Template talk:Certification Table Entry/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Problems

Please report any problems below in a new section. --Muhandes (talk) 20:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

RIAA Spanish-language albums

If you can, could you also added RIAA certifications for Spanish-language albums? They have different standards from the regular RIAA certifications. Magiciandude (talk) 04:54, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing, could you please give me an example article I could test this on? --Muhandes (talk) 09:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Alright, how about this album? In the RIAA website gold & platinum search database, it's listed under type as "LA". Magiciandude (talk) 13:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

 Done and checked with that article. --Muhandes (talk) 13:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The rest of the qualifications for Spanish-language albums can be found here. EDIT: Never mind, I see you've got it already. Thanks! Magiciandude (talk) 14:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Ref name?

Is there a ref name support for the table? Magiciandude (talk) 17:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's the purpose of {{Certification Cite Ref}}, see there for an example. You can also use the certref field to use any reference you want. --Muhandes (talk) 18:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay didn't see it, thanks!

Let me know if you need any help using it. --Muhandes (talk) 18:46, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

List of best-selling Latin albums in the US

This discussion was copied here from User talk:Muhandes as it explains the reason for some changes in done with the template

Hello Muhandes, while I was looking the most shipped Latin album in the RIAA site, I had an idea. Why not make a list of best-selling Latin albums in the US. So when I ahead and made a sandbox for it right here. What do you think? Erick (talk) 22:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

It's a good list, I'm surprised it didn't exist before. However, why are you limiting the sources to RIAA certifications? If a reliable sources exist (for example, Billboard has numbers for many of them) why not use it? Also note that RIAA certifies for shipments, not sales, so you should rename the column, or even better use Shipments (Sales), for cases where you have both.--Muhandes (talk) 23:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

True, after all it's a draft of what it could like. I'm also faced with another dilemma and that's the certification years. Take Amor Prohibido, which was certified 20x Platinum last year. The amount of shipments of that album would be 2 million, but Mi Tierra was certified 16x with the old certification level, which brings it to 3.2 millions units shipped. EDIT: At any rate, I created the page right here. I'll go look for specific sales figure when I have the time. Erick (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh boy, I think I just found out something. Do you remember when you told me about the RIAA certification year and asked me to have a look? Remember the link was saying how all the older albums were updated but we weren't sure if meant the shipments stayed the same or it changed with the new one? Well I saw [1], and the certifications and sales do not match what is on the RIAA and articles. Take Gilberto Santa Rosa, on the Carnegie Hall album, the RIAA says that it received a 2x Platinum on April 25, 2002, a month before this issue was written, but now it says 2x on the RIAA page. Another example is Ottmar Liebert's album. It says it's 1.4 million, but with the certification, it says 2.8 million units shipped. The newer shipments would be 14x which would be more accurate. I am confused to say in the least (it was in this discussion. I tried looking at the archive but didn't work either. Maybe I'll ask RIAA themselves. Erick (talk) 05:32, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Indeed it would be best to ask RIAA themselves. My guess would be that the correct numbers are indeed 200,000 and 1,400,000. This would suggest that RIAA redid the certifications for either all or some of the database. If they did it for all the database it would be simple to correct, but if they only redid some of the database (maybe only artists which received further certifications?) I have no idea how we can be certain. For now, as we have a clear source with Billboard for these albums, I think it would be prudent to use the lower numbers and give Billboard as an additional source. I'll do that for these two albums. --Muhandes (talk) 10:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Here's some more evidence I have found, look at Shakira's The Remixes': [2], Chayanne's Grandes Exitos, [3], Cristian Castro's Lo Mejor Mi, [4]. Even the certification for Gloria Estefan's album, Mi Tierra says it's 1.6 million [5]. To finish, off, this ad, says that Sanz's album was 3x Disco de Platino. With the old standard, that would 600,000 shipments, but with the new, it would be 300,000. The RIAA website lists it as 6x, the same number as the old level. Yeah, I am now more convinced than ever that the RIAA did update the certifications for older albums. Erick (talk) 07:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

The current implementation was based on what Harout72 suggested, so I asked him to comment before I change the implementation.--Muhandes (talk) 08:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi guys. I would not compare the sales figures found in the Billboard magazine or elsewhere with RIAA certifications, as RIAA goes by units shipped. An album such as Black & Blue by Backstreet Boys may have shipped 8 million units, but sold only 5 million (for example), and the latter figure will be seen in the Billboard magazine, whereas the shipment in the RIAA's database will show 8x Platinum. And they don't match. But that doesn't create any confusion for us because certification-levels on standard format has never been adjusted. But in the case of Latin-certifications, a difference that big arises doubts since the levels for Latin formats have been adjusted down the road.

