Talk:World Tourism rankings

Question

I am guessing there was a mistake or a troll or something, but something is misleading in the article. it says that Saudi Arabia had a whopping 43 million tourists which should put it in the top ten. is it 3.4 million or did someone decide to mess with the article?

Why is Italy missing from the top ten ranking when a figure of 61M is quoted under the European heading?

Question

So Egypt is in the Middle East, not in Africa? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.28.78.27 (talk) 21:59, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

When will the freaking 2008 data be uploaded ????!!!!?!! This still belongs to 2007! We are almost in 2010! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.70.229.121 (talk) 05:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Can someone please find 2008 data? This ranking is so old. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HakanGS (talk • contribs) 12:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

Why the Philippines is not included in that because so many visitors also going here?

This list shows Greece as 12th with an inflated 21 million tourists. The source, UNWTO barometer however, does not have any data for Greece for 2007. Greece had 16M tourists in 2006, and a 5M jump in one year is not reasonable. Could this be corrected? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.162.222 (talk) 22:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

It shows Greece as 12th with 21 million tourists. The source, UNWTO barometer however, does not have any data for Greece for 2007. Similar case for Russia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.162.222 (talk) 22:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

When will this be updated with 2008 data? Could anyone access the latest WTO barometer?

The data belongs to 2007, and needs to be updated... WTO barometer published on 07/2009 has the rankings for 2008 but full access to the barometer is not free. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.35.43.248 (talk) (UTC)

==

Question on Croatia

why is Croatia at 19th place with 11.2 million, when on the world tourism report it is at 8.7 million in 23rd place...it seams to be the only one that is off. It doesn't match the source...why was this done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.154.72 (talk) 02:27, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

China

I'm sure China now receives a lot of visitors and indeed, up-to-date figures would presumably reflect the event of the Olympics, but do the current figures include Hong Kong and Macau as tourist arrivals when they are sort of the same country? --81.105.251.230 (talk) 05:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

2009 rankings?

Where to find the 2009 rankings? --Mariotto2009 (talk) 10:12, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Article title and better sourcing

This article is currently entitled "World Tourism rankings" and cites the source — the "UNTWO World Tourism Barometer" — that first published the eponymous ranking of the article. However, the UNTWO source is incomplete as it omits several smaller countries that, despite being small, have many tourist arrivals. For example, Andorra is notable for the remarkably high number of tourist arrivals it has, both in absolute number — 10+ million tourist arrivals per annum — and on a per capita basis — the world's highest number of tourist arrivals per capita (121 in 2008). An editor recently removed Andorra from the list saying "This is a list based on one source." However, I don't think this article needs to be based on a single source, and in any event, a better article title would probably be "World tourism ranking" (note lower case) to encourage multiple sourcing. First, having multiple, independent reliable sources for any article is good per WP: V. Second, the source I cited is a reliable source per WP: RS — the Andorran Government's statistics department. Third, the source I cited is not in conflict with the UNTWO source; it adds a notable country that is otherwise omitted from the list. Adding it does not cross into WP: OR or SYNTH. I think the list would be improved if it wasn't just the UNTWO World Tourism ranking, and missing countries not mentioned by the UNTWO source were added using citations to other reliable sources. 91.187.64.100 (talk) 03:26, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Multiple articles that have lists use one source due to consistency. This is because if we use only one source, there won't be conflicts about how this group did its measurement compared to another group. Examples include Quality-of-life index, List of countries by Failed States Index and Global city (just the lists). The best example I can give about articles that use only one source is with demographics, specifically articles dealing with metropolitan areas and urban areas. Here is the problem that arises. One editor says, this source measures unfairly compared to the next source and therefore there is an unfair comparison within the two. This is evident in the articles I listed above. Going back to the metropolitan/urban areas, for example, both New York and London have equally valid and equally reliable sources that source their metropolitan/urban population, New York has the US census bureau, London has the EU statistics department (can't remember the exact name). They don't conflict with each other, both are notable, both follow the criteria of verifiability and reliability. But they measure their metropolitan areas differently. Much of the arguments with this topic is how New York's metropolitan area is measured unfairly compared to London. Due to these types of arguments, editors in the past decided that to avoid disputes between sources, it would be better to just choose one among them as the standard list. This seems to be the case here since the article uses only one source. So in some cases, it is better to use one source rather than a collection of sources. This seems to have been the consensus judging by the structure of the article. This is why I reverted it since the article was using only one source and the article was structured this way.

