Talk:List of Philippine television ratings for 2008

Tambayan Philippines Start‑class Low‑importance

	Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Tambayan PhilippinesWikipedia:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesTemplate:WikiProject Tambayan PhilippinesPhilippine-related
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Reminders

I'm expecting this article will be flooded with fanboys of every color. With that in mind, revisions will be reverted if it doesn't comply with any of the criteria:

All edits without references will be reverted. Don't engage in an edit war for you will be blocked.
All edits on the current week for the "Weekly ratings" will be temporarily hidden until the week is done.
Currently, we're using PEP.ph, as much as possible we should keep off from tabloids even if they publish the same thing since we can use the more reliable PEP.ph. If you have other sources aside from PEP.ph, list it here first so that it can be evaluated as per external link guidelines.

Thanks and happy editing. --Howard the Duck 16:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many regard PEP as a "tabloid" website. Also it is currently own by GMA network. The whole article seems to be geared to reinforce GMA network spins on the ratings competition. Example: overemphasizing the "Mega Manila" aspects. Also, AGB is under scrutiny for rating manipulation allegations. Regardless, ratings fluctuates all the time, I don't see this as very "encyclopedic". This article would only serves best for the "fanboys"71.107.250.97 (talk) 04:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get the fact the GMA owns PEP? And PEP is a "tabloid" website? I'd say it's even a tad better than Page Six. Also, Mega Manila ratings are located way below, and the page has been structured to give prominence to the NUTAM; the problem is the NUTAM is released irregularly so you can't accurately compare each release to the other since the encompass different lengths of time.

AGB's scrutiny is duly linked at the see also section -- there's even a full article for that. It is up for the reader to decide for himself whether this is true or not, Wikipedia doesn't and shouldn't force anyone to believe it.

As for ratings fluctuation, see List of Australian television ratings for 2008 for which this article was "ripped off" from.

Nevertheless, if you still believe this article is inappropriate here, you can always use the AFD process. --Howard the Duck 06:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added a tag

I have added the "confusing" tag in the article. It didn't clarify the difference between NUTAM, weekly ratings, monthly ratings etc. How did AGB or any research firm come up with that figure? --Jojit (talk) 02:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've transferred much of the info at the AGB Nielsen Philippines article. --Howard the Duck 06:54, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latest ratings

Why should there be a "latest ratings" section? It is completely unnecessary and isn't appropriate. 119.95.17.214 (talk) 00:08, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Performance

In this table the ratings are tabulated from monday to friday to show the program's performance for the week. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.mi. shinley (talk • contribs) 01:16, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not needed. Wikipedia is not PEP.ph. --Howard the Duck 01:17, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is important

Weekly performance is vital because, we can determine the average rating and certainly predict ratings the next week. And mainly, we can determine which episode shown is highly attended and lowly viewed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.mi. shinley (talk • contribs) 01:25, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How is that relevant to the article, as an entry in an encyclopedia—which may be subject to printing and issuing in a static form? —C.Fred (talk) 01:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think people go to Wikipedia to find out about the latest TV ratings in the Philippines. --Howard the Duck 01:33, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly, what I added this time is informative, I know that wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it must contain all-time records, i got this from ikuwaderno and the prominence —Preceding unsigned comment added by R.mi. shinley (talk • contribs) 01:13, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs aren't reliable sources. And someone called User:Theprominence has been banned here. --Howard the Duck 07:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NUTAM Market comprise of only 38%

Who wrote this????

NUTAM supposed to be 100% of all the "Urban Markets" in the Philippines INCLUDING MEGA MANILA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.146.72 (talk) 06:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the article seems to be authored by a GMA Network fan.

Besides, The whole thing look like an Almanac where we archive everything single rating result.

We should stick in a broader sense of explaining this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.146.72 (talk) 06:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Follow Up

This article is truly ''GMA sided''. I think Wikipedia should refer their ratings on AGB-Nielsen or NUTAM and not on other website such as PEP, which is popularly known to be made by GMA New Media, a subsidiary of the said network. If it is so,then PEP, Wikipedia or the kind contributing author must display the real country-wide numbers for weekly ratings and most watched section and not "for Mega Manila only". According to <ref>Wikipedia</ref>, "Rating" is the percentage of potential listeners Since listeners (or viewers) are not only in Metro. Plus, The percentage division must be revised: When did "Mega Manila got the 48% of the total TV households" combining it with the Luzon will be 76%. Therefore, 24% belongs to Visayas and Mindanao? Is it because Luzon is highly urbanized city? Dealing with Market shares: Mega Manila represents 52% while the remaining percent shares come from the regions. ---- What I wanted about this article is not just about ratings. It's about authority of reference and PEP is not a good example. In conclusion, this article must be revised. Else, it will be a new candidate for deletion: ''Blatant Advertising'' of PEP on GMA, ''Notabiltity'', and ''Inappropriate'' in a way that weekly review must be based as country-wide.

PEP is not owned by GMA. What AGB Nielsen spews out is on PEP. PEP doesn't conduct ratings surveys, they rely on AGB Nielsen and other ratings agency. So AGB Nielsen = PEP. They're identical.

As you can notice, the NUTAM is displayed first. When you say about NUTAM, you'd only factor urban Philippines which is 39% of the Philippines; hence when the figures say "33%", it means 33% of urban Philippines. The rest of the 61% isn't included, maybe there are no TVs in the area.

Now, 52% of that 39% (or 20% of the 100%) is Mega Manila; now when you say 33% of Mega Manila, that means it only encompasses Mega Manila (Metro Manila, Bulacan, Rizal, Cavite and Laguna).

And we don't "archive everything single rating result" since if that was the case this won't be formatted a la top 10 and instead we just copy-paste everything that's on PEP. --Howard the Duck 11:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]