File talk:Alcohol by Country.png

Greenland is known as a place with lots of alcohol abuse, yet it is coloured very light grey on the map. On an earlier version, Greenland correctly shows up as a heavy drinking country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.81.40.95 (talk) 20:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody confirm that Uganda really does have an astronomically high alcohol consumption? Why is there nothing anywhere on Wikipedia about alcohol consumption in Uganda? Surely it is worth even a passing mention somewhere in an article on alcohol consumption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.107.217.9 (talk) 02:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, according to WHO, the alcohol consumption is 19,47 l/cap/yr in Uganda. The reason is that the statistics include a few local beverages made from fermented fruits etc. Same thing with a few other African countries. Pls see links below. Fcel (talk) 19:12, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Global Status Report on Alcohol, pt I - Full report from the WHO website, retrived 2009-09-03.
• GSRoA, pt II - Same report, country specific information, retrieved 2009-09-03.

Serbia is obviously missing from map although it is present in cyan colored version. Another remark is that there is no distinction between countries with no available data and countries with minimal consumption. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.148.81.160 (talk) 19:12, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok, no, this is NOT going to work out like this. I know it might be "un-neutral" to have a green to red color scale, or whatever, but this hole grey-scale thing is NOT working. I'm down with the single color thing, instead of green to red, but common, gray scale... Can we please redo this with a differenent color, like a green scale, blue scale, etc. The gray is NOT cutting it.--Cooljuno411 (talk) 20:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol consumption per year? Per week? Per minute? Why is the time scale missing?--81.174.47.0 (talk) 16:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know that, too.--Section6 (talk) 01:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very important missing point. Based on the data source it might be for the year 2004, but it should really be specified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.166.219.81 (talk) 11:51, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the source document, page 10, bottom paragraph, this for one year, for the year 2000 or 2001, depending on country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.166.219.81 (talk) 11:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]