Also forgot to say that this will probably be my last comment until tomorrow, since for me since it's late where I am. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 04:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for taking such good care of this article and for your in-depth explanation! --Funandtrvl (talk) 07:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for such a nice comment. :) Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 17:25, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Australia is entered twice

Australia is listed as having 21 million and 5.4 million tourists. The source pdf has them at 5.1 million, so I'll remove the 21 million figure as it is obviously wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.221.10.51 (talk) 07:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

This user, 115.132.84.221 vandalized the page and I reverted to version before they edited. This should be correct. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 12:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Japan

Very funny. In the section International tourist arrivals by country of destination 2007, the second country is listed as Japan, which appears twice. It should be Spain. Changing now. VNNS (talk) 08:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I cant see INDIA anywhere, Please check the report and update it, too. Gopal Kapoor —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.74.48.85 (talk) 19:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Egypt

Egypt is in Africa! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.177.195.12 (talk) 21:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Contradictions

This article needs massive improvement: there is an arbitrary list of. Can we not replace it with the list or two of tourist destinations for all countries, each one from a single source? The international rankings for the UK and Germany (which does not appear) are contradicted by the ones for Europe. Does one include repeat tourists, and one not? What is going on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harsimaja (talk • contribs) 15:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

The info is taken from the UNWTO Tourism numbers for international tourists (see ext link). Right now, the latest survey numbers out are from Oct. 2010, thus why the figures for the 2010 table aren't yet complete. A list of tourist destinations for each country could be added to each country's Wikipedia article titled "Tourism in ....", i.e, Tourism in Germany. Those articles need to be improved, but those types of lists wouldn't belong to this article since it's only the UNWTO rankings. --Funandtrvl (talk) 17:41, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Egypt is in Africa.

isn't egypt in africa? 88.64.182.125 (talk) 23:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Egypt is an interesting case. It's part of the core Arab world and traditionally part of the Mid-East (in fact I read that the Greeks defined it as part of "Asia"), but it is geographically mostly in Africa. Like Turkey, it spans two "continents" (the Sinai's in Eurasia) with the majority of the population in one, but when the Middle East and Africa are distinguished, Egypt is often treated as part of the former. (Just as Turkey is mostly in the Mideast with a small part in Europe, but usually considered part of Europe.) —Quintucket (talk) 10:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Turkey

As a result, Turkey hosted a record 31,456,076 visitors in 2011. source: http://english.sabah.com.tr/Travel/2012/01/25/a-new-record-in-tourism-31456076 88.64.182.125 (talk) 23:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Saudi Arabia

Are these numbers for Saudi Arabia actually tourist arrivals, or do they include hajji and umrah, visa holders? If the latter, I think it merits at least a footnote, seeing as those are unique visas not available to normal tourists (Muslims who want to visit anywhere except Mecca, Medina, and Jeddah or stay longer than three days and all non-Muslims). —Quintucket (talk) 10:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the figures are correct. If you read the source (ref #2, p. 12), it says the Saudi Arabia experienced an unprecedented 60% jump in int'l tourist arrivals, due to efforts from the gov't to promote tourism. The UNWTO figures measure int'l tourist arrivals, across all countries. I don't think one can put a footnote by the figures for Saudi Arabia unless you can find a WP: RS that says that was the major reason for the increase in numbers. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

How can this statistic be correct if Saudi Arabia does not even issue tourist visas? The only nationalities that may visit Saudi without any visa are GCC citizens... The populations of Qatar, UAE and Bahrain are extremely small

