I took a long break from working on this project because all these numbers and transcribing sort of small and somewhat blurry Japanese text into English to the best of my ability was a real strain on my eyes and brain, but I figured I should dive back into it. I am currently working on the June 1995 chart.
And as I'm working on the chart and get into the 70s, I noticed that something was slightly off. Several games in the "Previous Month" column (the second column from the left) were one number off from what they should be. As I looked at later ranked entries I noticed that, indeed, several numbers were off by one. Namely, I looked at "Alisia Dragoon" which in the June 1995 chart says was placed at 73rd place the previous month. According to my transcribed chart of May 1995, and double checking the actual May 1995 charts, 73rd place was "Star Cruiser." In fact, Alisia Dragoon was ranked at 242 in May 1995.
When I first transcribed the May 1995 charts, I did find it a bit odd that Alisia Dragoon had a drastic drop in ranking for that month. Very few games in these charts change positions in such a large degree, especially titles that, by this point, were already a couple years old. Usually, they maintain their average score, with a few updated numbers pushing it slightly one way or the other, as new games enter the charts causing the majority of ranking displacement.
All of a sudden, in June 1995, it is back up to roughly the area it was previously, with a different previous month listed, and pretty much every ranking below it adjusted.
Up to this point, there were very few typos or errors of this sort in the magazine's run. At most, it'll be a typo with the average score but the ranking placement was correct otherwise, or maybe they forget to include a number on the chart somewhere. This is probably the biggest error on the charts that I have seen so far. My only assumption is that somebody made an error with the May 1995 Alicia Dragoon ranking (either calculating the average score for it wrong or did a copy-paste error and accidentally gave Alicia Dragoon some other game's average score, although it doesn't look like any other game got this error) and this was silently corrected in the June 1995 chart. Looking through the side bar text and notes accompanied by the chart, they don't seem to draw any attention to the error at all, so this is all just my theory on the situation.
I guess this is a good time to reiterate something I've always said about these sorts of publications. I find old magazines like this to be a good primary source for researching video game history, culturally or otherwise. But also, these are popular publications and not professional, and should always be approached not as absolute facts on pages, but rather a sort of general idea of what things were probably like in the gaming landscape of the time, to be taken with whatever amount of salt and critical thinking you want to approach it with. My fascination with this gigantic monthly "reader ranking" system is that this is about the closest thing to hard statistics you can get that paint an idea of what was probably popular (or reviled) during this time period. The hard numbers being thrown around and the actual rankings don't really matter THAT much; it's more the gist of the rankings and scores. They shouldn't be interpreted as "Lunar: Eternal Blue (1st place in June 1995 with an avg. score of 9.3867) is definitely more popular or better than Langrisser II (5th place in June 1995 with an average score of 9.0688)" but rather, both Lunar: Eternal Blue and Langrisser II were among the most popular games of this era.
EDIT: It turns out that only the games that were in the 73 - 242 "previous month" rankings were affected by this issue and were adjusted one number up. The rest are numbered properly. So that makes my theory that they made a weird error with Alisia Dragoon make sense. I might have to double check some other numbers and see if maybe it was a situation where they swapped Alisia Dragoon and some other game by mistake.