User talk:Worldenc

Typos in demographic charts
Hi, Worldenc. Thanks for adding the demographic charts to various counties. I've noticed some typos in the charts themselves that you probably should fix;
 * The pie chart of ages should not be called "ageing" (which is a typo, and not clear).. How about "age distribution"?
 * The population y-axis should be labeled "Estimated population", not "Estimate population".

Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 13:27, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, i will update all chart (fix typos) within 2 to 3 day and re-upload it. Worldenc (talk) 15:59, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * These charts are a great idea! Nyttend (talk) 13:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Need help for bar chart
helpme I want to create bar chart for population (for determine an annual trend), please advised me for starting point of bar chart.

example : if county has population July 2000 Estimate 	43874 July 2001 Estimate 	44437 July 2002 Estimate 	45160 July 2003 Estimate 	45766 July 2004 Estimate 	46941 July 2005 Estimate 	47882 July 2006 Estimate 	49039 July 2007 Estimate 	49830 July 2008 Estimate 	50364 for this chart what should i take starting point???

usually i take starting point 40000, its ok or not???

some one tell me that you must take starting point 0 (zero) is that correct???

Which is better example 1 or example 2 ???

Thanks Worldenc (talk) 06:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it just depends on your preference. I don't believe that either one is "more" correct than the other. You might still start from zero, but try making the scale smaller. I hope this helps! If you still are stuck then reply here please. :)  Letter  7  07:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Letter7 Worldenc (talk) 07:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Example 1 shows the difference between the years better, and thus, is a better example. Starting from 0 will make the graph less readable, so don't do that. &mdash;Dark 07:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much Dark for your comment Worldenc (talk) 07:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Just remember that readability and simplication is the main point of using charts in articles. if the reader cannot read or understand the chart, then it's not very useful is it? Your charts are looking great at the moment, so nice job. &mdash;Dark 08:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Starting at 40000 is a classic error in visualization and statistics. See second paragraph of the article on How to Lie with Statistics. If you start the y-axis at 40000, you are visually exaggerating the growth of a county. Starting at 0 is more honest.


 * A related question is: why start at the year 2000? The growth of a county over the last 9 years is not as interesting as the growth over the last 50 or 100 years, in my opinion. Large population growth over decades shows urbanization, while flat or declining growth is interesting, too.


 * If you're going to do this to all U.S. counties, I would recommend getting feedback over at WP:WikiProject U.S. Counties. That's a group of people who care deeply about counties: the consensus of that group should probably guide the design of the graphs.


 * Keep up the good work! —hike395 (talk) 12:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you hike395 for your comment, i want to create population graph for 2000-2009 because this graph show recent population change, if i get time (after this work), i will also create population graph for 50-100 year (decades).


 * I have search for some statical bar graph in government website and found some are not starting at 0.

Fiscal Year Budget Graphs : http://www.genome.gov/27531706 : which start $450 Millions Effect on noise level : http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl07027/llcp_07_04.cfm : which start 76 DB History of Budget Authority : http://www.ninds.nih.gov/news_and_events/congressional_testimony/ninds_fy_2010_cj.htm : which start $1480 million etc...

Once again thanks for your advised, i am looking for other editors review

Worldenc (talk) 13:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Another problem, not addressed above, and maybe should be addressed on a Project Page someplace, is readability vs article domination. Woldenc has been careful not to dominate the text with graphs, but I'm finding them very hard to read. In the bar graph, it is easier for the reader just to see obvious progress. But that sort of assumption can't be made with a pie chart - it needs to be readable. On the other hand, I don't want my article overpowered. While Woldenc has used diversified charts which looks interesting, I'm wondering if bar charts shouldn't be used for readability (or to avoid having to read it!). Student7 (talk) 14:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I really don't know for sure: although showing the total population (instead of from 0) seems like it would make more sense, the base of 40,000 is more readable, and including a note in the caption about how the base is 40,000 (or whatever other number) would clarify the actual situation. After all, if we don't read the caption, we won't know that it refers to population at all. Nyttend (talk) 14:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Bar charts are best used when there is reason to visually compare two values (total values, not just relative heights). They should not be used to graph small changes over time. Line graphs are more appropriate for showing relative changes over time. For an excellent example of this, see in Edward Tufte. However, I'm not sure that year-to-year Census estimates deserve to be graphed -- these are only estimates, and the year-to-year changes often are just errors... --Orlady (talk) 18:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I have update all bar chart (start from zero) Worldenc (talk) 22:44, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Charts in Missouri counties
I've noticed your awesome work making demographic charts for counties in Missouri. I'm currently working on trying to get the Columbia, Missouri article from GA to FA status. If you have the time, would you be able to make the same demographic charts for that page? Thanks in advance, if not thats ok too. Grey Wanderer (talk) 20:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, currently i am working for county of US, after county i will work for all US city, so you have wait for atleast 1 week, after complete US county i will work for Columbia, Missouri.