UNWTO Regions

The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) has its membership list divided into regions. Turkey and Israel are in Europe in this list. So there is no need to edit fight on these issues. I will install the UNWTO membership list in the right place and then correct the other editions. The fact that Israel is situated in the Middle East or Turkey is a Eurasian country has nothing to do with this discussion as the UNWTO, the universal authority on tourism has made its regional classification as regards tourism issues. --E4024 (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

P.S. There seems to be a technical difficulty with the UNWTO official website at the moment, but the regionally classified membership list is here. --E4024 (talk) 14:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I think it would be better just to remove the whole region column. It's blatantly incorrect that Israel is classified as part of Europe. These divisions compound their factual inaccuracy. Elockid ^(Talk) 15:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Will someone please place Israel in Europe as it is where this country belongs in the UNWTO regional classification of member states. (I am not very good at those things, deleting "Asia" from the Turkey column was easy but changing the place from one module into another is beyond my abilities.) Thank you.

@Kid: Are you planning to throw Israel out from Eurovision and UEFA etc also? That is an issue of the governments/national football federations of the parties (member countries) to those organizations, not of WP editors. --E4024 (talk) 15:31, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

It's not uncommon for organizations to include exceptions. Those are examples. Another example is NATO. Though there are varying definitions of Europe and Asia, the common and practically most widely accepted both scholarly, historically, geographically, etc. are that the boundaries of Asia and Europe are around the Bosphorus, the Caucusus Mountains, and the Ural Mountains. Israel is nowhere near the vicinity of any these. The UN statistics division conforms to this. For now, I have boldy removed the regions column as I said previously. Elockid ^(Talk) 18:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I do not know for which reasons you bring those geographical arguments but you should be aware that international organizations are autonomous in deciding their classification of regions and members and they are not going to ask for your personal choice. In other words, when we speak about the EU or the CoE, for example, Israel is not a European country but it is so for the UNWTO and some other international organizations. We have nothing more than respecting those facts and reflecting them in WP. --E4024 (talk) 18:23, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

I am bringing them up because those are the definitions that describe Asia and Europe. Any other organization or in this case as a statistical division that says differently is factually incorrect. The UNWTO said that Israel is in Europe is not a matter of fact, it's a matter of inaccuracy. It is not a personal choice, it is the accepted definition. Just because a source says something, that doesn't automatically mean copy then paste. Also, the reason I included the link to the UN is to show their scheme (the UNWTO is also part of the UN) which says that Israel is in Asia. Elockid ^(Talk) 19:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Turkey is showing in the European region official web page of the World Tourism Organization. See,[1] and [2]. Yes; you are right, Israel is on this list. Of course, Israel is not geographically in Europe. This is a fact. That is the problem. You are approaching this topic completely "geographically".If Israel had taken place in the 10 most great holiday destination 2011, of course, it will be here, across Europe.Other contradiction, please look at.. In the same article, European data, Turkey is still here not the Middle East or Asia. Also, Turkey is the European region in the article of Tourism. I do not think your opinion is a logical explanation.--Maurice (talk) 16:30, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Maurice, have a look here[3], it clearly adds Turkey in Western Asia, i agree about Russia though. Justicejayant (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Edit request - International tourism receipts

As may be seen at the "Europe" list Turkey has a tourism receipt of over USD 29 million in 2011. As such it is (or now was, due to disruptive editing) in the Top 10 of the International tourism receipts ranking in this article. Somehow, some users changed the respective list and placed two Special Administrative Regions of China (Hong Kong and Macau) in the list while none of these two entities reach even 28 million. Could someone correct this situation and revert the data, please... P.D. to Elockid: In the meantime, you changed the format of the page and now the situation is even more difficult for a not-very-experienced user like this scribe to correct... --E4024 (talk) 22:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

2012 figures are out

Can someone update everything? Thanks! http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_highlights13_en_hr.pdf MarcosPassos (talk) 20:54, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Turkey's Location

