Wikidata:Property proposal/viewers

number of viewers/listeners edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

Done: number of viewers/listeners (P5436) (Talk and documentation)

Description	number of viewers of a television or broadcasting program; web traffic on websites.
Represents	audience measurement (Q847520)
Data type	Quantity
Template parameter	"Viewers" in en:Template:Episode list/sublist
Domain	instances of broadcasting program (Q11578774), website (Q35127)
Example 1	Broken Bow (Q2629417) → 12500000
Example 2	Morning Edition (Q3088585) → 14900000
Example 3	Google Search (Q9366) → 296034944
See also	determination method (P459)

Motivation

To import each episode data from w:List of One Piece episodes (season 1) --Ans (talk) 04:38, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support Hmm, this seems useful generally for broadcast media, I would have thought we already had a property for this but I can't find one. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:23, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Somehow I was convinced of that too, but apparently we don't.
  --- Jura 11:56, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Better to call this something like "audience", then it will suit for radio shows, concerts, etc. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:31, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support David (talk) 08:28, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment readership (P4295) already exists as its own stand-alone property. Thierry Caro (talk) 10:07, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, the name mixes three different names. If we want to create a property, we have to decide on one name and preferably with reasons why it's preferable to the others.ChristianKl (✉) 12:15, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Newspaper and magazine readership should now be excluded, as readership (P4295) already exists.

I now think "household rating" is preferred, as it cover both television and radio program. However, it not cover website. "viewers" may cover both website and television, but not cover radio.

I'm not sure "audience" will cover website or not.

However, I don't see much need to be used for neither radio nor website, so we may not try to cover all of them now. If we later found them all are needed, can we expand the scope to cover all of them later?

I prefer "household rating" to cover only tv/radio, rather than "viewers" for tv/website, since tv and radio are more closely ralated in many aspect than tv and website.

Or can we instead expand the scope of existing readership (P4295) to also cover tv and radio?

--Ans (talk) 18:40, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Current suggestion for a label is "household rating". I can't find that on w:Audience measurement. Any ref for this term?
--- Jura 18:58, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe for a more generic name, "viewer share" would be preferable. Should this only be in percentages?
  --- Jura 18:52, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Should be "viewer rating" so it can be any units, not only percentage, but better be "audience rating" to also include radios. But "audience rating" may be confusing with content rating system (Q5165090), so use "audience share rating" to solve those issues. Summary: I propose "audience share rating". --Ans (talk) 12:14, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't quite get why we'd include "rating" in the label? Isn't it about share or size?
      --- Jura 19:39, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      - Removed that.
        --- Jura 16:53, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Percentages/shares alone are not all that useful, if we don't include information about what exactly was measured. Measurements and their meaning can vary quite a bit by country and time period. And the general structure of the television market also varies by country. Shares/percentages can refer only to the first broadcast, include parallel broadcasts on SD and HD channels, include digital recordings (viewed on the same day, live + 3 days, live + 7 days), include streams, etc.. And we also need information about the source of the measured share/number of viewers (Nielsen ratings (Q1618101), Broadcasters' Audience Research Board (Q4972121), GfK (Q701088), etc.). --Kam Solusar (talk) 16:13, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Totally agree. We really should think it through before creating a property. In my home country AMR (Q432913) and SHR (Q1254128) are the standard while Gross rating point (Q391931) and Target rating point (Q1250572) are never really reported, while press releases like to exaggarate by using the reach (Q489398). And that's only television, radio has AQH share (Q4653513) and Time spent listening (Q7805435). – Máté (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Maybe determination method (P459) as qualifier.
    --- Jura 16:53, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support we can use that for Youtube channels ZellmerLP (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ans, ArthurPSmith, Pigsonthewing, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Thierry Caro:@ChristianKl, Jura1, Kam Solusar, Máté, ZellmerLP: After reading all the comments I'm inclined to create this property as "viewership" (to follow the convention of readership (P4295)), with aliases "number of viewers" and "audience". If there are no more comments, I will create it in the next days.--Micru (talk) 19:23, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank plan makes sense to me... ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:30, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Per my comment above, I am opposed to that. Radio shows, for example, do not have "viewers. Label it "audience", or "audience number", and use "viewership" as an alias. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:40, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Pigsonthewing: Your concern seems reasonable, however I find that neither the label "audience" nor "audience number" would be clear enough. What about "number of viewers/listeners"?--Micru (talk) 16:25, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sometimesits the number of viewers watching a certain show, sometimes its their share (of the population/of viewers altogether at that point of time), sometimes its the share of households (with a TV). We need a general enough name to cover all measurement methods around the world. – Máté (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Máté: The audience share seems to be a concept different enough to deserve another property. If this proposal it is about the audience share, then it should be about that only. Why do you need to do everything with one property? --Micru (talk) 17:29, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - @Micru: It was not my idea: the proposal itself says “number of viewers or rating” and rating is usally defined as a ratio. I indicated above that this is a complex issue. – Máté (talk) 04:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Máté: This will be as difficult as we want it to be. The original label of this proposal was "viewers", so in that spirit I have changed the label to "number of viewers/listeners". I have also adapted the example. For "audience share/ratings" a new proposal will be needed.--Micru (talk) 08:08, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Micru: Then why not have separate properties for the number of viewers on average per minute (AMR) and the number of viewers watching for at least a minute (RCH)? It seems a bit arbitrary to split by "unit". – Máté (talk) 08:48, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Máté: You can add that information with determination method (P459).--Micru (talk) 09:55, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Micru: Sure, but in that case what is the point in splitting these from share-type viewership data? – Máté (talk) 09:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Máté: So that data re-users get relevant results to their queries. Even if it is not the same, it is more relevant to mix different kinds of "number of viewers", than to mix also "audience share".--Micru (talk) 11:51, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Micru: I don't quite see how it is more relevant to see absolute AMR and RCH together than seeing absolute AMR and AMR share together. – Máté (talk) 06:15, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Máté: You can have an absolute number or a share, both have a determination method. The determination method is not always available, however you can always know if it is an absolute number or a share. Since we have a known piece of information, that can be the basis to make an initial distinction by having two distinct properties. If more information is available, then a further distinction can be made with qualifiers.--Micru (talk) 07:03, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - We have descriptions for the purposes of disambiguation and explanation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:27, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think it would be good to have samples of different things this is meant to cover. Removing "ready" in the meantime.
--- Jura 05:17, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jura1: I've added two additional samples for the things it is meant to cover. Note that qualifiers would be needed to indicate that for Google it refers to montlhly unique users [1], and for the Morning Edition it refers to weekly listeners (w:en:List of most-listened-to radio programs).--Micru (talk) 11:09, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Micru, Pigsonthewing, Jura1, ArthurPSmith, Thierry Caro: @ZellmerLP, Ans, ChristianKl, Kam Solusar, Máté: Done: number of viewers/listeners (P5436). − Pintoch (talk) 13:56, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]