While it's difficult to tell whether older releases have received automatic updates as the certification-dates are not updated, I must admit that Eric has provided solid evidence proving that older certified Latin albums may have received that automatic update as stated on RIAA website. I did research on my own today on some Latin albums. I took Ricky Martin's MTV Unplugged, which has received its first Latin-type Platinum in Dec. 2006 for shipment of 200,000, I compared its 2006 Platinum certification with what currently RIAA's database has for it. The 2x Platinum in RIAA's database correlates with the original single Platinum. That proves that it has received an automatic update without having its certification date changed. Just to be 100% sure, I also took Shakira's Grandes Existos, which has received its first original Platinum in December 2002 for shipment of 200,000, which still had only one Platinum by December 2003, and I compared it with RIAA current 2x Platinum for it, which is another solid evidence that they have updated without changing the certification-date.

I think it's safe to disregard my initial opinion on how RIAA treats Latin type certifications. I apologize for the confusion I've created. I may have sounded quite persistent because RIAA does update the certification-dates for singles and albums even if they represent the same amount shipped. Take Micheal Jackson's single "Rock With You" for example, it was first certified Gold in 1980 for shipment of 1,000,000 units (see older levels), and then it was updated to Platinum with newer certification-level in February 1989, still representing only 1,000,000 units, the certification date is updated also. Or take The Beatles' compilation multi-disc album The Beatles 1967-1970. Prior to September 1996, RIAA used to count multi-disc albums as one unit towards certifications regardless of how many discs there were in the CD-case. In September 1996, RIAA made an amendment, and began counting each unit within a CD-case towards certifications. For example, two units in a CD-case would be counted as two units sold. So after the amendment, the original 7x Platinum for The Beatles 1967-1970 turned into 14x Platinum with the newer rules, still representing the same units shipped, certification-date was changed as well. Well, if I notice any inconsistencies with the way RIAA applies and updates the Latin albums, I'll be sure to bring it up, bur for now we should make the template to ignore the certification-date.--Harout72 (talk) 02:05, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Harout72 for your input, and thank you Muhandes for the quick update on the template. Erick (talk) 06:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

And I would like to thank both of you for doing the research. Correcting the template was easy, and we now should have the correct numbers in the several hundred articles using it. I'll do a quick run over the articles and see if there are any leftovers. --Muhandes (talk) 07:05, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Swiss certifications

In Switzerland, the threshold for Gold and Platinum awards for Italian-language and French-language albums released from 2007 are different from the thresholds for other albums [6], but the template calculates the "sales/shipments" value the same way (or, at least, I couldn't find the parameter to be set in order to specify that an album is subject to lower thresholds). Can anyone solve this problem? Thank you. Stee888 (talk) 19:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I will add this tomorrow, it's getting too late today and I'm bound to make a mistake. It will use the domestic field, which is used for this purpose on other regions. --Muhandes (talk) 22:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done --Muhandes (talk) 13:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Certification Template for Hungary

This discussion was copied here from User talk:Muhandes as it explains the reason for some changes in done with the template Hi Muhandes,

I came across the page of Britney (album) which is supported by the certification Templates, it states that the album has gone Gold in Hungary with the level next to it, 3,000 units. The levels for international artists up until the beginning of 2005 were Gold=10,000, Platinum=20,000 (see page 23). It should be noted that during the same period that it was 10,000/20,000 for international artists, it was 15,000/30,000 for domestic artists. And the levels for domestic artists were reduced to 15,000/30,000 on April 23, 2002, meaning the levels for international artists were reduced to 10,000/20,000 on the same exact date. And the levels for international artists for the previous period (December 03, 1997 - April 23, 2002) possibly stood lower from domestic levels also by 5,000/10,000, meaning they were 20,000/40,000. But since we don't have any specific sources for the levels before April 23, 2002, the template should leave it blank, in my opinion.--Harout72 (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the resources, I will have a look and correct the template. --Muhandes (talk) 18:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, I had a look, and I think we can indeed set the level to 10,000/20,000 between April 23, 2002 and February 23, 2005. We can also set it to 3000/6000 at least from September 13, 2006 till present since it was so at least from October 2007. As for any time before or in-between, we don't know. Would you say that is correct?--Muhandes (talk) 19:09, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Correct, for now we should set the Template so it produces levels for those two periods, 10,000/20,000 for "April 23, 2002 and February 23, 2005" and 3,000/6,000 for "September 13, 2006-onwards". I'll try and look for sources for the other periods. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 19:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

RIAA Video Longform

Does the Recording Industry Association of America use the multidisc criteria for video longform certifications?Rock'N'More (talk) 01:58, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Yes, see here at the bottom, Multi-Box Music Video Set. For packages of three or more. And it's also implemented by the template. --Muhandes (talk) 05:21, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Belgium certifications

Why is it that the Belgium certifications never give a salesamount? It doesn't say anything about having to give a manual amount on the template page.Rock'N'More (talk) 01:38, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

The documentation was missing. I just added to it that sales require relyear and sometimes relmonth. If you can please give me an example where it doesn't work, I could look at it. Again, except for Finland, salesamount should never be listed manually for supported regions (other than for cosmetic purposes). --Muhandes (talk) 08:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorting problem

