User talk:Harout72/Archive 4

Bundesverband Musikindustrie

The informations I cleaned out were false and they dont stand on the references —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yannick16695 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 9 October 2010 (UTC) I live in germany and i speak german . The information dont stand in this form how they stand on the english site on the german page.

Barnstar

		The Music Barnstar
		For your dedication to Wikipedia's music related articles, especially List of best-selling music artists, I award you this barnstar. Bluesatellite (talk) 04:59, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

• • Alright, you deserve it for keeping out crazy fans from that list :D Bluesatellite (talk) 02:55, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga discography

There are not markets that are "more important" than another, you should not be using pure opinion to base which charts get included. Frankly, which countries have "bigger" music markets is irrelevant. Japan's market is not easily cited - you must go to the website and then search by week for the peak for each album, and while the German albums are easily-cited enough, the singles are a whole other story - musicline.de's single discography for Gaga does not include two of her titles and the licensed Hung Medien archive, GermanCharts.com, for some reason does not provide any peaks for the German countries at all, leaving the German singles difficult to cite.

What I did while revamping the page was make each section to be consistent in forms of market order: US, US Dance, Australia, Canada, France, Ireland, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK all around. Now, that order is only present in the singles section. The studio albums go US, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, New Zealand, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK; the compilation albums go in the same order with Germany replaced by Ireland. This leaves no kind of consistency whatsoever and I fail to see what was wrong with what I initially had. –Chase (talk) 20:30, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Furthermore, as Gaga is a dance-pop singer, I would say the dance album and singles charts in America are fairly important to her, just as the R&B and hip hop charts would be relevant to the Eminem discography and the country charts would be relevant to the Taylor Swift discography (both of which are featured lists). –Chase (talk) 20:47, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Could you look at what I have proposed at Talk:Lady Gaga discography#Proposal for market orders and leave a comment? I would gladly appreciate it. –Chase (talk) 21:06, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again. I'm working on rearranging the market orders per the consensus, and I've found that locating the Japanese album and single discographies is extremely difficult, and I'm sure most visitors to the article would feel the same should they wish to verify the information. Is there any other market that would be easier to verify and a suitable replacement? Italy? –Chase (talk) 22:13, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Do you know where links to Gaga's single peaks in Japan could be found? Sorry if I'm being a pain, but I'm completely clueless when it comes to the Japanese charts. –Chase (talk) 22:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

(←) See, that's part of the reason I'm not fond of having Japan as one of the markets, because its peaks are very difficult to verify. I hope to nominate this as a featured list sometime in the near future, and for it to pass as one, it will have to meet Wikipedia's policies which include WP:V, which is arguably one of the most important ones. I realize that Japan is a major market, but in truth I don't think it's necessary to include. Many FL discographies do not include it, most likely because it's not easily verifiable.

As for a replacement. I don't think worrying about the big markets is an issue at this point, because most of the major ones are covered by what I have proposed. So I would think the next best replacement, for this specific discography anyway, would be Ireland. As much as you are opposed to it, it really is one of the markets where Gaga has performed the best, and it's very easy to cite and verify. Since most of the major markets (US, UK, Germany, etc.) are already (or are about to be once I implement the discussed changes) covered, you wouldn't mind just having one of the smaller markets, would you? –Chase (talk) 22:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

For consistency's sake, the market orders should be the same throughout the article. Japan's album peaks are somewhat easy to verify but the singles are a whole other story. Ireland, on the other hand, is easy to verify with both formats.

Yes, I see where you are coming from. Japan is a huge album market and a lot of Gaga's sales are coming from there. However, we can't list everything in the discography, the discography wikiproject suggests 10 countries and we have that (plus the US dance chart), so to remain within that limit somewhat within that limit, we should stick to what is verifiable for both the album and single formats.

Take a look at some of our current featured lists - most of them do not include Japan. I don't think it's going to do much harm if we leave it out of this list. That information will still be there in the articles about Gaga's singles and albums, but it will be fine to leave it out of the discography. –Chase (talk) 23:16, 1 August 2010 (UTC) –Chase (talk) 23:17, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

My reasons for not wishing to include Japan have nothing to do with the fact that it is a non-English speaking country. It is because the peaks are not easy to verify. As you said, to find single peaks, you would have to go through a whole list of directions, which is frankly quite confusing. But if you are not opposed to Italy, I would be glad to use that instead of Ireland. –Chase (talk) 23:50, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'll leave the Japan certs in and add the Germany ones. –Chase (talk) 00:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Madonna and others

Oh yes, that does explain things thanks! However I have another question. Let's say we would to do this for Mariah Carey, she has many "Million, 2x Million and even 3x Million" albums in the 90s, so that means we wouldn't be able to add them in? I mean that significantly widdles down the number to a sheer percentage. I mean her Japan sales in the 90s are more than 13 million and then in the 00s maybe 3 million or so. I don't understand why we can't include "Million" sellers.--PeterGriffin • Talk 23:41, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

