Publish /en/lessons/choropleth-maps-python-folium

[anisa-hawes]

Preparing files for publication.

Closes #3550

Checklist

• Assign yourself in the "Assignees" menu
• Add the appropriate "Label"
• If this PR closes an Issue, add the phrase Closes #ISSUENUMBER to your summary above
• Ensure the status checks pass: if you have difficulty fixing build errors, please contact our Publishing Manager @anisa-hawes
• Check the Netlify Preview: navigate to netlify/ph-preview/deploy-preview and click 'details' (at right)
• Assign at least one individual or team to "Reviewers"
  • [ ] if the text needs to be translated, please follow the translation request guidelines, then assign the relevant language team(s) as "Reviewers" and tag both the team as well as the managing editor in your PR.

[anisa-hawes]

Hello Alex @hawc2,

I’ve staged choropleth-maps-python-folium for publication. You can read it through in Preview and let me know if you note anything which you'd like to adjust.

We can publish this next week!

Thank you.

[hawc2]

@anisa-hawes Looks good. A couple minor things:

• This sentence - "According to Dombrowski, Gniady, and Kloster, Jupyter Notebook is" - it should be "Jupyter Notebooks are"

• There's a line of code in the Getting County Geometry Data that I'm not sure I understand - why is this code line commented out? What purpose does it serve to include it at all?:

"# counties = gpd.read_file("https://www2.census.gov/geo/tiger/GENZ2021/shp/cb_2021_us_county_5m.zip")"

The paragraph before seems to suggest either code would work, it's a bit confusing.

That's all I see, it otherwise looks great to me and ready to go!

[anisa-hawes]

Thank you, Alex @hawc2.

From what I can understand this line of code would extract data from a ZIP file hosted at a URL. As it uses the same structure as the line above, I don't think it serves to demonstrate an alternate working scenario.

I have asked Adam about whether this is necessary to include, and will let you know what he advises.

(I'll fix the broken links which are blocking this build too).

[anisa-hawes]

Hello again Alex @hawc2,

I've been in touch with Adam, and now understand that the intention was to give a choice to readers of which lines of code to use, depending on whether they wish to work with the archived dataset or the up-to-date census data.

In the previous section Getting the Fatal Force Data, this is made clear to readers. Adam agrees that we should add a similar sentence of explanation here:

As in the previous section, if you want to work with the lesson’s archived dataset, use the code as written. If you'd like to use the original Census data instead, comment-out (with #) the first line, and un-comment the second line (by removing the #).

I've made that addition: 87e5457

[hawc2]

Awesome thanks @anisa-hawes, I'll approve the pull request