Hey, there is a problem that I encountered while using this template. After I'm all done, if I try to use the sort button on in the table, things start screwing up. Like the Summary and the bottom footer goes to the top. Is there a way you could make it so the bottom stays at the bottom?
—Michael Jester (talk) 05:55, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid I am not aware of any way to avoid that. If you know of any other wikipedia table which solves this issue let me know and I will try to duplicate the effect. --Muhandes (talk) 12:08, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I found out how to prevent the bottom line from sorting. I'm not sure there is a solution for the summary line, I'll work on it. --Muhandes (talk) 22:51, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Music Canada

I believe that the template needs to be updated so that the Canadian certifications reads "Canada (Music Canada)" or "Canada (MC)" not "Canada (CRIA)" and that the automatic certification link goes to [7]. With the link I believe it would be easier to have it involve a manual search as sometimes this can happen with a link Level&ssdir=descending because the link has a space in it.Rock'N'More (talk) 15:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks,  Done. There is no need for manual search, the template handles spaces very well. I checked it for 30ish articles, and will check for all the rest with time, let me know if there are any problems. --Muhandes (talk) 17:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello! There is a confusion in certifications among physical singles and digital singles . When i want to add a new certification for a digital single, the threshold for physical singles appears instead (eg 5,000 copies for gold instead of 40,000 copies). Chronisgr (talk) 21:18, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I have added a parameter digital=true which should give you the correct number, let me know if it does not work. However, this does not change anything else. Autocat will still put the single into "Singles certified ..." and the text will not display anything special. Do you think the template should do anything else? I recommend that you manually add note=Digital download. --Muhandes (talk) 11:31, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, it works.Chronisgr (talk) 12:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Problem with Belgian certifications

I used the template in this page, but for some reason it doesn't compute the sales in Belgium in the right way. I used both relyear and relmonth. Is it a problem of the template? Or maybe I used it in the wrong way. In that case, what is wrong? Stee888 (talk) 16:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

The problem was that we did not know the thresholds for 2008. Looking at the sources again, I think I was a bit over protective and in fact it is safe to assume that the singles thresholds were changed in April 2008 exactly, so the template now reports sales thresholds for Belgium singles of all released dates. We still have a hole for albums between January 2006 and October 2007. --Muhandes (talk) 13:48, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Denmark

How come the amount of sales/shipments for certifications of Danish singles doesn't show up? You have to manually set it using salesamount=.

E.g. Sak Noel - "Loca People".

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
Denmark (IFPI Danmark)	Gold	0^
^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

As of April 1, 2011 certifications levels for singles in Denmark are 15,000 (Gold) and 30,000 (Denmark). Previously (from 2003 to June 1, 2006) they where 4,000 (Gold) and 8,000 (Platinum). Unfortunately the page that listed the previous certification levels is no longer available, but they are sourced on da:Certificering af musiksalg (in Danish). I've added them, using the no-longer available page as the source (the Danish branch of IFPI).--z33k (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm a bit in a hurry (Shabbat in 12 minutes), so this is a quick answer. You need to specify relmoth and sometimes even relday for the automatic number. Even when specifying these, we have unknown thresholds between January and September 2007 for albums/videos and between October 2007 and August 2010 for singles. The reason is that we use the sources provided here and only them. If we are missing a source, or we misunderstood a source, explain here and I'll be happy to correct any error. I'd also appreciate if you list any page in which you had to list salesamount, you should not have to do that. --Muhandes (talk) 15:57, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Chronisgr has supplied a source showing that a change of threshold occurred on February 2007, so I changed the numbers accordingly. Thanks! --Muhandes (talk) 14:55, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Album certification

Why is the sales amount for a Gold certification (album) in Denmark set to 15,000 copies? It's been 10,000 copies as of December 5, 2011. See Guld og platin on IFPI Denmark website.

E.g.

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
Denmark (IFPI Danmark)	Gold	15,000^
^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

On another note. I have collected my own list of thresholds from 1994 and onwards. It's fully sourced. See [8] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Z33k (talk • contribs) 12 December 2011

It says 15,000 since the relyear is 2010, and the change is for records released after January 7, 2011. We already seem to have IFPI Denmark which seems rather well sourced. --Muhandes (talk) 09:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC)--Muhandes (talk) 09:09, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

My fault with the year=2010. But you need to understand that the change is not for records RELEASED after January 7, 2011. The change is for CERTIFICATIONS after January 7, 2011. An album that was released on January 6, 2011, and is certified Gold on January 8, 2011 equals 10,000 copies and not 15,000 copies. It does not matter WHEN the album was released.--z33k (talk) 13:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Most IFPI subsidiaries go by release date, not by certification date. The French SNEP is the only exception I am aware of. I don't read Danish, does the source explicitly say that this is for certifications from Jan 7 2011, rather than albums release from that date? --Muhandes (talk) 15:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Netherlands certification site not working again

I've attempted to get into the Netherlands certification site with different browsers but I cannot seem to access the site at all. Erick (talk) 21:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that about a week ago. Too bad. --Muhandes (talk) 18:57, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Digital support for RIAA

Could you add digital support for RIAA (US) certifications, many certifications for singles are digital these days, Lady Gaga, Adele etc. cheers. Mattg82 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm probably missing something, since I can't figure out what's wrong with the current support. "Bad Romance" is certified 4× Platinum for Digital. What's wrong with:

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
United States (RIAA)	4× Platinum	0^
^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

References

What would you like to see changed? --Muhandes (talk) 12:48, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry what I meant was, shouldn't it have the star to indicate sales rather then shipments? Mattg82 (talk) 14:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done Good point, implemented. --Muhandes (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
United States (RIAA)	4× Platinum	0*
* Sales figures based on certification alone.

