Jump to content

Talk:Robbie Williams discography

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured listRobbie Williams discography is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 4, 2013Featured list candidatePromoted


Mexican Diamond Certifications on Intensive Care

[edit]

Since there is a continuous disagreement between an anonymous IP and myself on the Mexican Certification of Intensive Care, I'd like to discuss that here rather than reverting the same edits over and over.

First, this page in AMPROFON's site (as it was suggested to be looked at in edit-summary) does not mention anything that we actually can rely on. In fact, it only says at the top Criteria for certified album sales, then in the box at the left top it says Issue date / Recognition, then right underneath that it says Issues from January 1st, 2008 (meaning Certification-issues beginning from January 1st, 2008, and no, it doesn't necessarily apply only to records released from January 1st, 2008 as it may be understood by some).

I also looked at the terms within AMPROFON, I must say that I did not come across anything like what was suggested in the Edit Summary by anon. IP. The second paragraph (in the section: What are the Certifications?) which talks about how the Certification issuing is operated says: Depending on the volume of units sold since its launch date, the company associated with AMPROFON can award an album or music video with "Gold Record", "Platinum Record" or "Diamond Record". There is no mention of any kind that the company Certifies records based on the Certification pattern available during the period of the record's release date regardless of what the volume of the current Certification requires. And then we have the section The System of Certifications the second paragraph in which says: AMPROFON verifies the data of the product mentioned in the application and checks to see whether the volume of units sold since its launch date meets the criteria established. Again there is no mention that the company Certifies records based on the Certification volume pattern that was available during the period which that particular record was release in, regardless of what the current Certification volume requires.

If perhaps, what you're suggesting is mentioned anywhere else, please feel free to point out the Section-Title as well as the paragraph. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 22:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certifications in Mexico have always been given according to the release date of the album, you can check so on the charts, check the Top 100 on the same websites (Releases before 1999: Gold 100,000, Platinum 250,000 and Diamond 1 million, Releases from 1999 to 2003; Gold 75,000...) and well so on, you get the picture, they certify them according to the release date and not to when it was released --MetroPlayer (talk) 15:22, 6 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.159.183.23 (talk)

I believe you are misinterpreting the key term in the context. Lanzamientos A Partir Del 1 Enero De 2008. Here in this context, the word "Lanzamientos" refers to Certification Issues, and not releases. In other words, it says "Certification issues beginning from January 1st, 2008" (meaning the records from that point on will need the given volume to receive either Gold, Platinum or Diamond). The Top-100 does not give a different explanation. What you are suggesting; however, cannot be true because if a record, let's say, has been released before 2000 (when the Diamond in Mexico was 1 million units) and has no way of reaching the volume to meet the 1 million unit criteria due to enormous decline in record-sales, it would simply be illogical to treat the record without considering the gap of 600,000 needed units that would prevent the record from receiving the Certification (1 million in 1999 - 400,000 in 2008=600,000).--Harout72 (talk) 00:11, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question for you MetroPlayer. If, theoretically speaking, the two Diamonds that are issued to Williams' Intensive Care were treated according to your suggestion, that is 500,000 each based on what a 2005 release would require. Why did you make the total sales 1.2 million as you have done here and here . Wouldn't the volume of the Diamond Certification need to be 600,000 in order for it to be 1.2. In other words, isn't it supposed to be 1 million according to your theory?--Harout72 (talk) 00:38, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

because it sold 200,000 physically, it was also certified physically - physical sales and digital sales are counted and certified separately - it has been certified 2xDiamond digitally and 1xPlatinum & Gold physically, although when he was in Mexico in 2006 - a year after it was released he was awarded with a 2xPlatinum album, meaning the label didn't pay to update the certification, and the Top 100 CLEARLY states that albums released within the timeframe of the certification criteria have to be certified as it was the criteria then, example: "Disco de Platino. Certificación de ventas por 80,000 copias, para lanzamientos a partir de enero de 2009. Certificación de ventas por 100,000 copias, para lanzamientos a partir de julio de 2003. Certificación de ventas por 150,000 copias, para lanzamientos anteriores a julio de 2003." it clearly states that certifications are according to the year when the album was released not when it was certified--MetroPlayer (talk) 03:48, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it looks like you are not familiar how the Certifications issuing is conducted. Let's take a look at this here, as you see the Intensive Care has received its Diamond-Certifications after it has received the Gold and the Platinum. This means both the Gold and the Platinum are already within the number what the volume of the Diamond-Certification represents. If; however; the Platinum and then the Gold were issued after the Diamonds, then yes, you would be correct, the number would be 800,000(for two Diamonds)+100,000(Platinum)+ 50,000(Gold)=950,000. Or according to your theory the total would be 1,150,000. Such is not the case; however. And where are you getting the info whether the Diamonds are digital Downloads, or that the Record Company has not paid for the two platinums? In other words, are there any reliable sources that can confirm all this info including the total sales for 'Intensive Care?

