User talk:Spiffy sperry

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Spiffy sperry!

2016 election map[edit]

hello,how do you edit the US statewide polling map,and what program do you use for.AlAboud83 (talk) 21:10, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! The original file (the one with a .svg file extension, not the ones with a .png extension) can be viewed and edited in a simple text editor. I use Notepad on a Windows computer. The beginning of the text file sets up color definitions and state outlines. About half way through the text file, there is a section for defining the shading of each state. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 21:55, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

i tried updating it,but it isn't updating,how do i update it — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlAboud83 (talk • contribs) 00:28, 31 July 2016 (UTC) can you help me please.AlAboud83 (talk) 00:44, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When a new file is uploaded, Wikimedia Commons needs to do some extra stuff to display the image in various formats. I have found that sometimes this process happens immediately, and sometimes it's slow. If I don't see the new image and I'm confident that I didn't do something wrong, then I just wait a while. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 14:56, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

why did you revert my updates,there is no sources on those edits and they are known to be Dem strongholds,and for missouri i brought a source — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlAboud83 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 01 August 2016 (UTC) http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/trump-clinton-in-virtual-tie-in-missouri/article_ecbca03a-ea36-5bef-bf8c-fcb817cc7c31.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlAboud83 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 01 August 2016 (UTC) Oregan:http://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/313880-192141-governors-race-tight-trump-in-trouble-here-new-poll-shows Connecticut:https://www.qu.edu/images/polling/ct/ct06072016_Cvf63kbw.pdf AlAboud83 (talk) 18:19, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"known to be Dem strongholds" is not relevant for this map. This map only shows the results of the latest polling. For Connecticut, the Quinnipiac poll has two relevant questions, and the one which includes third party candidate(s) is preferred. So, Clinton's lead is 5%, which is not large enough based on a margin of error of 2.7%. For Oregon, the poll you cite was done in June and is not the latest poll. For Missouri, there are two polls that ended on July 24, and the one with the lowest margin of error is preferred. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 19:05, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

then how the map is supposed to be updated and explain what has that suppose to do with the margin of error in the polls.AlAboud83 (talk) 15:19, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The margin of error is necessary to determine whether a lead is significant enough to shade a state for a certain candidate. The margin of error is applied to the percentage for each candidate. As a result, a candidate's lead must be twice the margin of error in order for a state to be shaded for that candidate. It is critical to understand this concept in order to update the map correctly. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 16:37, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

but the latest polls supports my edits in all 3 states,connecticut,oregan,missouriAlAboud83 (talk) 17:15, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have already explained why that is not true. The latest polls, and how they are treated on the map, can be found in this table. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 18:58, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

South Dakota poll[edit]

http://www.keloland.com/news/article/politics/polling-data-shows-trump-leads-in-south-dakota can you add it to the map and does it meet requirements.AlAboud83 (talk) 00:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This poll is included in the discussion on this talk page. I did not participate in that discussion. The consensus was to not include them, in part due to incomplete information. -Spiffy sperry (talk) 14:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

the new shade[edit]

the new red shading is too bright.AlAboud83 (talk) 20:37, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User Prcc27 fixed this by going back to the original shade of red and changing the shade of orange to one that has better contrast. --Spiffy sperry (talk) 13:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]