UNWTO has Turkey in the European region. I have added the footnote "Turkey is classified as part of Europe in the UNWTO tourism rankings geolocation scheme" for clarification purposes as strictly speaking Turkey is not in Europe geographically. Opinions? 95.141.20.196 (talk) 22:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

This is your opinion. Turkey is part of Europe geographically and politically. This is available in many official and unofficial sources. It's located in the European continent with East Thrace and politically member of Council of Europe and official candidate and negotiator country of European Union. These facts can not be denied. I put the note on the table of "International tourist arrivals by country of destination 2011". Best Regards. -- Maurice (talk) 00:08, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

About the edit, that's fine. About Turkey being in Europe, there is no doubt that it is NOT geographically part of Europe besides a small part west of Bosporus. Not religiously or culturally or anything. Being a candidate country for the EU does not imply being in Europe as there are other countries in the EU strictly speaking not geographically in Europe. The fact that Turkey as a country is not part of Europe follows from the division of continents as landmasses and you could read about it anywhere. -- 95.141.20.196 (talk) 00:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

No, if it is referred to in Europe, it is in Europe. The borders of Europe are used for an escape definition for a political view. The classifications cannot be done by subjective, even there is a reference, the geographic definition (Still Turkey is in Europe in geographical definition) should not be used. I moved Turkey back to Europe. No one can tell me why Cyprus is in the EU, while Cyprus is geographically in Asia fully. So opinion is straightforward. The classification and definitions should not change from person to person!. Nitrium (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Turkey has nothing to do with Europe. The only european parts that they have are the ones that they took from the Greeks. History aside, it's an Asian country that has no affiliation with Europe. Onoufrios d (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Also the actual locations of the countries is not how they are classified, since Cyprus, UK and especially Iceland are not on the mainland. Nevertheless, historically and culturally they are. As is Russia for instance, which extends all the way to the other side of the world. Onoufrios d (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit Request - Some percentages are wrong

Some percentages are wrong. I mean, Egypt received 9.4 million tourists in 2011 and 14.0 million in 2010, and it says there that it had an "increase" of +32.4%. Yemen and a couple of others are wrong too. Thanks. MarcosPassos (talk) 00:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. It's my fault. I have seen minus instead of plus. Now I'm gonna look at rankings and fix mistakes. Thank you for your attention. Maurice (talk) 10:52, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Portugal

How come that Portugal is not in the list? I have doubts about the accuracy of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.240.193.10 (talk) 00:53, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

france

France is in the top for Europe and shown in the graphic but it isn't in the top table? This is confusing. 207.239.94.2 (talk) 13:36, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

2014-2015

Anybody have an opportunity to update this article with the current figures? 206.132.97.132 (talk) 09:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done Updated all figures by World Tourism Organization 2015 Tourism Highlights report. 78.182.243.187 (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Brilliant - good job! 206.132.97.132 (talk) 14:37, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Tourism income as a percent of GDP

The title of the section says it all: the size of the tourism sector (e.g., as a percent of GDP or employment) would be a useful column to add or sort on. Yes, this would be a bit tedious to set up. James Wallen

Middle East

How is UAE in second with 65 million? Typo or..?

1 Saudi Arabia 15.0 million 13.3 million Increase 12.8 Decrease 6.3 2 United Arab Emirates 65.0 million 9.9 million — Increase 17.9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.88.181 (talk) 05:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Citations

Hello, whoever put in the bulk of the citations for this article needs to redo them. I spent about 15 minutes trying to figure them out and am lost. Some of them are dead links, some say '2015 rankings' when the access date is in 2013, and there are several redefinitions of reference names. I believe the person that put these in is, in effect, the only one that could fix these. DJB3.14 (talk) 23:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Q: Middle East tourism arrivals rankings