Now CAPIF isn't working either

Apparently, they moved to a new site here, but the problem is that it doesn't any certifications. UPDATE: I just read through the news archive that the website was attacked by Anonymous. Erick (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Greek certification-levels

I came across Kylie Minogue's "Can't Get You Out of My Head" released in 2001, it says 15,000 units for Platinum. At least until 2005, the Platinum level for singles was 20,000 in Greece, see this IFPI report (page 23). While the level may even be higher for a 2001 release, the template should be adjusted to read 20,000/10,000 for all releases until 2006 at least. They seem to have lowered the levels for singles sometime in 2006, because IFPI report for 2007 has 15,000/7,500.--Harout72 (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for noting this. I'm quite busy these days, but I will have a look at fixing this on Saturday night or Sunday. --Muhandes (talk) 11:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Muhandes (talk) 12:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Certification levels for singles in Italy

I recently added the gold certification given by the Federation of the Italian Music Industry to Bonnie Tyler's "Total Eclipse of the Heart". At the moment, the template shows 25,000 units as the certification level. However, I'm not sure if that's correct. The new certifications for singles only refer to digital sales achieved starting from 2009, as stated here, therefore I guess the same threshold is applied for all releases. In fact, the official website of the Federation of the Italian Music Industry only says "...digital tracks which have sold over 15,000 units (gold), over 30,000 units (platinum), over 60,000 units (multi-platinum)", and the list of certifications is titled "Certifications for digital singles starting from week 1 of 2009 to week..." (I am translating from Italian). I think that, if I'm right, we should use the parameter "digital" to apply the new thresholds for those certifications. --Stee888 (talk) 12:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

While FIMI has instituted its Singles Gold/Platinum awards in 1999 at 25,000/50,000, all singles released before that and up to January 2005 are certified based on Gold=25,000, Platinum=50,000. Bonnie Tyler's "Eclipse of the Heart" has been released in Italy on July 28, 1995 according to FIMI. Tyler's Gold certification for "Total Eclipse of the Heart" contains both physical and digital sales, the combination of which has reached the Gold status (25,000). FIMI states here under "ONLINE SINGLE TRACK": per le singole tracce online che, eventualmente sommate alle vendite di singoli fisici. I don't think we should let the 15,000 units part confuse us, that is for those singles released after January 2009.--Harout72 (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, you're right. I couldn't find the full explanation, so I thought new certifications were based on digital sales only. Now it's clear. Thank you very much! --Stee888 (talk) 17:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Request for change to template

Since this is a complicated template, could someone with experience please add wrapper code such as {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}||[[Category:Foo]]}} so that the template only categorizes articles, not user sandbox pages? (See Wikipedia:Database reports/Polluted categories.) Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 04:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

UK URL Change

The URL on the British Phonographic Industry's website for the certification search has been moved to http://www.bpi.co.uk/certified-awards.aspx so the automatic reference should be changed as soon as possible. The new database still requires manual searching, but the wording on the reference may require to be changed slightly. Rock'N'More (talk) 22:08, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done It should be ok now, I've changed it. --Stee888 (talk) 22:37, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Norwegian Archive

The URL generated by the Nowegian certification entry no longer exists, but there is a recent archive from last November on the WaybackMachine [9].Rock'N'More (talk) 21:36, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Australia's earlier certification levels

Initially, the Platinum level in Australia in 1970s and even early 1980s was 50,000 units. For example:

• The 1971 album, Daddy Who? Daddy Cool has received a Platinum for 50,000 units according to this article
• ABBA's 1975 album, ABBA has sold half a million units (10x Platinum) according to this article. The same article also states that ABBA's 1975 album, The Best of ABBA has received 22 Platinum-awards for sales of 1.1 million units.
• This article of Billboard states under "Flight Economics" that the album, The Simon & Garfunkel Collection (released in 1981) has gone Triple Platinum (150,000 units), the same is for Men at Work's Business as Usual also released in 1981.

My research shows that the Platinum level was already 70,000 in 1984. Because:

• Talking Head's album, Stop Making Sense released in Sep. 1984, has sold 250,000 units (or over triple Platinum) according to this article.

But it's unclear when the Platinum was switched from 50,000 to 70,000 units between late '81 and '84.

Based on all that information, the template should be designed to make the earlier certifications appear as Gold=25,000, Platinum=50,000, at least for releases of up to 1982 as there is sufficient evidence.--Harout72 (talk) 04:13, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

My further research based on the figures posted on here, indicates that ARIA applies newer levels Gold=35,000, Platinum=70,000, when re-certifying older releases. So, unless Australian certifications for older releases are being sourced from Billboard's older issues, we need to disregard the original levels (Gold=25,000, Platinum50,000) when we see older releases re-certified and posted on ARIA's database here.--Harout72 (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Bulgaria?

