Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries

Project Countries main pageTalkParticipantsTemplatesArticlesPicturesTo doArticle assessmentCountries portal

Peer review of Yemen

I have put the Yemen article up for peer review, the more attention it gets, the more it will improve. After, I will put it up for good article review. You can review it at Wikipedia:Peer review/Yemen/archive1, and I would appreciate if you did. HerrHeulsuse (talk) 15:18, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Ditto for me with Malta. _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 04:15, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

(See Wikipedia:Peer review/Malta/archive2) _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 04:16, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

@Wikipedian12512 Please see my comment on the Yemen PR, especially regarding balance and oversubsectioning. Malta has similar areas for improvement. CMD (talk) 05:05, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

Got it. I’ll cut all sections in history down to 3 or 4 paragraphs, then redistribute some into the architecture, cities, and geology. I’ll be away from full internet access for a while, so that may be slow, but I’ll check in occasionally. _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 06:14, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

Need to be aware of how though the review process will be.....see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Portugal/archive4. Both articles need lots of work. Moxy🍁 15:26, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

Using "neutral" increase or decrease arrows for population

In the infoboxes of every country article on Wikipedia, statistics have Template:Increase or Template:Decrease to indicate whether the statistic is increasing or decreasing over time. However, for the population figure, it seems like every country's article uses Template:IncreaseNeutral or Template:DecreaseNeutral, which displays a grey arrow instead of green/red and a tooltip that says "Neutral Increase"/"Neutral Decrease", while all the other figures use the standard green/red increase and decrease. I do not understand why this is done and using these templates in this inconsistent manner does not make sense to me. Why are these templates used this way on country articles on Wikipedia? Cyrobyte (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2026 (UTC)

358 World Bank figures that the cited series no longer supports

I checked every English Wikipedia article that cites a data.worldbank.org/indicator link against the series the link names: 1,270 articles and 2,730 citations. For 358 of them, in 206 articles, the series now says something different from the sentence. The list is at User:Jorn3333/World Bank figures, in sortable tables grouped by kind:

• 155 where the sentence presents a figure as current and the series has a newer year (for example, the poverty rate in Economy of Laos is given as 15.7% for 2018; the series has 7.1% for 2024);
• 196 where the sentence states a year and the series now gives a different value for that year, usually after a revision (life expectancy in Liberia is given as 64.4 for 2020; the series now gives 61.3);
• 7 where the figure belongs to a different year from the one stated (GNI per capita in Jamaica and the World Bank is given as $4,990 for 2018; that is the 2016 value, and 2018 was 5,610).

Nothing has been edited, and I don't plan to edit from this list myself. Each row quotes the sentence, the figure, what the series says now, and links to the series, so it can be judged in one look. On three random samples of 40 rows checked by hand, 36, 36 and 34 were right (85–90%). The errors found have been fixed since, but the fixed version has not been re-measured. So please treat each row as something to check, not something to apply. If a row is wrong, a note in its last column helps me fix the rule behind it.

The list leaves out anything it could not pin to a single year of a single country's series. That includes links naming several countries, figures that match no year, prose about a past year ("fell to 3.3% in 1986"), figures for former states, and a few other cases. So it is not a complete audit, only the rows it is confident about. The checker is freshcite (open source, read-only).

I'll re-run it in 30 days and post how many rows were resolved, which will say whether a list like this is worth making for other sources. Jorn3333 (talk) 14:27, 27 September 2026 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Cameroon for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria, or help improve the article. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regard to the article's featured status (see review instructions). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:33, 3 October 2026 (UTC)