Want to get involved? We're always looking for ideas and content for Weekly Challenges.
SUBMIT YOUR IDEA@Blake,
thank you so much for your wonderful work. It helped a lot organizing the data in a useful manner.
In regards with the third question, I guess they meant "[year] = 2010", not "2020 < [year] < 2100" . I did the "= 2100" and got the same results they offered.
Also, in the last filter for the 3rd question, instead of comparing each men % and womend % in order to get the results (like in "[perc_men] > [perc_women]"), I simply passed a filter asking "men_percentage > 0.5", which seems to use less data and be a little more efficient.
Let me know what you think of that. I'm learning A LOT with your posts here. Thanks again!
Hi @jenny
Thanks for sharing your output. I tried replicating the Batch macro step that you had created particularly where you had used Filter to categorize 'Males' and 'Females' and link it back with the transposed data using "Append Fields" function.
How does it link the 2 fields which "Header" containing Males, Females, and Totals with the transposed data using Append Fields?
This is the output I saw at my end when I tried replicating your macro,
As you can observe, in the output section, It duplicating the same row for the female header as well where the Value is the same.
I was hoping if you could assist me with this step.It would be a great help.
Many Thanks,
Ashish Nelson
Ran the problem, then looked and saw others with the same issues I found with the data not matching the solution. I'm thinking there is a possible blog article to write on this.
Here's my attempt
Like everyone else my solution didn't match the one provided.
I also think there may be an error on the female population page for Peru which is the same exact number as Dominican Republic, so depending on whether you calculate the pct male vs. total or vs. female you get a different answer as well.
just like @Aaron_Harter - I took a dynamic approach to reading in the sheets