Worldenc (talk) 02:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There is no rush. Thanks again! it's great there are editors out there with graphic and computer skills to make up for those of us who can only contribute with prose. Grey Wanderer (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Rensselaer County charts
Thanks for making those great bar charts. One request: can you increase the size of the font in the bars by a lot, and make them white? Then in the article, they'll stand out better. Relevant files: You may want to consider doing that with all the ones you make in the future so they can be used effectively within an article (and won't require the user to go to the image page if they don't want to).  upstate NYer  05:08, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * File:US36A083 Population.png
 * File:US36A083 Income.png

Thanks for your comment, i will increase font in chart and change color, just tell me what font size and color is better??, one another thing i will update after my current work is complete so it will take some time, if you want to chart show better in article you may increase width of chart (just increase chart width 200px to 300px or 400px).

Worldenc (talk) 05:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * A better font size would be one that can be read in the thumbnail. These fonts are even a bit hard to read in the full size images....
 * These two graphs also suffer from starting the bottom of the bars at a value that is not zero (see my comment below). --Orlady (talk) 13:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

More issues with graphs
Although I think graphs add value, I'm bothered by several aspects of the graphs that you are uploading. Examples:
 * File:US36A057_Age.png -- Illegible at the 200px setting on the thumbnail (a colored pie is not meaningful if I can't tell what the slices represent. When I look at the full-size version, I see "garbage" in the image (colored dots above and below the legend). Anyway, the standard way of visually displaying age and sex distribution in a population is with a pyramid -- and interested users can readily interpret those pyramids. Why use a pie chart instead of a well-tested visual representation?


 * File:US36A057_Population.png - Again, the legend is illegible unless you look at the full size. More significantly:
 * The bar graph does not start at zero, so it gives a false impression of the magnitude of changes (it looks like population has declined radically, when in fact it merely went from about 49,700 to about 48,700. Starting a graph at a non-zero value is poor practice for visual display of data. I would prefer not to have graphs instead of displaying misleading visual representations like this one. Can you fix your bar graphs to start at zero?
 * The data set is just the annual Census population estimates since 2000. That's a fairly trivial set of data, and since these are estimates the year-to-year changes (at least in some jurisdictions) probably are not real. When I saw the graph, I thought it covered a longer period (for example, data from the Censuses done every 10 years). What value do you see in graphing this?

--Orlady (talk) 13:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Orlady, thanks for your comment on graphs.


 * if you want to see graph you click on graph (for full size), it show everything, and if you want to graph better seen in article, may be we increase graph width in article (200px to 400 px), so graph better seen in article but may be layout of article changed.


 * in pie chart some data have very less value so they merged with each other (text and slice) so i added dot (.) so text and slice of data not overleap with other data.


 * this pie chart represent age group (like : below 18 (younger), middle age working men (18-64) and older person (65+)), so it well shown group of age and even show dependency of younger on working men as well as old person (retired) dependency on working age people, which not shown in age pyramid graph.


 * Pie charts are not a good way to display this kind of data. As this web page explains, "Pie charts should rarely be used. ... Pie charts are fun to look at, but generally involve using a great deal of ink to display very little data. In addition, the charts often make it difficult to discern the exact magnitude of the size of the pie slices." The standard method for displaying the age and sex distribution of a population is the Population pyramid. This is a preferred method for displaying this type of data because it the visual image is effective in communicating a large amount of information. Wikipedia Commons has population pyramids for most or all United States counties. These pyramids are available for use in articles, so it should not be necessary to make new graphs. --Orlady (talk) 17:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * in population graph i am confused for starting point i also ask help (see my talk page : Need help for bar chart) on this matter but getting mix review, so if you think 0 is better represent graph i will change starting point of graph, waiting for your reply.


 * Worldenc (talk) 14:10, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As explained in Bar chart, in bar graphs the bars should be proportional to the size of the value represented. This means that the graph should start from zero, so that the graph can be used to visually compare two or more values. Starting the bar at an arbitrary number misrepresents the information. In File:BarGraph of Population Estimates.pdf (open the PDF to see the graph) I have graphed the Montgomery County population estimates with zero as the starting point. You will see that the fluctuations are almost invisible when zero is the starting point. This illustrates that a properly designed bar chart is not a good way to display this type of data set. --Orlady (talk) 17:23, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I have update one article with 400px width (thumbnail),


 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_County,_South_Carolina


 * so look out that article and give feedback.


 * Those images are much too big. They leave very little room for text. The problem I had in viewing the images was not that the images themselves were too small, but that the TEXT on the images is too small. It should be possible for the reader of the article to get some clue of what a graph means without having to open the full image in another window. When viewed at 200px, most of the titles on these graphs are at least semi-legible, but it is not possible to discern individual letters or numbers in the labels and legends. If the graphs are going to be useful, the legends and labels need to be in a larger font size.
 * Note, however, that the graphic itself does not necessarily need an embedded title -- the title can and should be provided in the caption that is displayed in the article. --Orlady (talk) 14:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)


 * one other thing we don't have data for economy and age distribusion for US county other than 2000 year (not even in cencus official website), we only have population update (estimate) in census for 2000, 2001 .... upto 2008 year.


