent here.Aaaronsmith (talk) 17:38, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

North America Vs the United States

Northern America lists a count of 13,558 while the United States alone has a count of 14,748 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.169.141.162 (talk) 13:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

The United Nations Population Division considers Northern America to consist of the United States (14,612), Canada (554), Bermuda (8), Greenland (11), and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon (A French territory). The total number of murders for Northern America should be 15,185. Blueneondot (talk) 00:08, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

How about deaths due to war?

Given that many countries are far above the middle east in this list, I can only assume that deaths due to war are not listed as murder, is that so?189.101.124.137 (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

North Korea

I followed the UN link. The only figure they had for NK was for 2008. Their source was WHO. I went to WHO and slogged through their data. The only numbers I could find were for (non-self-inflicted) violent deaths. The rates were marked in deep blue, eaning reliability was low. In any case, the numbers given (I used the by-age chart since I couldn't find a cumulative one) were far below what we list (the highest was only "3" - presumably per the same number we use, though I couldn't find the base). 211.225.33.104 (talk) 01:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Spain's figures must be mistaken

The rate for 2000 shown here is 1.25 per 100 000, but then it jumps to an annual rate of 3.35 in 2006. This looks suspect. The 2006 figure is taken from Spain's Ministry of Interior website. But the Eurostat website shows that Spain's average annual homicide rate between 2004 and 2006 was 1.14 per 100 000. The interior ministry website is wrong. Please correct the map.

India in the Records book

According to Guinness Records Book, India has most homicides in the world by having 38.000 cases. If Brazil has 50.000 cases, does that not make a world record too?

U.S. Virgin Islands

The United States Virgin Islands, a US territory consisting of St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. John, and outlying cays, has a population of around 110,000, with a record 47 (http://www.caribdaily.com/article/198454/v-i-homicides-near-record/) homicides thus far in 2009, and 34 (http://stthomassource.com/content/community/data/2008/01/05/homicides-2008#skip) in 2008. While it is not a "country" per se, a murder rate that rivals Kingston deserves it's own entry, yeah?

"Most Recent" heading is not most recent.

The column heading "Most Recent" in the 2000's table is highly ambiguous and does not mean "most recent" literally as would be commonly understood by most readers. It means here the most recent figure of the prior columns and in most cases just copies the 2009 column. As such it is different from the "Most Recent" column in the 2010's table. This heading will just confuse readers and does not add anything in any case. I suggest the column should be removed since the year headings are sufficient. Why add confusion?

Thats lie

The Turkey and USA cannot be on the same rank, since i lived in both long years and following news, ridiculus.

US homicide rate is waaaaay off

US number appears to be way off. Currently showing at 24.7 per 100,000 but the UNODC figures actually show 4.7. I'd make the change but, well, I'm useless with tables...

The actual number appears right though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robinr22 (talk • contribs) 01:36, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Separating fact from fiction

Many countries suppress and under-report crime statistics for fear of hurting their (tourist) economy or human rights image. Thailand, Cambodia, Turkey, Indonesia, just to name a few. It would be nice to separate these countries from the ones that do seem to report accurate numbers. It might be tricky to come up with clear standards to create such a list so I´d like to hear other people´s thoughts on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.179.34.27 (talk) 16:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Tricky, indeed. Sources sort of look like an “apples vs oranges” deal. I would thing that any numbers from the subject country would be suspect, if not worthless. Maybe you could compare them to a standard, the difference could be a lying measurement. But what standard?
UNODC table "Homicide Statistics 2012". UNODC. has lots of numbers, 2008 is almost complete. Source problems, though. Of examples, Cambodia uses a NGO who uses “murder recorded by judicial police”. Turkey uses CJ (criminal justice, sounds like gov’t numbers?). Indonesia uses WHO, I tried this: [3], but don’t see anything crime related. Thailand uses “National Police”.
Note on sources from article: UNODC covers the most, Geneva declaration [4] looks like best background (it’s too deep for me), I don’t see what WHO can do, other than population numbers. The rest are of fairly small areas?
Can you just say that X, Y, and Z have suspect figures, according to “source”. The source could even be something like a travel book collection, “Cambodia for a buck a day” type stuff.
For what it’s worth. Sammy D III (talk) 19:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Travel guides, at least old Frommer's, don't seem to work. Wikitravel has "Stay safe", but I don't see any source, and I don't think you are supposed to ref to other Wiki stuff. Too bad, these[5] [6][7][8] are pretty good. Sammy D III (talk) 15:41, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Your biggest problem is some of the worst offenders are major and usually fairly trusted countries. So,don't be naive. When it comes to reporting crime England (!) is one of the biggest offenders.Aaaronsmith (talk) 21:50, 19 March 2014 (UTC)

How about deaths due to war? Part 2

“How about deaths due to war?” was the first post on this talk page, I don’t see where it has been addressed, either here or in the article. The intro has “They may also be underreported for political reasons.”, that is the closest to this issue that I see.

