User talk:Giggy/Satisfying music notability guidelines

Chart Entries as Establishing Notability

I think some limits have to be drawn here, although I have to confess I wouldn't know where. Remember that initially charts were based on sales of sheet music, not discs. In the 1960s an artist had to sell a substantially larger volume to achieve Number 1 than now. In part it's the industry fault for having stupid ideas- Billboard's Top 200, for instance. One entry at number 200 for one week, and you're notable- by selling twelve copies. That has to be nonsense by any standard. --Rodhullandemu (talk - contribs) 23:04, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, yes, I see your argument, but unfortunately that's the word of WP:MUSIC (at least, I think it is :) ). Changes there would have to precede this. Such a change, though, would have my support. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 08:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Worth noting that you have to sell substantially more than 12 copies to land at #200 on the Billboard 200. More like 2,500 in one week, or so. That's a decent chunk of albums to be moving at one time. Also, the notability tree might need to be trimmed per WP:NOTINHERITED. Chubbles (talk) 03:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Contains a notable musician OR Is a member of a notable band

Reading #6 of WP:BAND, this section should state that a musician needs to have been in at least two notable bands, and a band needs to have two notable members to satisfy this condition. The article currently implies that one is sufficient. Robman94 (talk) 16:30, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]