Talk:Pivot table

Javelin software
Why there is no mention of Javelin software when he predate Lotus Improv and implement mechanism for pivot tables https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javelin_Software ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calimero (talk • contribs) 10:01, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Execucom's FPS
Execucom's Financial Planning System had this feature for main frames many years before Improv. I will try and get back here with more details. Laughingskeptic (talk) 07:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Please explain the concept with examples
This article currently doe not live up the the Wikipedia standard. I am not familiar with pivot tables. I came here to learn what it is, but I still do not understand what it is after reading the article. Could a knowleadgeable person please rewrite the article to be concise, and add some examples? Also, I find it irrelevant that the name is a trademark of Micro$oft Corporation. -- PeterThoeny - talk - 2007-02-17


 * The example now makes it clear. Thanks for making this article accessible! -- PeterThoeny - 06:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

The text under the second sample table seems to confuse rows and columns: " pivot table usually consists of row, column, and data (or fact) fields. In this case, the row is Region, the column is Ship Date, and the data we would like to see is Units. "  My understanding (since VisiCalc in the 1980s) is that a row is horizontal and a column is vertical. In the table being described, the Region is a column header and the Ship Date is a row header. Am I thinking backwards or is the example presented backwards? 65.82.126.100 (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2008 (UTC) Cajun Charlie - 23 Apr 08

It seems backwards to me too; I'm not familiar enough with the tables to just change it though. arafel2 - 12:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone understand pivot tables and can anyone actually explain them ?
 * Explain the name pivot table - if it's not a table that pivots so you can adjust the angle of it for reading a book etc.
 * Why in the example is there only east & west yet north and south appear magically from somewhere
 * examples with believable data that is followable

Regarding above complaints
I've since fixed up this article, and would like to clean up the discussion page. I'm not sure if I have to archive anything or just delete it. Could someone verify the issues have been addressed, and clean up the discussion page? Wikidan829 14:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Archived. -- Avi 14:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pivottable-Flatdata.PNG
Image:Pivottable-Flatdata.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pivottable-Pivoted.PNG
Image:Pivottable-Pivoted.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pivottable-Flatdata.PNG
Image:Pivottable-Flatdata.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:52, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Consolidation
I was under the impression the act was called data consolidation and the button to press on excel was pivot table. if they differ please specify. thanks --Squidonius (talk) 20:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Squidonius. Data consolidation appears to be more relevant to combining two or more datasources together, not the same as aggregating data from a single datasource. Wikidan829 (talk) 17:08, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Ambiguous in the wild
This might be good for an end user of excel but it doesn't speak much of the pivot table -- also for data -- that is reference by the postgres 8.3 docs. It appears as if that pivot table simply turns row oriented data into column oriented data. EvanCarroll (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Has this concern been addressed? Has it been fixed? New to watching here, I'll read the Article and see. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

NPOV?
The comment about Google Docs assumes that Excel is the standard Gordon Findlay (talk) 23:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

USE MATLAB INSTEAD OF MICROSOFT PRODUCTS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.118.122 (talk) 23:21, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Databases
The concept of a "pivot table" apparently means something entirely different for databases; see. The article should be updated with this detail (and I'll do that when I have time, if someone else hasn't first). - Brian Kendig (talk) 19:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

/!\ Page is BUSTED /!\
I reverted the last edit. Not sure what it was about the last edit that broke the page. By the diffs, the last edit was minor.Fotoguzzi (talk) 03:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

History clarification
Does a pivot table do something that accountants haven't been doing since the first ruled page? I'm not an accountant, but wouldn't they do something like run through a large list of receipts add each to a separate account book for, e. g., a particular department? If so, could a realistic example be included in the history section?Fotoguzzi (talk) 03:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

NPOV: someone associated with "ZK" is clearly using Wikipedia for free advertising.
"...but as of 2011 it provides limited functionality and is extremely slow with large amounts of data. ZK, an Ajax framework, also allows to embed pivot tables in Web applications. Demo here."

Yeah, very neutral. Oh, and what an Excellent Explanation of Pivot Tables.

I came for an explanation of pivot tables. I stayed for the subtle marketing strategy.

66.90.152.153 (talk) 04:49, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Software section is not neutral
As of now, the software section is not written neutrally and overemphasizes some products. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.50.96.36 (talk) 13:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Not only that. It describes specific steps, using some specific tool's user interface. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.156 (talk) 08:50, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

numberGo?
Is numberGo Publisher really a prominent enough product to be mentioned between Excel and Calc? That and the following paragraph about their 2.0 release seem like product placement.

