134
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 66:
Line 66: + + + +
File talk:Wikipedia scandals.jpg (view source)
Revision as of 03:27, October 11, 2007
, 03:27, October 11, 2007no edit summary
We don't need to make any conclusions. In fact, reporting the Foundations own stats here actually ''gives'' them credibility. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:26, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
We don't need to make any conclusions. In fact, reporting the Foundations own stats here actually ''gives'' them credibility. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 22:26, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
:In that case then, why not get a graph that shows this trend ANNUALLY. Wouldn't that make a lot more sense? To show it DAILY holds little significance in the law of averages. But also consider, we are still IN the year 2007, so they are still getting money obviously. I don't want to do the math, but you would have to divide by the months and multiply by 12 and all that.
:Also, do you see what I mean about the line dipping below $500? I hope you see that. Graphs should be accurate or throw them out! Anyway... this is your article, I am not working on it. I am just trying to help out. If you are going to be narrow minded about this graph, that is your business. I hope you won't though. And I hope someone else (preferably another Sysop) can weigh in on this. [[User:Jason|Jason]] 23:27, 10 October 2007 (EDT)