Someone keeps changing Israel to Palestine in Tourism arrivals rankings for the Middle East. This is factually incorrect as the numbers given are the tourism rankings for Israel. According to the UNWTO source used for the rankings Palestine received 432,000 visitors in 2015, which does not place it in the top ten. This is most likely being done for ideological reasons and does not reflect the statistics cited, which violates the WP neutrality policy. If the article protocol is to purely follow UNWTO regional classifications, which do not necessarily reflect 'common knowledge' geographical classifications, then both Iran and Israel should be removed from the list. Is there a way to stop the troll from arbitrarily changing this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.188.254.188 (talk) 10:08, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Tourism in {countryname}

Listed in each table is the name of a country which links to that country's page, which is interesting and all but is not what is relevant to the article. Those links should be, where available, to the numerous "Tourism in {Countryname}" articles, or, at least, those links should be available on this page. While it is useful for me to be linked to, say, the France page when I click on "France" on this page, what I really want to know about is the details of tourism in that country, the numbers, the facts and figures relating to tourism. After all, this page IS all about tourism. That would make this a link to those articles. And, ultimately, if I'd never heard of "France" before, the Tourism in France article will link me to France. That's my thinking. But, frankly, I'm afraid someone will just reverse these changes on me if I start doing them, and I have better things to do than waste my time. So, I came here, instead. I'll do the obvious ones, but I'll wait for a response before I do more. 2001:8003:4032:8700:3DA6:BFCE:3B8:700D (talk) 07:46, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Nope, okay, I've taken one look at the code and its variable shortcodes and I'm not touching anything. Wiki has moved on from my day and I don't understand what I am looking at well-enough to try editing it, so... I touched nothing. But, someone ought to do this because it's a good idea. 2001:8003:4032:8700:3DA6:BFCE:3B8:700D (talk) 07:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree, that would make sense. I'd be willing to do it if there was any support for it –DJB3.14 ^talk 15:30, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Some clean-up

I have fixed a couple of problems in the stats. There are, however, some more to solve. The numbers for 2016 in the source are provisional. That should have been a reason not to implement them yet, but since it has gone that far, it may be difficult to reverse. The numbers are also incomplete. Missing values for several countries is probably the reason for not updating the lists of Africa, the Americas and the Middle East. But the problem is also present in Europe, Asia and the world ranking since there are no numbers for Turkey and Indonesia. There was a number for Indonesia from another source in the table, but for Turkey, someone at one stage has just added an unsourced number. I have found a source for Turkey 2016 with a number that is also used in the Turkey and the Tourism in Turkey articles. The problem with these extra sources is that they cannot be used directly in the table together with the numbers from the main source, nor can they be used for calculating increase and decrease since we do not know if the methodology is the same. I have placed those numbers in parentheses and put an en-dash in the column for increase/decrease. In the world stats, there is reason to believe that both Malaysia, Hong Kong and Austrian may have passed Turkey on the list so that Turkey no longer is in the top ten, but since the main source still, put them as number 10, so should we. That means that Austria comes before Turkey in the Europe list, but not in the world list, which is kind of disturbing. But that is about the best we can do.

My advice is this: When the next edition of the "UNWTO Tourism Highlights" comes, probably in the summer, we should update the 2016 numbers, but not implement the 2017 numbers since they will be provisional and probably incomplete. --T*U (talk) 09:34, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

ILoveCaracas, Khirurg, your recent edits to this article are a bit problematic. As you will see from my comment above, I have tried to make the best out of a situation where people have been too quick to implement data that are provisional and incomplete. Ideally, all numbers should be from the same source, but since the numbers are incomplete, some of the tables would then be missing important countries. On the other hand, if we import data from other sources, we will soon find ourselves in murky WP: SYNTH-waters, since we do not know if the methodology is the same.

The data of the main table is taken directly from a similar table in the source. In that table, Turkey is placed at number 10, even if the data is missing. The text in the source says: "Turkey completes the Top 10 in arrivals, moving down an estimated four places". Before I started to work on the numbers, someone had entered a completely unsourced number of 31.3 million for Turkey. I found a source for 25.4 million, which would seem to put Turkey well out of the top ten. But the same source has a 2015 number of 36.4 million, indicating a 30% decrease. 30% down from 39,5 million is somewhere between 27.5 and 28 million, so in reality, this source makes the top ten claims credible.