Could someone please add Bulgaria, for What About Now (album)? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 22:23, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Sweden broken, at least for Just a Dream (Nelly song)

The calculation for Sweden is broken in Just a Dream (Nelly song). – Jonesey95 (talk) 22:14, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

I think I fixed it. Joe Schmedley^T* 05:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Swedish certification

The sales for the Swedish certifications should be updated. Now Platinum is 40,000 copies, and on the template they are still shown as 20,000. Since Muhandes (talk · contribs) is on a long wiki break, can some other use fix it? Thanks. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 09:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can tell from the template code, it looks like it's been fixed by now. Joe Schmedley^T* 05:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

German and Italian certifications need fixing

In the "strTtArt" parameter of the German certification entry, the term "alben" has to be replaced with "alle" in order to show search results. Also, the Italian certification entry lacks "Week" and "Year" fields. SnapSnap 18:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Pre-2003 certs for Japan not working

Certifications before 2003 are in .pdf files on the RIAJ website, making it practically impossible to cite them (since all the automatic URLs are made to start with http://www.riaj.or.jp/data/others/gold/). I've made a mess at Savage Garden (album) trying to get something that looks right, but a manual input option where I can manually add in the reference would be the best.

The .pdfs are at http://www.riaj.or.jp/issue/record/2000/200003.pdf (where the year and months get replaced with the desired one), but not all .pdf URLs are the same style (200007.pdf, 2001_01.pdf, 2001_8.pdf, etc).

Also, the sales thresholds were different from 1989 to December 2002! Since the citations are always from two months prior, the last 2002 citation is at http://www.riaj.or.jp/issue/record/2003/200302.pdf (all the early 2003 citations were changed later to reflect the new system, but not earlier years). --Prosperosity (talk) 03:17, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Hong Kong certifications not there anymore

It appears the certifications for Hong Kong all point to dead links now. --Prosperosity (talk) 09:21, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Bundesverband Musikindustrie

Since june 2014 the Bundesverband Musikindustrie awarded the Diamond Award for 750,000 sold albums or 1,000,000 sold singles. Since june singles must be also sold 200,000 times for gold and 400,000 times for platinum.[10]-- Xxvid (talk) 19:44, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

IMMEDIATE Music Canada

The old url for Music Canada certifications has moved to this new link and the old link is not redirected causing a 404. This has to be updated to avoid large-scale impact. @Kww:, please? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 11:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

I changed the urls for Canadian certifications. I hope everything works! Stee888 (talk) 21:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Australia 2014

I think there is no URL in references for the 2014 Australian album certifications, the link is this: [11]. Mayast (talk) 14:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

 Done Stee888 (talk) 21:49, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Ref name

Can a refname parameter be included, for when we want to use the certification reference elsewhere in the article? Adabow (talk) 09:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

I would strongly support adding that parameter. It works great with {{albumchart}} and {{singlechart}} when referencing chart peaks in the text, why can't it also be used for certifications? Mayast (talk) 16:03, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Did anybody take a look at this? I believe it is utmost necessary. —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 08:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

@Adabow: did you check if this is working? I did and not working for me :( —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 12:35, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

No, there is currently no support for this feature, and I lack the technical know-how to add it. Now I usually manually create each row of the certification table, particularly when the ref is used elsewhere. Adabow (talk) 21:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

@Stee888:, would you be able to help here with your expertise? —Indian:BIO · ^{[ ChitChat ]} 18:36, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done I hope it works fine! I had to add it to Template:Certification Cite Ref too. Let me know if there's any issue with it. Stee888 (talk) 19:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Unused ref errors

I could use some help eliminating the unused ref errors at the bottom of the References section in Kylie Minogue albums discography. It's not clear at all what the problem is, or how to correct it. Perhaps some guidance could be added to the doc?

I am not involved with the article, just cleaning up the error tracking category. ‑‑Mandruss (talk) 07:03, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Problem solved. Never mind. ‑‑Mandruss (talk) 13:10, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

German certification sales figures

According to the Wikipedia page for the List of music recording certifications, the German sales threshold for singles is 200,000 and 400,000. It also notes that this is as of June 1, 2014, so I had a look at past revision histories and it shows that before June 1, the thresholds were 150,000 and 300,000. The problem is, whenever I add a certification table entry it still shows the sales as 150,000 and 300,000 even when I set the relyear/certyear as 2014. Is this a problem that needs to be fixed? — Usfun8991 02:45, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Streaming

Can something be done about RIAA single certification? Since May 2013 single certification includes streaming [12], so a song's certification no longer reflects sales in any way. For example Katy Perry's Firework has been certified 9x platinum [13], but its sales is 6,668,000 as of July 2014 [14]. If you don't enter an actual sales amount, the certification will give 9 million sold, and that is completely off. It also misled people into writing in the text of articles for songs that they have sold x million units because they were certified x number of platinum. Hzh (talk) 11:20, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

