Talk:Arctic Monkeys discography/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Chart Positions

Whilst collating the chart positions, I notices some discrepancies:

• Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not: Japan album Chart position was listed as reaching #9 in the main article but #11 in the old discography. Can anyone confirm the correct? - #9 was the highest.
• YI Bet You Look Good on the Dancefloor: Australia position was listed as #18 in its main article but #23 in the old discography. Confirm? Befuddled Steve 15:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
• YWhen The Sun Goes Down: Australia position was listed as #28 in its main article but #36 in the old discography. Confirm? Befuddled Steve 15:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

--Befuddled Steve 15:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea where the figures come from. Technically, I'd suggest that they violate WP:VERIFY and, on that basis, should all be deleted. Some kind of citation is required. DJR (T) 02:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I have a tendency to agree with you here. At a guess, I would say its where the single has risen up the charts after someone added the initial chart position. That's why I like putting the http://www.everyhit.com/ (UK) external link at the bottom so anyone can cross-references with it. Does anyone know if there are similar services for each country? That would be supremely useful.

Befuddled Steve 12:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

→Update: I have found out the correct Australian positions using the searchable http://www.australian-charts.com/search.asp. I have placed it in the External links for any other singles. Listing similar services would be still greatful for other countries. Befuddled Steve 15:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

On the Arctic Monkeys main page it says that "Brianstorm" was released on the 16th (yesterday). So how can it already have a chart position?(17th) i thought chart positions weren't relesed till sunday (22nd)?ColaRules 14:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Downloads are now included Doc Strange 14:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Question

What about Bigger Boys and Stolen Sweethearts? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.209.198.234 (talk • contribs) 22:31, 5 April 2007.

What about it? DJR (T) 02:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't released as a single 14:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Brianstorm EP ?

There is no Brianstorm EP it's just a long single Bencey 21:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The Curious Predicament Of "Fake Tales Of San Fransisco"

Hi. I redid the table (someone deleted it all) and I added "Fake Tales" which was a US Radio Only single. So, should we keep it in the discography? Also, someone keeps changing "Brianstorm" linked on this page to "Brainstorm". The title of the Arctic Monkeys song is intentionally(?) mispelled. It is "Brianstorm", not "Brainstorm". Doc Strange 14:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge It

Is there really any reason to have a discography section for a band with a relatively small number of releases separate from the main article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.77.94.19 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 26 April 2007.

Anyone have a copy of Billboard?

Did "Brianstorm" reach the Billboard Hot 100? Doc Strange 12:48, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Or for that matter the Modern Rock Top 40?Doc Strange 12:49, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Chart Posisition

Any point of them being next to the albums/E.P.'s/singles if they are listed below. Bencey 15:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

What about...

What about Bigger Boys and Stolen Sweethearts? It's actually a bootleg, an unofficial album, both front and back cover of the CD can be seen here [1], and even a download link down there, it features some covers and other rare tracks, but even though it's a bootleg, it should be here, right? José Daniel (the cake is a lie.) 07:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Bootlegs and unofficial albums are not official band releases and are not part of discographies. Bencey (talk) 00:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Number of singles

How come the article says there are nine singles, but then only lists six? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.182.136 (talk) 14:39, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Album Charts

The article doesn't include Irish Chart Positions, they have already had 2 number 1 albums and today reached number 1 with Humbug. This needs to be added in soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.221.196 (talk) 13:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Is nobody going to add this?? Seems to me like it's more notable than some of the others considering they've had 3 albums debut at number 1, even if someone could give me an answer..... thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.221.196 (talk) 23:49, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

iTunes Festival: London 2011

Shouldn't the official EP not be listed or mentioned here, too? Not sure about the policy... no iTunes? But isn't it all just advertising artists, music, albums, record companies...? So lets add this EP, will we? --116.118.88.109 (talk) 12:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Trimming down number of charts to 10

Yesterday I updated the tables' format to the new one, according to WP:DISCOGSTYLE#Samples. Another thing that needs to be done is limiting number of charts in the tables to 10 (WP:DISCOGSTYLE#Per-release). I already deleted the Polish chart (although I'm Polish), as the albums charted quite low in comparison to other countries. But there are still 19 charts left, of which 9 should also be deleted. In my opinion:

• UK, AUS, IRL should stay for sure, US probably as well as the largest music market,
• MEX should be deleted, as it has the lowest positions, and I think FIN, SWE, ITA and ESP are next on the list,
• 4 of these charts need to be thrown out: AUT, BEL (FL), CAN, DK, FRA, GER, JPN, MEX, NLD, NOR, NZ

In terms of the music market size, JPN, GER, FRA, CAN, NLD are the biggest of those, while BEL, NOR, AUT, NZ, DK are smaller. On the other hand, albums charted relatively low in Canada, for instance.
I'd like to hear your opinions about which ones should be kept, and which not. — Mayast (talk) 12:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Here's what the table would look like without MEX, FIN, SWE, ITA and ESP: User:Mayast/sandbox/AMdiscog. If there will be no objections to this in the next few days, I will delete these five, trimming down the number of charts to 14.
Out of the remaining 14, it seems that the charts with the lowest positions are CAN, AUS, US, GER and JPN. I think the latter three should probably stay, but CAN and AUS could also be cut. — Mayast (talk) 13:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, somebody already did the trimming. — Mayast (talk) 19:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I feel about the US being there when we've also cleansed it of the Bubbling-Under extrapolations (which is fine by me; I always felt they were incredibly misleading). If the US has to be there because of its market size, can't we just focus on the US Alternative Chart, where they've had the most relevant success? DackAttac (talk) 19:26, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. But I wouldn't mind if the bubbling-under footnotes (in their current form) stayed as well. Mayast (talk) 20:13, 17 November 2013 (UTC)