The methodology of the two sources is different, so mixing them is problematic. My attempt to solve this was to present the number from the other source in parenthesis like this: "– (25.4 mill.)" The parenthesis was removed by ILoveCaracas, which in my opinion crossed the threshold of WP: SYNTH. Then Khirurg replaces Turkey with Malaysia, which from the numbers seems the logical thing to do, but this is contradicted by the text of the source.

So where do we go from here? Perhaps the best thing would be to put Turkey back in position 10 without a number, but with an explanatory note saying that this is where UNWTO puts Turkey and that other sources indicate a 30% decrease.

Regarding Turkey (in the Europe table) and Indonesia (in the Asia table), we will have to decide how to present those, too. What is certain, is that we can not calculate percentages by combining the main source with other sources. That is synthesis, so I will remove it. Regards! --T*U (talk) 14:37, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, I really did not know about the parentheses thing, but it seemed like vandalism, look I checked in a lot of pages by google or PDFs and I still did not find a reliable source that says any data of 2017 for any statistics on tourism, I agree with everything you propose and we have to wait until data appears, I will be looking for information online, regards--ILoveCaracas (talk) 17:49, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Repeatedly inserting wrong numbers

2600:1:9A5E:257B:A4F8:CE02:A4A3:3410: The newest version of "UNWTO Tourism Highlights" is the 2018 edition, which you can see here. According to this, the number of tourism arrivals in 2016 was 75.3 million for Spain and 75.9 million for the US. The numbers you repeatedly try to enter, 75.6 for both countries, were preliminary numbers presented in the 2017 edition. Furthermore, the 2018 edition does not give any number for tourism arrivals in 2017 for US, but states that the numbers for 2017 are "not yet available". So please refrain from adding the wrong data again. --T*U (talk) 20:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Turkey: location

Turkey is not a European country and it can't be both in Europe and the Middle East. Onoufrios d (talk) 13:10, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

RUSSIAN TOURISM RECEIPS I cannot see the tourism receips from Russia.--213.60.225.183 (talk) 11:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Nepal

Most visited destinations by international tourist arrivals Is NEPAL visited by 800 billion (!!) tourists???

The top 10 table has several mistakes. First, Nepal ranks at the top with 800 billion visitors. This is obviously false. Second, there are only 9 countries listed so one is missing.

Typo "billions" or "millions?"

International Tourism Receipts listed as "billions" in first table but then as "millions" in remaining tables. For example US = 214 billion in first table and then US = 214 million in Americas table. Am I reading these tables incorrectly? Thanks Scout1691 (talk) 12:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

2021 World Rankings Missing

Why has no one updated this article with 2021 world tourism rankings? According to the United Nations, these are the 2021 rankings:

1. France 48.4 Million Tourists 2. Mexico 31.9 Million Tourists 3. Spain 31.2 Million Tourists 4. Turkey 29.9 Million Tourists 5. Italy 26.9 Million Tourists 6. United States 22.1 Million Tourists 7. Greece 14.7 Million Tourists 8. Austria 12.7 Million Tourists 9. Germany 11.7 Million Tourists 10. Croatia 10.6 Million Tourists

The link is found here:

https://www.unwto.org/tourism-data/global-and-regional-tourism-performance

On the left side of the chart, click on "Inbound Tourism." After that, on the top right corner of the chart, click on "Ranking." You can then adjust the "Arrivals (millions)" section of the chart to show country rankings from high to low. 162.225.120.217 (talk) 02:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 April 2024

Omeed66757557 (talk) 16:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I would like to add the 2023 numbers for world tourism rankings!

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 17:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Mismatched years

I noticed that some countries have 2021/22/23 data, while others have 2018/19. given the obvious change that COVID had on tourism, would it not make sense to at the very least have the same years listed for all the countries? perhaps as well a comparison of pre/during COVID, although perhaps that is better suited for the effects of COVID on tourism page. Rafaelloaa (talk) 17:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)