This wiki is a XML full dump clone of "Heroes Wiki", the main wiki about the Heroes saga that has been shut down permanently since June 1, 2020. The purpose of this wiki is to keep online an exhaustive and accurate database about the franchise.

Talk:Nielsen Ratings

From Heroes Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
See also:

Talk:Nielsen Ratings/Season One

Talk:Nielsen Ratings/Season Three
  • I'd just like to state for the record that Nielson is in fact the devil. They murder perfectly good television shows with their flawed processes. (Just a little steam to let out) ---- Ohmyn0.jpgOhmyn0talk.jpg 03:02, 4 July 2007 (EDT)
  • Just a note-to-self and other editors that it looks like the actual Nielson ratings come out the Monday after an episode airs, and the Fast National ratings come out only 1-2 days after the airing (much quicker).--MiamiVolts (talk) 03:24, 26 September 2007 (EDT)


So where did the Nielson ratings posted Sept. 30th come from? According to the Nielson Media website, Heroes scored a 9.9 rating with 16.972 million total viewers last week. Of course, that's total viewers (not just 18-49). Also, can we note somewhere that Heroes was 10th among the top 10 shows last week?--MiamiVolts (talk) 12:19, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

  • Bigfoot Lover on Bionic Wiki is using the following sources, and I've updated the ratings for Season 2 by them here:
Fast Nationals rating and share are available one to two days after airing from (rating/share is specified next to the program name)
18--49 yro rating and share (final Nielson version) are published on the forum by the following week
18--49 yro viewers is published at the following week as well--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:07, 10 October 2007 (EDT)


This article needs to be merged and then deleted the same way that the article video on demand was done. --Pinkkeith 12:34, 10 October 2007 (EDT)

  • Merged with what?--MiamiVolts (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
    • Merged into the Heroes article. Right now it's transcluded, but I've always felt that the Nielson ratings don't require their own article but instead should only exist as a section of the Heroes article. (Admin 17:09, 10 October 2007 (EDT))
      • Another option, since Heroes is pretty huge, would be to leave it as-is, but trim the transcluded part using noincludes to be just the current season, with an includeonly link back to the full article. I hesitate to think how Heroes will look by the end of the season, let alone by season 5.--Hardvice (talk) 17:19, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
        • I've just never been a fan of an individual article named "Nielson ratings"; it always seemed out of place to me. I've always thought that it should either be merged into Heroes or perhaps exist as a subpage of Heroes. (Admin 17:23, 10 October 2007 (EDT))
        • Well that is a stupid thought, the whole point of WWW was to spread it up instead of having everything no the same page. And that folding system needs to be improved, I came to this page to ask why there was no ratings from season one, until I from comments here realised that they were hidding and needed to be figured out (another dumb implementation) --IceHunter 22:42, 29 November 2007 (EST)
          • A little late in this discussion, cause it was already decided to keep it a subpage. As for the hiding, it says to click "show" to see the individidual episode data in the header. Is there something else it should say?--MiamiVolts (talk) 22:59, 29 November 2007 (EST)


  • Perhaps a subpage is a better option. Heroes is just so frickin' bloated.--Hardvice (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
    • I agree about only including the current season on Heroes. As for deleting the article, I'm not sure why that's needed. Unlike video on demand, the ratings listing will continue to grow as long as the series continues to air new episodes, and only the current season's ratings are relevant. We can keep the article as a kind of archive of past seasons. As for converting to a subpage, that's okay but I'm not sure we need a different subpage for each season.--MiamiVolts (talk) 17:45, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
      • Agreed. I'd much rather just move this to be a subpage of Heroes than maintain separate subpages for each season (not that anyone suggested that).--Hardvice (talk) 17:49, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
        • Agreed. I like the noinclude/includeonly approach as well to limit it to the current season while providing a link to the full listing. Or you could use the collapsible tables code to show only the current season. (Admin 17:51, 10 October 2007 (EDT))
          • Noinclude/includeonly works best for limiting such huge articles that are already seperated. Hiding/collapsing the text isn't the same as not being sent the text. Collapsible tables are more for articles with spoiler info or articles that can't be broken any further like theory articles. If we do move this article to a subpage, I suggest keeping the article name as a redirect and to do the same with video on demand to allow for easier searching.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
            • Search wouldn't be affected much either way since searching for either would return the page since it would match on the section heading. (Admin 18:34, 10 October 2007 (EDT))
              • I don't have any problem with the page as it is--subpage or its own page, it's all the same to me. I'm not a fan of just dumping all the info onto the Heroes page, though--I'd rather see this page fleshed out with each season, including information in a Notes section about rankings (10 out of 10, for instance).... I didn't realize that both seasons were being included on Heroes--definitely needs to be trimmed. Also, I'd personally prefer that just one or two columns of the table be included. Tricky, I know, but it could be done with templates or lots of noincludes. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:37, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
                • Did you check the collapsible table link I mentioned before? It might be what you're looking for. (Admin 18:39, 10 October 2007 (EDT))
                  • It looks like it might work. I'm not smart enough to be able to look at the help page and figure out if it would work--I'd have to test it out. Regardless, it seems like a good tool. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:53, 10 October 2007 (EDT)


