This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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

The article states both that "15.7% are foreign born" and "Estimates show that the number of immigrants could be as high as 15% of the total population by 2030.", which seems slightly contradictory (since 15.7% in 2019 is already higher than 15%). 惑乱 Wakuran ( talk) 23:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC) reply

I belive it's due to the Icelanders who are born abroad. People with a foreign citizenship are currently at 11%. – Thjarkur (talk) 01:14, 7 August 2019 (UTC) reply

The article cites Karlsson 2000, p. 243 to reference the statement that by 1900, only 1% of Icelandic population had Danish heritage. This is a false assertion. The author rather states that about 1% of the Icelandic population lived in Denmark. Here's the verbatim: "Correspondingly, there was no Icelandic population anywhere outside Iceland, apart from the tiny colony in Copenhagen and a few Icelanders scattered around Denmark for various reasons. In 1870 only 299 inhabitants of Denmark were reported to have been born in Iceland. By 1900 this number had risen to 743, or approximately 1% of the population of Iceland.1 Although people born to Danish parents in Iceland are included in this number, there cannot have been many, so, roughly speaking, this must refer to the Icelandic element in Denmark's population." Politely curious ( talk) 19:14, 24 February 2023 (UTC) Politely curious ( talk 19:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Template:Largest cities of Iceland has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- Triggerhippie4 ( talk) 10:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC) reply

I think average populations shouldn't be rounded to the thousands in the vital statistics table with such a low population, this causes unprecision in the data. These figures should be rounded to the hundreds. Givibidou ( talk) 18:29, 18 February 2022 (UTC) reply

An other issue : from 1900 to 2009, the "average population" from the source https://px.hagstofa.is/pxen/pxweb/en/Ibuar/Ibuar__mannfjoldi__1_yfirlit__yfirlit_mannfjolda/MAN00000.px is the population in the begining of the year, not the average population. I will correct that. Givibidou ( talk) 13:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Sorry, wrong calculations, average population 1900-2010 is correct (when rounded). Givibidou ( talk) 18:35, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply