A weak opening
“I analyzed data and made a dashboard.” This gives no question, source, inclusion rule or independently checkable result.
A stronger opening
“I reconciled six fictional product records against independent closing counts and isolated a one-unit discrepancy for P02 without assuming its cause.”
Why the stronger version works
It names the scope, independent work, method and evidence boundary. It does not claim a real employer, client impact or an outcome outside the extract.
Suggested repository structure
README with question and reproduction commands; data with dictionary and permissions; src with your implementation; tests with expected totals; outputs with chart/table and decision note. Keep answer keys separate from your own attempt.
Evidence to annotate
Expected closing by SKU14,15,13,2,11,40; counted 14,14,13,2,11,40. P02 difference-1; all other differences 0. Total expected 95, counted 94. Explain why each validation exists. Include one failed check you investigated and how you resolved it, rather than hiding all intermediate problems.
Your independent task
Reproduce the analysis yourself, then add a documented extension or alternative presentation. Credit the original fixture and explain your contribution. No unit costs, count timestamps or movement evidence are supplied; do not estimate loss value or blame a person.
Career note
Portfolio examples and resume guidance do not guarantee interviews or a job. Use your own verified work; do not copy the sample as commercial experience.
Try the activity before reading its reference. Keep your sources, commands and assumptions with your work. Companion activities are unsaved self-practice and do not award a certificate or change lesson progress.