Examples (NO political implications intended): If a Taliban fighter kills an Afghan policeman/soldier, is that a homicide? If the Afghan policeman/soldier kills a Taliban fighter, is that? If a drone kills a fighter? If a drone kills an innocent? In Syria there appear to be at least three factions just now, are any committing homicide? If we are counting convictions, in whose court? Who counts in a civil war, the winners or losers? How about inter-tribal conflicts?

I am not thinking this article is about military deaths, but should there be a mention of the differences? Thank you for your time.Sammy D III (talk) 22:39, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

The list is about HOMICIDE. Deaths in war is not considered homicide. Car accidents are not homicide. Injuries resulting in death are not homicide, and so on. Some numbers, like Norway's murder rate, is not representative - the year in question was the year of Brevik's murder spree, making the murder rate roughly three times higher than normal, but it IS accurate. Rune Fostervoll (talk) 15:43, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

"I am not thinking this article is about military deaths, but should there be a mention of the differences?"
Brevik must be for someone else, I don't do math. Have a good one. Sammy D III (talk) 04:50, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Rune Fostervoll, I agree with you about the numbers for Norway for 2011 being non-typical. Newer numbers (from 2013) are now available, and I have updated the table accordingly so that the abnormal numbers are not any more creating a misleading impression. Joreberg (talk) 10:26, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Breakdown by police area for England and Wales

Does anyone object if I do a breakdown for England and Wales but by police force area instead of by county? Also, if someone could find the 2013 figures for Scotland and Northern Ireland then they could be added to make it a UK breakdown. Kookiethebird (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Outdated

This page is VERY outdated. More recent information is needed.

https://www.unodc.org/gsh/en/data.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr. Conumdrum (talk • contribs) 03:10, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

{{Sofixit}} Magog the Ogre (t • c) 17:07, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

110% liberal BS

This is so stupid. How can the UK have 1/4 fewer murders when they have an unarmed population? Obviously it's going to be WAY higher there than it is here, since here any bad guy who comes at me is gonna go join his "homies" 2Pack and Biggy in hell. Delete this or fix the blatant liberal bias.76.118.92.242 (talk) 23:18, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

If the well studied facts don't support what you believe, then the facts must be wrong! I think your cart and your horse are in reverse. Magog the Ogre (t • c) 17:09, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Palestine is not a country

Sorry, but its not.

Chechnya isn't on here either... For a reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.186.150 (talk) 00:43, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Greenland, Puerto Rico, etc are not countries either but they are separate geographical and/or autonomous zones so they are handled separately. --Andynct (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

N.B. not being a fully and universally recognized state does not make something not a country; see List of states with limited recognition. Nikko2013 (talk) 01:18, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Standardization & listing year

I've updated all of the data to match the UNODC table, and since the year was not by any means standard (which will in some notable cases seem rather relevant), I've also added a column to say which year that was. Various potential problems aside, the next day someone updated the Germany numbers to ... I don't know what, neither of the sources UNODC cites publicly list more recent data, so I slapped a [citation needed] on it. In any case: my thoughts are that the numbers should, for the purpose of standardization, generally come from the same list, prepared by people whose job it is to cull the data into standardized lists; thoughts? Nikko2013 (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. There have been several unsourced changes in the last few days. Meters (talk) 05:29, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The information is still 2012

Guys this has been brought up before but seriously, its been almost two years since the end of 2012. We really need new information. It's been almost 9 months since the end of 2013, I know the UNODC has recent data I just can't get onto their page because they are using Microsoft word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.84.222.21 (talk) 16:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Global Study on Homicide. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). See the PDF of the full report, and the statistical annex at the end of it. For the current report it starts on page 121. It has detailed charts for homicide counts and rates by country. You may need to use the "rotate view" command in your PDF reader. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Converting xlsx files to other formats