Also, why are Excel and Publisher simply listed, with Calc relegated to "competing software" providing "similar functionality". Perhaps I'm splitting hairs, but this reads like bias. Are not Excel and Publisher also competitors? Is the pivot table functionality in Excel and Publisher somehow different or better than that in Calc? Jasongetsdown (talk) 01:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * It's not. I added that as a product that I have personally used and in hindsight realize that it was probably inappropriate. I think if you look before my original edits to this article that you will find I've drastically improved it overall. The majority of my rewrite still exists. Sorry it took so long but I haven't actually logged on in years. Wikidan829 (talk) 05:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The Grammar in This Article is Horrible!
Can a native speaker of English please clean this up?


 * I'll take a look "at my earliest convenience". Has someone already improved the article herein?  -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:37, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Please Make Terminology In Examples Consistent
The opening paragraphs use "sex", but the later paragraphs use "gender".

Deletion of how to create pivot tables in the 1010data application
The information added about 1010data was inappropriately reverted by with a comment of nonnotable. Per Wikipedia policy, notability guidelines are not intended to be applied to content within articles or lists. I am restoring the reference information. --Ecrz (talk) 02:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Have a look at WP:WTAF. The article should exist before entries are added to lists such as the one on this article. - MrOllie (talk) 18:33, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I did take a look at the policy page you are indicating. It talks about writing an article before linking to it in a list, in order to prevent broken links. There are no such broken links in my addition. Please stop quickly deleting other editor's contributions based on interpretations of policies that differ from what the policies actually say. --Ecrz (talk) 02:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I think you need to read it again. This article is not meant to be an indiscriminate list of nonnotable software. And article on the software has already been deleted at Articles_for_deletion/1010data. - MrOllie (talk) 18:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I already did read WP:WTAF several times before posting and the issue described there is a different one. The deleted article that you cited is about 1010data the company, not the product. The notability guidelines (referenced in my first post in this thread) state very clearly that something (e.g., a product) may not be sufficiently notable for having its own page but be perfectly fine for inclusion in another article. This is not uncommon at all in Wikipedia, articles that mention related products that don't have their own separate page (e.g., because they are a niche, industry-specific product instead of a widespread end-consumer product, or whatever other reason). Such mentions don't make the article "an indiscriminate list of nonnotable items" because (a) this article is not a standalone list (b) The addition was a complete sentence with additional information, not a simple entry in a list.


 * It is important to note that, as indicated at the top of the page, the term "Pivot Tables" was trademarked for a period of time, and that led to some companies choosing other names for the same functionality within their products. I believe that it is useful having a reference in this article indicating that pivot table functionality is available in these other products, and how to find and access it. In my opinion, this information belongs in the "Application Support" section but, if other people's opinion is that it should be separate, that can be an option --Ecrz (talk) 02:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Per discussion in the respective user pages, I agreed to the proposal for trying out the optional BRD process. This process however has failed to gather any discussion at all for over a month. At this point I will proceed soon with reinstating the section and following a more traditional approach to consensus. 98.116.84.205 (talk) 19:21, 9 December 2022 (UTC)


 * And it will surely be reverted again, since it still lacks consensus support. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. MrOllie (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The removal failed to meet Wikipedia's Reasons for content removal, it did not obtain any Consensus for removal, and it did not follow the process for repeated removals either (as noted in the policy page, for text that has been restored following a previous removal, it should be discussed on the page's talk page prior to a repeated removal). What I intend to do is take corrective action following an improper removal. A dispute for inclusion of properly removed content would put the onus on me as the requester, but that is not what I am doing. Restoration after an improper removal is a very different action and the rule you cited does not apply.Ecrz (talk) 06:34, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That is the opposite of how Wikipedia works. You need consensus to keep it. I don't think you'll get it, because it doesn't meet the list inclusion criteria - having already been removed at AFD. By 'corrective action', you mean edit warring without consensus in plain violation of Wikipedia's policies. Content removal is an essay, not a policy or guideline. It is just somebody's opinion. MrOllie (talk) 13:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You keep referring to the AFD of the article about 1010data, the company. Please read the AFD talk that you linked. The concern at the time of deletion was WP:PROMO in the language of the article, and the adopted solution was to redirect to the Advance Publications article (the current parent company of 1010data). Using this deletion as a reason for indefinitely suppressing any information about 1010data products is misguided zeal and ultimately wrong.


 * On the topic of WP:ONUS, it is in the policy you linked yourself: "Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article. Such information should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." The onus for inclusion comes after consensus for removal (not this case) Ecrz (talk) 06:40, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * No. You can't add whatever you like and then filibuster to keep it in. That is the opposite of what that policy says. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.- MrOllie (talk) 13:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)