I think a number of countries are including streaming now. The UK does from July 2014. Shipments can still be used, but in this digital age, they are less and less relevant. We could do with a new footnote along the lines of "figure includes sales plus a factor for streaming" or similar. This can be automatic if the date at which it came into force is included for each country or manual if not. Btljs (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

SNEP link updation

The SNEP link for France should be updated since their website revamped. Can someone please do it? Previously it was disquenfrance.com which had individual links for each certification. Now there is a general link, where one inserts the artist name at "Notre Base de Données" and it generates a specific url (for eg: SNEP - Madonna. Please update the template. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 06:01, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done Thank you for your suggestion! --Stee888 (talk) 09:29, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

IFPI Europe dead

All links for the IFPI Platinum Europe Awards are now dead. Can anyone add archived URLs? SnapSnap 23:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done. I also added archived URLs for GCC certifications. --Stee888 (talk) 09:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Turkey

Could someone please add Turkey, for ...Baby One More Time (album)? --Auric talk 11:29, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

UK sales and streaming

Please can we have a change to the wording for entries in the UK from July 2014. It is no longer true to say "figures based on shipments" the BPI cert figures are based on sales & streaming. Shipments are rarely used these days as with 95% of sales being digital, there is nothing to ship. Thanks. I'm guessing this may be true in other countries as well. Btljs (talk) 09:37, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Update categories

It seemed about time to change the categories for singles away from talking about 'shipments' and include a note on the inclusion of streaming. The Template:Certification Table Entry/Foot can be used to put in a certyear for any countries including streaming (as for United Kingdom from 2014) and set 'streaming = true' when calling the Template:Certification_Table_Bottom to include the new footnote. Btljs (talk) 17:29, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

Including certyear=2015 in the template, the note for Italian certifications still points to "sales figures based on certification alone" but, starting from week 52 of 2014, straming is also included. FIMI announced it back in September and confirmed straming started to be considered on 9 January, when certifications for the last week of 2014 were published on their website. Can you please update it? Stee888 (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Done the update for Italy single certifications from 2015. Please confirm it works OK. (I tested it on "Happy" and it seems OK) Don't forget to add |streaming=true to the table bottom statement on each article to include the footnote.

If anyone has a list of regions that include streaming and the relevant years then I'm happy to add them all to the template. Btljs (talk) 09:37, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, it correctly works! For singles listed as certifid during the 52nd week of 2014, we should use certyear=2015, is it correct? According to FIMI, these certifications already include streaming. I don't have a list of countries which include streaming in certifications. The above link provided by FIMI claims streaming is considered for charts in Austria, Finland, Germany, Ireland, The Netherlands, Norway, South Corea, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States, but I don't know if they consider streaming for certifications too. --Stee888 (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

>>For singles listed as certifid during the 52nd week of 2014, we should use certyear=2015-- Yes, that seems the best work around. There shouldn't be that many, I guess? Unfortunately, the UK change happened in July 2014 so I've got to go through all the 2014 awards before then and change them manually to stop them triggering it. Btljs (talk) 09:48, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

As you can see here, 189 singles were certified during the last week of 2014, because FIMI included all the streams going back to 2010. Still, it's probably the best workaround, since we should anyway apply a change to all the certified singles. I'll work on these articles to include certyear=2015. Thank you very much! --Stee888 (talk) 19:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

IFPI Denmark

• 1) IFPI Denmark has adjusted the levels for singles. The newer levels effective of November 17, 2014 are Gold=30,000, Platinum=60,000. The award for Streaming has been suppressed, instead it is now included in the Downloads.

• 2) Also, IFPI Denmark's levels for albums before 1994 were Gold=50,000, Platinum=80,000.

Can someone make the necessary adjustments, so the certification tables will bring up correct results?--Harout72 (talk) 00:43, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Australian (ARIA) certifications for 2015

Hello, can someone please add a 2015 variable for the Australian certification as the URL is formatted in a different way this year.
Singles: http://www.aria.com.au/pages/SingleAccreds2015.htm
Albums: http://www.aria.com.au/pages/AlbumAccreds2015.htm
Thank you! — Usfun8991 (talk) 02:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

FIMI (Italian) certification as of 2015

According to FIMI, Gold denotes 25,000; Platinum denotes 50,000; Diamond denotes 500,000. Please update this. — HĐ (talk) 05:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Problem with the Denmark certification

As of November 2014, Denmark updated its certified shipments; Gold is 30,000 now (prev. 15,000) and Platinum is 60,000 (prev. 30,000). However, the template is yet to be updated as shows it wrong (ex. FourFiveSeconds#Certifications). Please fix it. — Tomíca^(T2ME) 13:14, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Autogenerated shipments/sales for RIAA singles certs need to be based on certyear, not relyear

Hi! The template seems to be generating sales/shipment data based on the single's year of release as indicated in the relyear parameter. This is falsely generating hugely inflated sales/shipments numbers for the many singles that were on sale before 1989 but then certified or re-certified subsequently. To fix this problem, the figure will instead have to be generated based on the certyear parameter. If you're not aware, 1989 was the year that the requirements for singles certification was halved; gold, previously representing a million shipped, now meant half a million, while platinum, previously for two million, was for one million. The decision to halve the requirement was announced in late 1988 and went into effect beginning Jan. 1, 1989; see "RIAA Halves Requirements for Singles Certification" here (the second page of that article located here).