P.S. In the meantime, I have contacted Amprofon and asked them if they could clarify how the Certifications are treated. Hopefully, we'll have a word from them soon.--Harout72 (talk) 15:22, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

because the certifications say so, it says 'pre-loaded full album' whilst the physical says 'album' they are both different types of certifications and formats they are not combined LOL - it seems that you are not familiar with Amprofon, they give away awards to digital and physical separately, i don't know why but they do, they have digital certifications that are different to the physical ones, and you can check so on the criteria, that is why digital and physical are counted separately, Robbie's 2xDiamond is for his album being pre-loaded to a mobile phone, a Sony Ericsson phone, it sold over a million so they certified it 2xDiamond, the album was included so EMI and him got royalties as if he had sold the physical thing - as you can see, the release date for the physical and the 'pre-loaded album' is different, because the mobile phone was released until 2006. --MetroPlayer (talk) 02:01, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've seen where it says "Pre-loaded full Albums" next to the Diamonds. I'm also aware that unlike the physical Diamond (the volume of which has become 400.000 beginning January 1st, 2008) the volume of the Diamond for Digital Downloads has remained at 500,000 until June, 2008. However, the Diamond-Certifications on Intensive Care have been issued on December 12th, 2008 as it says "Última Certificació 12-12-2008". And there was no Digital Downloads available in the Mexican Music Market before 2007 as the Digital Downloads were introduced to the Mexican Market in 2007 ( read the last paragraph). That said, it still makes the total of two Diamonds 800,000. Even though, it nowhere within Amprofon explains that the sales of smaller Certifications (such as Gold and platinum) are not, in the end, included within the larger Certification (Diamonds), I might be willing to agree to turn the 800,000 (that we currently have for Intensive Care) into 950,000 since may be the Physical Platinum and the Physical Gold are not included within the Diamond, although, they should be as it's done so in all larger markets (including US and Germany). Let me know if you are OK with 950,000. --Harout72 (talk) 01:08, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reality Killed the Video Star

[edit]

I can't find any information about Gold status on Certified Awards Search!? --Adam Brody (talk) 21:16, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Williams' official website states that Reality Killed the Video Star has gone triple-platinum. I accept that this is not on the BPI website but it seems as though this is simply a case of it having not been updated. If anyone wishes disagrees that the article should list the album as being triple-platinum, please could you first discuss it here so that we can resolve this issue amicably. Nottmlad (talk) 16:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

robbiewilliams.com states that the album has sold one million copies, which would make it enough to be triple platinum. but it is not officially certified until it is done so by the bpi. Mister sparky (talk) 16:55, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are the BPI good at updating everything on their website regularly though? I'd imagine that as songs and albums continue to sell that it's almost impossible for the BPI to keep everything on there up-to-date. Nottmlad (talk) 01:23, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
it could sell 10million copies and still not be officially certified. the record company has to apply for certification, they're not automatically given. so they only way to know if its officially certified is when it appears on the site. but they're usually quite good at updating it. Mister sparky (talk) 20:32, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Music videos

[edit]

Who on earth unlinked the songs at the music video section??? I worked 4 that!! the songs should be linked to their respective articles!! MariAna_MiMi (Talk) 22:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hey, i removed the wikilinks. every flc discussion i've been involved in with discographies has insisted on the de-linking of the songs in the music videos section. thats why. wasn't a personal thing or to annoy anybody :) Mister sparky (talk) 22:41, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greatest Hits II

[edit]

I've added the second Robbie Williams greatest hits, which was a limited album also titled 'Greatest Hits' (but is often called Greatest Hits 2 or II. It's been sat around in the Greatest Hits 2 disambiguation page for ages i wondered why it was not here, or in the template. Well i've added it, and sucsessfully de-orphaned it too.--77.99.231.37 (talk) 15:55, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

US or North American charts

[edit]

Why is there no information on any USA chart positions for albums or singles? Or is the answer as obvious as I think it is?

lack of charting most likely. Mister sparky (talk) 18:15, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be useful to indicate the performance in the United States... It is the most important market of the world, and although he have not ranked their albums there, we should open a column.--181.27.145.169 (talk) 03:52, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've added columns for US chart positions to the album tables. Would be nice if someone can do the singles (a few have charted). Tomdejong14 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The U.S. Charts (Especially The Billboard Hot 100) are overrated. 69.11.161.35 (talk) 22:36, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Compilation album

[edit]

Could someone please add the following album to the compilation albums section: 'Robbie Williams: Classic Album Selection'? (I don't want to mess up the complex table formatting by messing around with it) Cheers --Jonie148 (talk) 12:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Robbie Williams discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Robbie Williams discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Robbie Williams discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:55, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Robbie Williams discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:28, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Robbie Williams discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Robbie Williams discography

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Robbie Williams discography's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "US":

  • From Take That discography: "Gary Barlow Chart History: Billboard Hot 100". Billboard. Retrieved 29 May 2020.
  • From Bryan Adams: "Artist Chart History – Bryan Adams". Allmusic. Archived from the original on 17 February 2011. Retrieved 12 November 2013.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 00:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Robbie_Williams_discography&oldid=1245349192"