Everything you ever wanted to know about

[reynardo]

Weeki Wachee's population:

... As of the censusGR2 of 2000, there are 12 people, 5 households, and 5 families residing in the city. The population density is 4.5/km² (11.8/mi²). There are 5 housing units at an average density of 1.9/km² (4.9/mi²). The racial makeup of the city is 100.00% White, with no African Americans, Native Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders, or other races, and none from two or more races. No one in Weeki Wachee is Hispanic or Latino of any race.

There are five households out of which two have children under the age of 18 living with them, two are married couples living together, three have a female householder with no husband present, and none are non-families. No households in Weeki Wachee are made up of individuals, and none consist of someone living alone who is 65 years of age or older. The average household size is 2.40 and the average family size is 2.40.

In the city the population is spread out with five under the age of 18, none from 18 to 24, two from 25 to 44, two from 45 to 64, and three who are 65 years of age or older. The median age is 35 years. For every female there is one male. For every five females age 18 and over, there are two males.

So - 12 people, 5 households. No-one lives by themself. 2 married couples and the rest are female-headed with no male partner - that's 7 people, leaving 5. For every female there is one male, so there are 6 males, 6 females. Obviously the married couples are 1 and 1 so of the 5 people left over there are 4 males and 1 female.

"For every 5 females age 18 and over there are 2 males" and "two from 25 to 44, two from 45 to 64, and three who are 65 years of age or older". I calculate that therefore the 5 remainders are under 18.

As to the distribution, can someone who's better at stats than me tell how many kids per household, or is it reasonable to assume 1 each?

Comments

[chaos-crafter.livejournal.com]

And they said the census wouldn't give away private details. "All disguised by the sheer mass of data" they said.
:)

[quatranoctal.livejournal.com]

Heh. The Australian Bureaur of Statistics has a section (about 12 people, currently) dedicated to data access and confidentiality, and one of the most important things they do is make sure that anyone accessing data can never request it in a form that would let them estimate a single unit's contribution to a high degree of accuracy, although I'm not sure whether they worry much about census data - and there would have to be some small towns in Australia.

[tenner.livejournal.com]

Combine this analysis with Google Maps and we can find out where everyone lives!

[loganberrybunny.livejournal.com]

I'm fairly sure that the UK census deliberately alters the data slightly when there are numbers as small as that, so that 5 might actually be anything between 3 and 7; that sort of thing. It doesn't affect the overall figures for calculation purposes precisely because they're so small.

I did smile at your cut text, though... I live in a town of 10,000 people, and the next town over has 50,000 - neither is a city. =:P

[(Anonymous)]

Would those 12 people be 6 males, 6 females, living in 5 households...

[reynardo.livejournal.com]

Here that size (20,000) is really what we would think of as a town, but as it's often the commercial centre for teh area, it's often given City status. Orange, Armidale and quite a few other areas count as cities.

We don't tend to have villages, though, so a centre of 100 people (with a pub, a general store and a petrol station) will be a town.