Note that the article delineating the new rules explains that all singles would receive certifications based on the new, halved criteria, regardless of when they were released. This meant that singles selling 500,000 before 1989 were now eligible to be certified gold, and those that had sold a million (for a gold certification) prior to then were now eligible for a platinum re-certification. ("All singles meeting the criteria for certification will be eligible, regardless of when they were released. 'If they want to certify I Want To Hold Your Hand by the Beatles, they can,' Heimers says." [In case you're wondering, I Want to Hold Your Hand had been certified gold at that point, since 1964 when it received the certification. It appears they did not elect to re-certify, as it remains gold to this day.]) This article, used as a source on the List of music recording certifications page, spells it out even more clearly: "But the RIAA didn't lower the requirement just for current singles. It decreed all singles that sold 500,000 copies are eligible for gold, no matter when they were released. Similarly, all 991 singles that went gold [for selling one million copies] between 1958 and 1988 are now eligible for platinum status."

The fact that the template is automatically generating the sales/shipment figures based on the single's year of release rather than when it was certified seems to be causing confusion among some of the editors at Wikipedia when the generated number is falsely inflated as a result. For instance, I am encountering lots of resistance from other editors in trying to modify the article for Total Eclipse of the Heart to reflect that its 2001 platinum certification is for shipment of one million, rather than two million, copies, based on all certifications reflecting the newer criterion no matter the single's original release date.

I am not familiar enough with templates and don't trust myself to make the modification correctly, but I would very much appreciate if someone who is capable would make the necessary change. Remember, the new criteria for singles went into effect Jan. 1, 1989, so all singles with certyear >= 1989 can have their sales/shipments figures generated based on the halved criteria. Thanks! I think I've explained in enough detail why this change is necessary, but please feel free to discuss if you feel I've overlooked a key point or something else needs clarification. Mmrsofgreen (talk) 19:27, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Actually I figured out how to make the change myself, so no need to heed this request! Thanks. Mmrsofgreen (talk) 02:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Categories are not required for Mexico

Per consensus at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 April 25#Category:Singles certified by the Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas, categories are not required for region=Mexico. Please could someone edit the template to avoid building them for this region? – Fayenatic London 17:05, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

@Armbrust: Thanks, that did it. – Fayenatic London 15:26, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Nor for Australia, see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2015 May 9#Category:Singles certified by the Australian Recording Industry Association. I have made a similar edit to the template, which depopulated the categories for Autralia. – Fayenatic London 17:38, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

PROBLEM: French video certification

Hi folks, I've been adding the "Cream" french video certification for their album "Royal Albert Hall London May 2-3-5-6, 2005". Sadly, sales of "0*" are displayed. Please fix that. Thanks. --Matthiasberoli (talk) 11:08, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Polish certification as of 2015

As of April 2014 Polish certification include streamings too (2500 streams of a song = 1 sold album / 250 streams of a song = 1 sold single). Could someone update this like the Itialian sales? (sales/streaming figures based on certification alone)-- Xxvid (talk) 14:00, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Problem with Sweden

Two links of Swedish certification are dead. The IPFI offical is 404, and file on Media Fire has been removed. So all the Swedish certifications on all articles are affected ? Minhhai 2000 (talk) 03:00, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

New Zealand certification

I've been trying to work out how to do the entry for New Zealand one, but so far failed. It really doesn't explain what the id is supposed to be. I added a certification table for Man! I Feel Like a Woman!, I had assume that it is the chart number given in the url here, but it doesn't work. I even try adding a source using refcert, but the reference simply won't appear. Hzh (talk) 01:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got the certref working (made a mistake earlier), but I still have no idea what the id is. Perhaps give a clearer explanation on the page? Hzh (talk)

I assume it doesn't work for older certification? Anyone? Hzh (talk) 19:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Philippines

The Philippine unit of the IFPI: PARI recently released their database of Gold, Platinum and Diamond certifications online on their official site. I think this is legit. Can we include it? Chihciboy (talk) 23:26, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

Problem with pre-1997 Australian certifications?