Data. Global Study on Homicide. UNODC. See "Homicide counts and rates, time series...". The xlsx files can be converted to other formats here. Just paste in the URL of the file, and the converted file will be emailed to you. It arrives fast since the conversion is quick for small files such as the main file:
https://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/data/GSH2013_Homicide_count_and_rate.xlsx --Timeshifter (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Converted to CSV and then to wikitext table

See result here:

The xlsx file was converted to CSV via zamzar.com/url, and then to wikitext here:

More info in English: de:Benutzer:Duesentrieb/csv2wp_(en)

--Timeshifter (talk) 17:10, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

By subregion

Where is the source for the data in the table found here?:

I can not find the source data. I looked in the full report PDF and the xlsx file.

Did someone calculate it by adding up the number of deaths in each country in a subregion? And then doing the math with info from census counts? If so, this needs to be indicated. Otherwise, the numbers may be made up. I am adding {{citation needed}} tag. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:26, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Maybe someone can add a population column to the subregion table. See:
Getting Murdered: Where in the World? (Updated) | constitutionalley.us. Has chart of subregion murder rates, counts, populations. Already out of date, but a good model. The detailed tables used to calculate that old chart are here:
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?cid=1AB34B12813E463A&resid=1AB34B12813E463A!214&app=Excel
We need the specific homicide rate numbers for subregions from UNODC so that we can put sourced accurate rate numbers in here in the Wikipedia article. Some of the numbers currently used here are wrong. But we have nothing to replace them with. The UNODC full report only has a bar chart (Figure 1.3, page 23), but not the data used for it. The data is what we need.
Someone could calculate the subregion rates manually from regional populations and murder counts, as was done in web page linked above. Use census references for the year of the murder count for each country in a subregion.
I left requests for help on the UNODC feedback form, and on the author info page (comment form there) of the old subregion chart page linked above. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:45, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

ERROR in data of Estonia

Today 2014, September 8, in this page of Wikipedia it is reported the rate 5.0 and the count 65 for Estonia in 2012, but in the UN source those numbers are referred to 2011 (not 2012, lacking). UN source is in www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/pdfs/2014_GLOBAL_HOMICIDE_BOOK_web.pdf (pag. 130). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexor65 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I reset Estonia numbers in table to UNODC source data and year. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

By subregion

I removed this section. There is no sourcing for the exact numbers. Someone may have added up the numbers manually, but who knows. I found mistakes previously, and I have not had the time to check the numbers. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Map is wrong

I fixed a few errors but the map is still wrong because I don't know how to change it without messing up the page. The real map is this one http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_world_by_intentional_homicide_rate.png. I don't know how to replace the map file so if someone with more knowledge could please replace the file with this map that would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.84.222.21 (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The SVG map is using more recent UNODC source:
http://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/data/GSH2013_Homicide_count_and_rate.xlsx - 2013.
The PNG map is using this older UNODC source:
http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime/Homicide_statistics2012.xls - 2012.
You can tell by looking at the color of Iraq in the SVG map. GSH2013_Homicide_count_and_rate.xlsx has been converted to an easy to use wiki table:
User:Timeshifter/Sandbox44 - Look up Iraq. The homicide rate is listed as 8.0 for the latest year. That corresponds to the blue color for "5-10" in the legend of map colors. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:34, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Canada's homicide rate is old data, update needed

"Statistics Canada says the country's homicide rate fell last year to 1.44 victims for every 100,000 people, its lowest level since 1966.

The agency says the 2013 rate was eight per cent lower than in 2012.

It says police reported 505 homicides in 2013, down 38 from the previous year."

- http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/2013-homicide-rate-in-canada-lowest-since-1966-1.2856143

- http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/canadian-homicide-rate-dips-to-1966-levels/article21842093/

The rate now is clearly 1.4 instead of 1.6. I am not sure if the people editing this look at one standard study but this is an accurate update by Statistics Canada itself not a foreign body. An adjustment at once is in order.

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.224.154 (talk) 06:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

For purposes of this article, only UNODOC data is referenced. The US rate is also lower than listed, per the recently released FBI UCR, 4.5/100k rather than 4.7/100k - but for consistency, since there are so many countries represented, the article uses only UNODOC. Anastrophe (talk) 06:05, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Top 10 highest rates since 1995

I removed this section. The listed reference source does not have all this data. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:11, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

Source of information

Can we use local sources for homicide rate, or just the UN? Because we got new numbers in Brazil for 2013, but the numbers come from local sources, and the total murders were increased, while the rate decreased a little bit.

