Talk:Weekly Shōnen Jump

Clarification of circulation categories

Is there any source to explain the difference between Total Circulation and Magazine Sales?

Untitled

Somebody please help, I messed up big time.

-Eclispeo — Preceding undated comment added 17:24, 23 March 2021‎ (UTC)

Issues with Circulation Figures

Recent Circulation Figures Updated - I assume the reason the past 3 years of circulation figures were never updated because the source that gave yearly reports stopped doing them. However, the quarterly data from the exact same source has always been available. Each yearly report was just the 4 quarterly reports averaged together. So I updated the past 3 years doing exactly that. There's no reason to have missing data when it's readily available.

Circulation Source - The years from 1968 to 2006 all use the same source for their circulation figures. The issue with this, is that that source literally references the Japanese version of the Weekly Shounen Jump Wiki as the source for its numbers. Which would then mean that the source for all of this information is another Wikipedia page. I'm not that experienced on here, but I'm pretty sure that doesn't count as credible. To be honest though, I think the information being there is better than it not being there; and the JP page seems to have their sources in order, so it's probably fine to keep it there...

Majorly Incorrect Issue Pricing - I don't know how someone managed to do it, but virtually none of the changes in price from this source that have been used from 1974 to 2012 have been correct. The source itself only listed the price of WSJ in two years: 1994 and 2007 - and these don't even represent price changes, just the price in that randomly chosen year. All the other prices used were from completely different magazines. The source I found for the increase in price to 290 Yen goes over the history of price changes for the magazine, and although it might not be entirely comprehensive of every price change made, it's a lot better than using the prices of other magazines to determine the price of WSJ. Though changing all of the prices would also necessitate recalculating all of the sales revenues, and I'd prefer someone more skilled than I to do that. Also it should be noted, that WSJ releases special edition issues where the price is 10 Yen more. So that source that was used to show the price increased to 250 Yen from 240 Yen, was most likely just referencing a special edition issue, not the standard price. There are special edition issues right now that are 300 Yen, but the standard price of an issue is still 290 Yen.

Manga Series Circulation - Given that the pricing has been wrong, that would also mean this entire section would need to be looked at and redone. But I'm having trouble figuring out exactly what methodology is being used to even calculate this. Recently someone added in Black Clover, yet why are 350 chapters being included in the number, when about 150 of those chapters (assuming ~50 chapters/year) came out in the past 3 years where there had been absolutely no circulation figures posted, until I had just added them a day ago? How was the average circulation calculated? You can't just average the years it's been serializing and multiply it by the total chapter count. Different years will have different amounts of chapters released. If we want to make this actually accurate, you should take the amount of chapters published in a given year, multiply it by the yearly average and the price of the issue at that time, and then do that for every year, adding all of them together at the end. And for a lot of these series, don't we also need to adjust for inflation, maybe in a separate column? Also, what is the cutoff for what can be added to this list? Is it a certain threshold of circulation? Revenue? The methodology should also be posted somewhere so that we're not all doing different things to get these numbers.

For example, this is how it should be done IMO: Series A has 190 total chapters published from 2013 through 2016. They started later in the 2013 fiscal year, so only 40 chapters were released that year (my main point is that each year should not be weighted exactly the same, because different amounts of chapters will be released in different years, which simply averaging the years together would not account for). The average circulation in 2013 (2,701,042) x 40 Chapters = 108,041,680 copies in 2013. Then you do the 50 chapters that were released in 2014 with 2014's average circulation, 2015, etc. Then you add them all up for the Total and divide by the total amount of chapters for the average weekly. The average should come from the total, not the other way around. You should also not be counting chapters released in a fiscal year where the weekly circulation average has not come out yet. That means series like One Piece and Black Clover have no business having 1040 chapters and 350 chapters included respectively. You guys are using yearly averages that are MUCH higher than what the magazine currently produces. To calculate the sales revenue, you multiply each year's total copies that you calculated and multiply it by then Issue's Price from that year, and add them together. If adjusting for inflation, each year would have to be carefully calculated before adding together.

I'm mainly asking for veterans of this wiki page, who've worked to build it up, to discuss this. I don't want to come in and just singlehandedly change a bunch of things. But I also believe a lot of this is just incorrect or poorly done, and not representative of actual data. I'd like the information to stay updated, and also for the manga series circulations to be overhauled and include some more series. Just looking at some long running series in WSJ, Toriko, Food Wars, Haikyuu, and My Hero Academia would easily fit on this list, and you can definitely find more. Pretty much any series with a 5+ year run, especially if it's older, could make it on this list, assuming that the criteria has been 500m+ total circulation, which is what it looks like. Anyway, I hope this is even found. If there are no responses after awhile I'll start tagging some names that I see editing this page often. ManjirouEdits (talk) 04:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@ManjirouEdits: This is an old discussion, but I would definitely support the removal of the two tables included in the article. Both tables were created by Maestro2016 (talk · contribs), a sockpuppet user known for misinterpreting sales, film grosses and similar (this is not the only article where they made similar edits). I would also support the removal of notes such as: "In addition to tankōbon sales, [series title] has had a total estimated circulation of approximately [figure] copies in [magazine name]" which I'm sure were included in various articles by the same user (although I may be wrong here). Xexerss (talk) 03:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

I would be in favor of that, though I do think the Magazine Circulation table does provide useful information. Just the "Sales Revenue" and "Issue Price" columns don't need to be there at all. As far as I can tell, there is no verified amount of sales revenue available anywhere, or at least on this page, so we shouldn't be estimating it - especially when there are a multitude of factors that influence it. Though the quarterly-weekly average circulation figures throughout the years I think is valuable to keep, and we have a source that provides the information since 2008. Everything pre-2008 should not be there at all unless we have an actual source for it, especially considering most of it has been incredibly misinterpreted. Example: 1974's 1,650,000 is the peak circulation of one issue released in Summer, not the weekly average for the year. The Japanese Wiki for WSJ has a table titled "発行部数（2008年（平成20年）4月以降）一般社団法人 日本雑誌協会" with just the pure weekly averages & time periods that I think we could model ours after (it's below all of the circulation data that my link goes to). We don't need the totals/averages bolded at the bottom of our chart, nor do we really need the "Magazine Sales" column (should not say "sales" though as none of these figures are sales to begin with).

Though the "Manga Series" table should definitely be removed entirely. It's purely made to serve the biases of the people creating and adding to it. And I am absolutely in favor of removing the notes that you're talking about, as they are based on this horribly crafted table with mostly unverified or incorrect information. It's especially egregious how this note is always placed in relation to tankobon figures, when they aren't even comparable data sets. Comparing a single chapter that was printed in a magazine along with 20 other series (and yet they're attributing all of those copies printed to that one specific series) with actual volumes of manga that include ~9 chapters of that one specific series, is wild to say the least. ManjirouEdits (talk) 00:35, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Manga Plus

Change Manga Plus section to include the new MAX Subscriptions. 99.35.58.3 (talk) 04:50, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Ongoing Series

If RuriDragon is considered currently serialized, the same should be for HunterXHunter, since they're both in hiatus more or less in the same way.

Instead, Burn the witch is not considered currently serialized by any source. 185.170.137.33 (talk) 06:48, 27 November 2023 (UTC)