 * Worldenc (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * That's because the U.S. Census is conducted only once every 10 years. The last Census was in 2000. The values that are reported for years in between are just estimates -- they are not actual data. When Wikipedia reports estimates, they should be identified as estimates. --Orlady (talk) 14:49, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

En dash in graph caption
You may want to update the caption in the population graph to include an en dash rather than a hyphen between the years ("2000–2008"), per WP:DASH. I've updated it in a few county articles on my watch list. The character can be generated using "&amp;ndash;", Alt-0150 on Microsoft Windows platforms, or option-dash in Mac OS. —ADavidB 13:37, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Reverting
I am reverting the charts you added to all or most of the pages I am watching because there is no consensus on their inclusion. Personally, I think they have been added to the pages without any attention being paid to the way the pages look and, judging from all the chatter above, it seems that they don't present the data very well either. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 14:42, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

A tiny settlement like Mettler, California, with a population of 157, is certainly not well served by this overwhelming attention to petty detail; viz.: this comparison. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 14:55, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I actually like the charts, if they could be presented in a better way (discussed above). I think they add to the articles. Of course, the tiny settlement you mentioned probably doesn't need a chart, but on the whole I believe they can be beneficial. Killiondude (talk) 19:27, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Pictures to San Bernardino County Cities
You need to please go back and down size the pictures about demographics and what not, to all the city articles to at most 150 pix, nore. To made the pics 300, thats way to big, and you are destroying the article flow which was made by WikiProject IE and User:MissionInn.Jim some of the cities were Yucca Valley, California, Adelanto, California, ect you know which cities/article they were, again I am only worried about the cities in San Bernardino County and Riverside County. Please do it as soon as possible! Anyways have fun and any questions ask me, GO DOWNSIZE THOSE PICS....PLEASE (I WOULD DO IT MY SELF BUT i AM WORKING ON FIXING OTHER ARTICLES), -House1090 (talk) 21:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I would resize graph as soon as possible, sorry for inconvenience. Worldenc (talk) 08:13, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank-You so much but, I asked you to bring them to at least 150 px, you just changed it to 200 pix, which is still to big. So could you please down size it some more to 150 pix (at the very most). And also move both of the pix to the left of the screen,, it helps with the flow, and I am asking this because were are hoping to get the San Benardino-Riverside County Articles to FA Status. Again I am thankfull for you cooperation with me, and make sure you do it as soon as possible. Thanks Again - House1090 (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

mapzones.org
What is the purpose of adding the mapzones link to the articles? It's an aggregation site (i.e., collecting data from official sources). We've had problems with people spamming similar sites in the past. (Though the site currently does not contain advertising, that doesn't preclude future ads being added. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:09, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I have taken some data from this site, which are not available from official site (census site), though data were available but in diferent format (in database format), so user can't verify it, and chart concept were taken from this site, so i will add both website as source. Worldenc (talk) 15:15, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Your charts
I would just like to inform you that I've started a thread here about the charts you have been creating and adding to city/area articles. Feel free to chime in about it. I just wanted to create a thread somewhere so we could keep the discussion in one place. Killiondude (talk) 20:54, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for help, i have taken few data from mapzones.org and create graph some graph data don't taken from mapzones.org like http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US01A0130045_Age.png which are completely taken from cencus this age chart don't found in mapzones.org so i only sourced cencus site. i have linked both website where data and concept taken from census and mapzones.org.

Worldenc (talk) 05:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Accounts
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Usgeowiki Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Askgeowiki Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Autauga County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Ksademap Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Sakhani Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Autaugaalgeo Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Alabamaalwiki Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Barbour_County_Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Adams_County_Colorado Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Apache County Arizona Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Autauga County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Butler County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Colbert County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Butte County California Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Dekalb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Dale County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cache County Utah Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Chilton County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Fremont County Wyoming Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Franklin County Florida Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Baldwin County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Boone County Arkansas Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Custer County Idaho Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Crenshaw County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Baxter County Arkansas Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Blount County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Alleghany County Virginia Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Alameda_County_California Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Fulton County New York Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bailey County Texas Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Shelby County Ohio Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Ontonagon County Michigan Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cullman County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Covington County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Coosa County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Conecuh County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Coffee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cleburne County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Clay County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Clarke County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Choctaw County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cherokee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Chambers County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bullock County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Calhoun County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Crenshaw County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Baxter County Arkansas Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Blount County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Alleghany County Virginia Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Alameda_County_California Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Fulton County New York Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bailey County Texas Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Shelby County Ohio Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Ontonagon County Michigan Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cullman County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Covington County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Coosa County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Conecuh County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Coffee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cleburne County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Clay County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Clarke County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Choctaw County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cherokee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Chambers County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bullock County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Calhoun County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Coosa County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Conecuh County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Coffee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cleburne County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Clay County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Clarke County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Choctaw County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cherokee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Chambers County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bullock County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Calhoun County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Choctaw County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Cherokee County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Chambers County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bullock County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Calhoun County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bullock County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Calhoun County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account
 * commons:Special:Contributions/Bibb County Alabama Wikimedia Commons spamming account

__NOINDEX__--Hu12 (talk) 19:13, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Demographic of San Francisco
Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Demographic of San Francisco. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as yourself. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - San Francisco. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will to continue helping improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at San Francisco - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Pim Rijkee (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)