Anyway, if anyone wants to edit the information on the page, the information is here:

http://www.forumseguranca.org.br/storage/download//anuario_2014_20150309.pdf


Page 6: 53.646 deaths in 2013, 1.1% increase from 2012 figures, which according to the publication was 53.054.

Page 20: On the very first line of the table it shows the rate for 2012, 27,4 / 100k and rate for 2013: 26,6 /100k, a 2.6% decrease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.23.205.15 (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

We cannot in the main table, but we can in the 'Country subdivisions' section.Enivid (talk) 15:40, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Is UNODC accurate?

I typically use the fbi.gov site for violent crime in the US.

However, none of the numbers are matching up. Homicide only has so many definitions. The Homicides rate in 2012 do not match. Neither does the Robbery rate, nor the Sexual Assault Rate. And I cannot find a table with the overall violent crime rate. Not to mention it seems to hold an agenda. The UNODC homepage does not have a link for overall homicide, only homicides committed with a firearm.

I haven't check UK's site yet, or any others, but it doesn't match the FBI.gov stats. I do not understand where they are getting their figures from.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/1tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_1_crime_in_the_united_states_by_volume_and_rate_per_100000_inhabitants_1993-2012.xls

http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.151.179.5 (talk) 20:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

To make it short: Probably the most accurate and seriously collected/adjusted data set regarding this issue as you can have anywhere on this planet! For further understanding, I propose to (thoroughly) read (and understand) the two chapters 6. Data challanges and 7. Methodological Annex in the UNODC 2013 report! – And yes, it is not easy at all to collect accurate data. But this is a primary intention by UNODC!! -- 21:33, 28 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZH8000 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 28 March 2015

Homicide rate for Taiwan

The homicide rate for Taiwan (3.0) is suspiciously high, compared with countries such as China, S.Korea, Japan (0.3-1.0). For instance S.Korea has a note, explaining that the homicide count includes attempted murder, aiding and abetting of murder, murder conspiracy and others.

Being curious, I looked up the official Taiwanese numbers for death-by-cause, including homicide. They can be found here: http://www.mohw.gov.tw/EN/Ministry/Statistic.aspx?f_list_no=474&fod_list_no=3485

Looking at Table 1 Causes of death for different years (p.94 and onwards in pdf, p.84 by printed page number), we can find homicide as cause-of-death for different years. 1981: 336 1986: 357 1991: 379 1996: 327 2001: 306 2006: 228 2010: 179 2011: Dropped off top 30 causes of death.

By comparison, the table in the Wiki-article lists a homicide count of 686 (2011). These numbers are wildly inconsistent.

I am almost positive that the number listed for Taiwan is wrong, in the sense that it uses a much more inclusive definition, possibly like S.Korea. This should at least be specified in a note, but I'm beginning to wonder if this sort of inconsistencies is a much larger problem than this case with Taiwan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.149.85.176 (talk) 13:30, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