I like to clean up citation errors in Wikipedia articles and have edited my CSS stylesheet to see all CS1 errors, not just those that are visible by default. One of the extra error categories I see is Category:Pages using web citations with no URL (includes instructions on how to make all error messages visible, for those interested). With these errors visible I can see a problem on ...But Seriously by Phil Collins which causes the article to be included in the list of those with citation errors. The Australian certification shows a "Missing or empty |url=" error. The code for the Certification Table Entry is as follows:

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
Australia (ARIA)	6× Platinum	420,000^
* Sales figures based on certification alone. ^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

In the code, certyear=1996. The ARIA Accreditations page [15] shows only entries as far back as 1997. Other articles with the same problem include Kick (INXS album) (1996), Tubular Bells (1995), Kylie Minogue (album) (1994), etc. A random look back to 1980 also turns up citation errors, such as Glass Houses. I can't guess how these certifications were originally sourced - perhaps the ARIA website formerly listed old awards and no longer do, or perhaps the awards were sourced from printed trade magazines or reference books, or perhaps the references have just been accumulating as people find them in old articles. I can't imagine that the sources are spurious, not in the quantities that seem to exist, and almost certainly the Australian music industry would have had some form of album award certifications in place prior to 1997 (here are two mentions in Billboard that would at least imply this, one from an article about the band Cruel Sea and the other from an ad for Garth Brooks [16] [17]). In any case, every pre-1997 award certification seems to generate a missing URL error. Should these articles point to the ARIA Accreditations page URL instead of pointing to year page URLs that don't exist? Or should they generate a text-only reference that doesn't include any URL? Without a known source to confirm these older certifications, I don't see a good solution either way, and I certainly don't want to see all old certifications from Wikipedia purged due to lack of known references. - Stamptrader (talk) 17:26, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, no comments after more than a month so I figured I could go ahead and change it. The reference for old awards looks just the same now as it did before except it no longer gives a CS1 error. Most users won't notice any difference since the error for web citations missing the URL is something that is not normally visible. The edited code now includes a comment that notes the lack of pre-1997 award certifications on the ARIA website, and I have changed the documentation on the Cite certification template as well. - Stamptrader (talk) 01:47, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Stamptrader: Sorry, this reply is way after the fact, but I've only just seen this post. Yes, there were ARIA certifications before 1997 – back to 1989, I believe – but I have no idea why pre-1997 certs are no longer shown on their website. I am not sure if there is an Australian chart reference book that includes old references – I will have a look, but obviously even if there is it can't be used with this template. Richard3120 (talk) 01:52, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Edit: yes there is such a book. Also, you can see a table here of singles certifications since 1989, but obviously this is not WP:RS. Richard3120 (talk) 02:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Streaming footnotes

I notice that a dagger footnote is still being put in manually about streaming being included in RIAA certifications for USA (e.g. Poker Face (Lady Gaga song)#Certifications and sales). If you look at #Update categories above, you'll see that I created a footnote for streaming for the UK which automatically generated within the certification table footer. Wouldn't this be better for the USA as well? At the moment there is inconsistency of the manual footnotes (sometimes the dagger is next to the award and sometimes next to the sales figure and the wording changes). It's not like streaming's going away any time soon so all new songs need this footnote. I'm happy to create the code here (less happy to go through and delete all the existing footnotes but that can be done whenever) - let me know if you think it's a good idea. Btljs (talk) 06:50, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate reference problem in The Beatles (album)

Can somebody who understands this template explain why The Beatles (album)#Certifications gives a "duplicate reference" error for the Canadian certifications? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:00, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I pasted the section into Special:ExpandTemplates and looked at the two copies of the Canadian reference after the templates were expanded. They were identical except for the text "Retrieved 21 January 2014". So I've fixed the error by copying the accessdate field from one of the Canadian entries into the other. The software can then fold the two references into one without complaining about the mismatch. Messy! -- John of Reading (talk) 13:35, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Wouldn't have guessed that in a million years - thanks! Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 13:47, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Australian ARIA Video Sales Mistake

Hi everybody, I noticed that the certification levels for Australian Music DVD is 7,500 Gold and 15,000 for a Platinum award. There seems to be a mistake made in the template as you can see here (taken from Live 1986):

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
Australia (ARIA)	Gold	7,500^
Brazil (Pro-Música Brasil)	Gold	25,000*
Canada (Music Canada)	Gold	5,000^
United Kingdom (BPI)	Gold	25,000^
* Sales figures based on certification alone. ^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

It should be 7,500^{^} for Gold right? Please change that in the Template. Platinum with 15,000 then works again. Thanks --Matthiasberoli (talk) 15:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

German Certifications Are Based On Sales

Hi there, please change the ^{^} for every German certification (album, video, single) to a star ^*. I'm German and I've read the certification procedure and also contactet the Bundesverband Musikindustrie (BVMI) for information. Here it is explained simply with an example:

1. Warner Music Holding Germany GmbH released Clapton in September of 2010.
2. Clapton peakes at number 3 on the German charts according to the price it sales a number of copies.
3. GfK Entertainment tracks the sales to compile the charts; WMHG knows the sales data.
4. The certification level is at 100.000 for a Gold album in Germany.
5. WMHG notes Clapton sold more than 100.000 copies by 2014.
6. WMHG would like the BVMI to certify it Gold.
7. BVMI want the sales according to WMHG.
8. WMHG sends the sales via letter to the BVMI.
9. GfK + BVMI proof the sales figures.
10. GfK + BVMI note it sold more than 100.000 copies in Germany.
11. BVMI certifies Clapton in late 2014.

Done. It's based on sales, as it always has. Album, video and single. Cheers! :-) --Matthiasberoli (talk) 14:17, 24 December 2015 (UTC)