Na, they're not consoles plain and simple. Bending the definition because it would suit you is pretty ridiculous.

edit: ah okay nevermind 

Here are a few very necessary critiques, though I see some others have already positively contributed.

1. Handhelds are not consoles. Do not conflate them. That would be like taking a demographic poll and putting Eastern European immigrants and African Americans in as one category.

2. Where is the representation for third-party sales? That's hugely important.

3. Putting a "top twenty" metric next to the other cumulative ones feels more than a bit arbitrary.

Well, honestly there is little to debate. We just need to check any dictionary. let's see the Merriam Webster:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/console

5: an electronic system that connects to a display (as a television set) and is used primarily to play video games

By that definition, we could say that the display is the screen of the handheld. Maybe it's a stretch for some, but I think it counts.

3DS is a console? by that logic isn't every smartphone ever a console too?

1. I was looking for an other word.. and was thinking on calling them "dedicated gamer hardware" but I choose "consoles" And I do think it fits the purpose

2. This tread is only about Nintendo VS Sony

3. I think it's a good way to see how many "hot" games they each make/have

No it does not count. And this is only a street for those trying to make something something that it is not.

If having a screen makes it a console, then every tablet, smartphone and even smwrtwatch that can also play games is also a console. Let's stop moving the posts. A console is a set top box that is connected to a TV. A console cannot exist without its tether to a TV. Its not a portable device that you can take with you where ever you are going to.

I don't see the problem. A videogame console is a device whose main purpose is to play videogames. It was created for that. The difference between a home console and handheld is that the home console needs to be hooked up to a screen, and the handheld was made with a screen installed to the device already, so it can be used on the go.

Mobiles and tablets are not videogame consoles because their main purpose is not gaming, they were designed to be all in one devices. Gaming was never a priority to them, just another function they can do.

1. I definitely agree with the consensus here... One category is already conventionally called consoles. Furthermore, combining them completely falsifies the data. Those are different markets with very different implications, pricing, revenue streams, audiences, and future-proofing.  No matter what you call them (though I think you should follow known convention/gamer parlance and call them "consoles" and "handhelds"), combining them makes the data you are displaying quite meaningless.

2. An enormous element of Sony and Nintendo's competition is over third-party game sales. Third-party game sales are quite indicative of a platform's health. Not only do third-party sales contribute to the appeal of the hardware, but the platform manufacturers get a cut of those sales. Whenever Final Fantasy XIV sells on PS4 or Just Dance sells on Wii U, Sony/Nintendo get their respective cuts of those sales. Ignoring third-party sales is ignoring essential data in the competition and just makes your presentation look misleadingly selective.

3. That may be, though it is nonetheless arbitrary. After all, why cut it at 20? But that's fine if you present the data in a different way. Perhaps put it below the bar graphs and list the titles. Presenting that data the same way as the rest makes it feel like it's intended to be less arbitrary/"for fun" than it is. It's not illegitimate information, but it's the wrong way to present it. c:

Also!

4. Have you considered expanding the data with regional information? I think what you are doing could be very interesting if expanded, improved, and professionalised.