I removed the South Korea note because the reference it used did not back up what was claimed in the note. Then I removed the Taiwan note because the reference did not provide a homicide count. So what the note said was speculation. --Timeshifter (talk) 03:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 664 (by printed page number) explicitly lists Homicide as cause of death for 2011 (Assault X85-Y09) to be 117. I have not done any work South Korea.90.149.85.176 (talk) 03:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC) ::
People can also die from fires, smoke, falls, etc.. Those are also listed in that report. Large numbers of people. Some of those are later classified as murders. "Homicide" is not "explicitly" listed (as you wrote) on page 664.
Large numbers of people are murdered with guns according to this report:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/taiwan
128 in 2008.
I found the source UNODC used:
http://michaelturton.blogspot.com/2012/12/murder-in-taiwan.html
http://www.npa.gov.tw/NPAGip/wSite/ct?xItem=30120&ctNode=11500&mp=4
http://www.npa.gov.tw/NPAGip/wSite/public/Attachment/f1397462328094.pdf
686 in 2011 via "murder and nonnegligent manslaughter".
FBI counts both in their murder numbers:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/violent-crime/murder-topic-page/murdermain_final
--Timeshifter (talk) 08:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
If you read the document carefully, X85-Y09 Assault includes all categories of intentional murder, such as X97 Assault by smoke, fire, flames and Y01 Assault from pushing from high place, etc, not to mention Y09 Assault by unspecified means. In case this is unclear: X85-Y09 is a supercategory, the sum of all individual X85, X86, ..., Y08, Y09. What isn't included is Intentional self-harm and Event of undetermined intent. All categories of firearm homicide is included in Assault. You will not find 100 firearms homicides in Taiwan for 2011, simply because they did not occur, unless you take an inclusive legal definition of intent to kill, rather than an exclusive medical definition of succeeding in killing. Note that X95 Assault by other and unspecified firearm discharge and Y24 Other and unspecified firearm discharge, undetermined intent, sum to 10 deaths. The gun homicide numbers are off by 1000%, much like the total homicide number is off by 600%.
Causes of death lists all people who die. Clearly, the victims of these Murder and Non-negligent manslaughter don't wind up dead. Even adding together all of Assault and Undetermined intent for 2011, you get 611 which is still short of 648, and this is including 123 cases of Falling from high place and 133 Drowning and submersion - the vast majority of these are clearly suicides and not homicides.
Seeing as the first paragraph of the article states that "Another problem for the comparability of the following figures is that some data may include attempts. In general the values in these lists should not include failed attempts except when mentioned otherwise.", this either needs to be removed, or Taiwan needs to have this note attached. You are clearly spending some time managing this article, and you are clearly allowing it to include garbage numbers on your watch. 90.149.85.176 (talk) 14:23, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I advise you to abandon this discussion, since I think it is futile. All these questions you raise are covered by UNODC and their activities; it's their intentional goal to reach a comparable level across the different countries and cultures. Please read their report carefully, also the chapters about data collection (6.) and methodological approaches (7.), but also the Introduction. – In other words: there is hardly any other institution on this world which can provide more accurate and provide more seriously collected data than UNODC!! Finally, it is their core knowledge to know how to handle the many differences in definition and the differences in collecting respective data. – As a conclusion, you can derive that their data is by far x times better than any individual (including us) could provide. Anyhow, as a wikipedia author your are not expected to make your own conclusions, but "only" to report/summarize given surveys and statements; anything else would be WP:OR. - Oh, and yes, I seriously think that the figures about Taiwan are correct as far as currently possible! -- ZH8000 (talk) 21:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

I am advocating a very simple note, referenced with official Taiwanese statistics, because the article itself explicitly states: "In general the values in these lists should not include failed attempts except when mentioned otherwise." Given the conflict between the UNODC numbers for Taiwan and the Cause of Death numbers for Taiwan, as it stands, this is outright false. Observing that two numbers from official sources are different is hardly original research.
I have sought to have the article "mention otherwise". If including a note with public health data for Taiwan is considered off the table, then I contend that the article must elaborate on how the UNODC numbers are variously sourced in criminological and medical records, and how these numbers can differ by many hundred percent. The current discussion in the article vastly understates the problem. Alternately, the article can of course remain misleading. 90.149.85.176 (talk) 23:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Again, this discussion is futile, since it implies interpretation by the wikipedia authors, which in itself is WP:OR (that's almost the shortest definition of it!). Of course you could add additional remarks about other figures from other sources (this would be not WP:OR, of course). But since this page explicitely and intentionally lists–for a reasonable reason–only the UNODC report, there is no reason to do so. And no, it is not the wikipedia author's task to negotiate and guessing about the reported statements, quite contrary. This again would clearly be WP:OR!!! Wikipedia is an excyclopedia, not an scientific or whatever forum, it only states what others say. (And this is my last contribution to this issue). -- ZH8000 (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not going the WP:Bureaucracy&Technicalities route. I have pointed out a very serious problem with the article, documented it meticulously and suggested different ways to address it. Feel free to use UNODC report as an exclusive source, while failing to properly state the weaknesses that the very report itself admits to. I will leave the article as is, though it, and in turn the readership, is worse off for it. 90.149.85.176 (talk) 03:15, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Indonesia suspiciously low

Here Indonesia has a far higher and more realistic rate: http://www.crimestatssa.com/international.php

North Korea also has triple the rate here, not surprising given the awful poverty there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.109.104.155 (talk) 22:42, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate/Archive_2&oldid=1143528041"