Ok, I just trimmed the include to just Season Two. Ryan is also correcting it. I'm not sure why he'd want only a couple columns printed, though. Looks good as-is, imho. Anyways, I still think you should re-consider the redirects: Searching for video on demand lists both the Daniel Linderman and the Heroes articles, and from the text shown, it not obvious that anything exists. Searching for Nielson Ratings returns only the current article, not Heroes.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:12, 10 October 2007 (EDT)

  • I agree, I'd like to see a redirect for "Video on demand" jumping to Heroes#Video on Demand--I don't see the harm, only the good. As for the columns on the page, it's mostly because I don't understand what all the numbers mean. :) More seriously, I think it's just a lot of unnecessary info on a very big article. It's fine for this page, but not so much for the Heroes page. Just my opinion, one I'm not terribly tied to if people would rather see the entire table on the Heroes page. -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 19:23, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
    • I'll add some more help to the actual article. Hopefully yourself and others will then be able to understand it better.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:50, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
      • Ok, help added. Feel free review and port it to Bionic Wiki.--MiamiVolts (talk) 20:17, 10 October 2007 (EDT)


I do not pretend to know what anything on this page is about. Nor do I really care, personally. However, I came across some ratings for Kindred at Hollywood Reporter (10.7 million, 5.0/11) and I have absolutely no idea what they mean. I think it means that 10.7 million total viewers watched Heroes this week, but I don't see a column for it on the graph. Anyway, could somebody add info for this week's episode? Thanks! -- RyanGibsonStewart (talk) 18:51, 10 October 2007 (EDT)

  • We have a column for the 18-49 viewers, but not the total viewers. 18-49 viewer info comes out next week. I added the fast national data for Kindred.--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:17, 10 October 2007 (EDT)


Would anyone object to my renaming this article to Nielsen Ratings? The company doing the rating system has been known as Nielsen Media Research for a while now...--MiamiVolts (talk) 16:38, 23 October 2007 (EDT)

  • No comment so I went ahead and corrected it.--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:43, 24 October 2007 (EDT)

Collapsible tables

  • There's not any way to exclude the totals from the collapse, is there? I tried making it a header row but that didn't work. It would be awesome if the table showed totals, and when you clicked it, it showed individual episodes.--Hardvice (talk) 17:41, 9 November 2007 (EST)
    • Yes, you can keep the averages (I think that's what you mean) when collapsed by using tables within tables. I'll try that. You can undo it if you don't like the result.--MiamiVolts (talk) 18:30, 9 November 2007 (EST)
      • This might also be a cool table to use sort on. It would let people see the episodes ranked by ratings.--Hardvice (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2007 (EST)
        • Ok, I've changed Season One for now. Check it out and maybe you can help. It's not easy to make the tables flush, as it looks like the wikitable format doesn't do flush well. Maybe strait html table tags would work better?--MiamiVolts (talk) 19:12, 9 November 2007 (EST)
          • It's really nifty, but I'd imagine it'll be a bear to force everything to line up nicely unless we force width on everything. We can probably get close by overriding all the padding and spacing. We should still be able to use the collapsible class with HTML tables. I'll give it a go.--Hardvice (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2007 (EST)
            • OK, here are two options: one nielsen}}&oldid=122132 collapsed, one nielsen}}&oldid=122134 collapsed & sortable. The sortable uglies things up considerably, but is kind of neat/useful.--Hardvice (talk) 00:39, 10 November 2007 (EST)
              • Incidentally, these look ok in Firefox & Safari but don't line up at all in IE. Oh well. Not absolutely essential that we show the averages.--Hardvice (talk) 00:41, 10 November 2007 (EST)
                • Heh, the whole purpose of the seperate table was to keep the averages shown. For that matter, we could do that table using wikitable code and still used a class of "collapsible collapsed sortable". I'm going to undo my changes for now, and add some new data. I think you should just delete the template or move it to a subpage for now, as the verticle spacing is still way off.--MiamiVolts (talk) 00:52, 10 November 2007 (EST)
                  • What's frustrating is that it's near perfect on FF and Safari, whereas the current one is much closer on IE but way off in FF & Safari -- and there's no browser-dependent CSS. GRRR.--Hardvice (talk) 01:02, 10 November 2007 (EST)
                    • Well, we could expland the stuff we did for ietop to add a custom CSS for IE, however, check out my mods to Nielsen Ratings and let me know what you think. I added the sortable option, but the averages have to collapse. It's not so bad, imho.--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:38, 10 November 2007 (EST)
                      • It's a little icky that it sorts the averages into the table, though.--Hardvice (talk) 01:41, 10 November 2007 (EST)


It doesn't bother me that much that the averages are included since you can re-sort them back to the bottom using the airdate sort button. However, we could modify the "sortable" javascript to not sort last lines for tables with a "nosortlastline" class. What do you think, Hardvice?--MiamiVolts (talk) 01:51, 10 November 2007 (EST)

  • Actually, I've got it all matched up and excluding the averages (and not collapsing them). Aligns perfect in IE, FF, and Safari. See template:season one nielsen.--Hardvice (talk) 01:57, 10 November 2007 (EST)

11/16/09 Ratings

Nielsen's Fast National Ratings for Monday have been delayed till at least Wednesday morning due to a power outage at Nielsen's Florida facility on Monday. The outage has also delayed Nielsen's final ratings release for last week till tomorrow morning as well.--MiamiVolts (talk) 23:03, 17 November 2009 (EST)