She has 6 "Million" albums, 1 "2x Million" and 1 "3x Million," in addition to 1 "Million" single. Right I understand that, but my question is why? Why do we only include the certifications after 2003 from the database. I mean, we have sourced "Million" awards, so why not? Is there a specific reason? Thanks :).--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Harout. Well I'm not really trying to get her placed there just yet, only for discussion. If you look here on the RIAA website, Carey has 92 (I believe I counted it well) certifications including albums, singles and videos. That is around 8 million more than Madonna in the US. Next, she has 12 "Million" (in total counting 1x, 2x, 3x)" and 3x Platinum and 2x Gold albums and singles in Japan. I believe thats 12 + 1.2 = 13.2 million. That makes her record shipments stand at 105.2 million in US and Japan alone. While Mariah is bigger than Madonna in Asia, many of those countries don't have certification agencies so we can't track them as we can in Europe for Madonna, where shes biggest. So as you see, from only these 2 countries we have 105M, and if we count all other countries, Im sure we can reach 140+. Now heres another problem I have, I'm sure Celine Dion should also have at least 130-140 million certifications like Mariah, so if they both prove to have larger shipments than ABBA, Queen, Led Zepplin we should remove them and place these 2 females who obviously have sold more, regardless of what other sources say. If you'd like Id be happy to compile the certifications for both artists from all available countries :). Thanks--PeterGriffin • Talk 16:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello :). So I see my mistake with the US, I didn't realize Platinum videos weren't 1 million. No, see here and let me list to you how Japan sales are far greater than you mentioned.

"Mariah Carey-1M", "Emotions-1M", "Music Box-1M", "Merry Christmas-2M", "Daydream-1M", "Butterfly-1M", "#1s-3M", "Rainbow-1M". And 1M for her single. As you see, the number is far greater than 4 or 5 million.

Next, you aren't counting the mass bulk of her sales in Australia, prior to 1997, even though we have sourced books and info prior. I mean her 1993 album "Music Box" is certified 11X Platinum there, not to mention the countless singles that shes had certified there, see Mariah Carey singles discography, which is sourced by proper book and other sources. In Madonnas counting you have not simply counted from 1997 either. Next you didn't add Spain, which you did for Madonna. She has I believe 1M in certs from Spain, you can find it in the same place for hers. Next we have Austria, as well as it appears for the Brazilian certs to equal higher if you ask me. Also, it appears your Swiss numbers are a bit off. Let me know what you think about this.--PeterGriffin • Talk 00:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Well that japan issue diminishes the number greatly. Also, Im not sure why Brazil's certifier was sourcing it, but here is the correct source used for her Australian certs prior to 1997. Kent, David (2003). Australian Chart Book 1970-1992. ISBN 0-646-11917-6--PeterGriffin • Talk 00:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Mariah Carey albums discography

Hello Harout :). So I have a few concerns regarding this page. So if the Million awards aren't certifications and merely sales, why can't it be 2 or 3 million. Like why can't the sales be 3.4 million for #1's? I mean there are sources that could indicate sales, so why not include those. Also, if the "Million" award is not a certification award, why is it mentioned on the RIAJ certifying agency? I mean in the US, SoundScan sales have nothing to do with the RIAA. Thanks!--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hello :). Okay, now I understand fully what you mean. Sorry if it took you a few tries, the Japanese databases are tricky :S. So yes I guess until we can find reliable surces claiming Japanese sales we gotta stick with these. Thanks for the help! :D--PeterGriffin • Talk 10:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi again, just giving you an example. Here is an issue of Billlboard magazine, which claims Mariah's album "Daydream" sold 1.65 million copies in 1996 alone. So these are the kind of sources ill be looking for.--PeterGriffin • Talk 10:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I have found allot of info in Billboards old magazines. Look here, it tells you how "Music Box sold over 2million copies, and "Merry Christmas" has sold over 2.5 million.--PeterGriffin • Talk 12:13, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks harout :). I have a question. On "Music Box" it says "Million: under the certifications, what should we do? Remove it and place 2 million, or no because its sales?--PeterGriffin • Talk 22:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

BPI

Hey Harout. I noticed you took note of the little mistake. It is wierd, its fooled me before too, but yes you need to always click on the "More info" to sometimes see the full certification. Take care.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:31, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Music Box (album)

Hello Harout. I am having trouble formatting a certain chart. I would like to have a small "Sales" chart right next to the singles Chart (there seems to be enough room) so it mirrors the chart positions and certifications as they stand side by side. Thing is Im having difficulty formatting the chart to stay next to the singles box, it keeps going underneath. Can you help? Thanks!--PeterGriffin • Talk 18:26, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep, a small one on the right side of the singles chart. Its to place actual sales since we have around 8 different countries.--PeterGriffin • Talk 18:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

No not that. Its for the albums sales in certain countries not single sales. I would like its own little chart next to the singles chart.--PeterGriffin • Talk 18:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Let me try and explain. So I have around 7 countries and their sourced sales. So I would like to make a small separate chart for sales either next to the certifications chart (I doubt three charts will fit on one line) or next to the singles chart.--PeterGriffin • Talk 18:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Yep, thats what I mean lol. However I only have 7 countries with sourced sales, so in comparison to the 20ish certifications, I think it will look weird sharing a table, which is why I suggested its own little table next to it.--PeterGriffin • Talk 18:52, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

So your right that that seems like the best approach, but there was a consensus some time ago that agreed to not do that because of the vandalism that was taking place and the confusion over how much Platinum was in 1994. So that why I would like to make it in its own little table. I have 7 countries, so I think it would be a nice little section. Do you think you can format it to stay adjacent to the singles table?--PeterGriffin • Talk 19:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I get what your saying, but Im just going on what the consensus said a while back. I would prefer a separate table if its possible, simply to differentiate and put more emphasis on the sales.--PeterGriffin • Talk 20:54, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Right on Harout! Its perfect, thanks so much! :).--PeterGriffin • Talk 21:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh perfect, yeah Im sure after I fill in the column it will come closer together! Thanks!:)--PeterGriffin • Talk 21:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Lady Gaga

I generally appreciate you keeping a careful look over sourcing on the best selling artists article, but this edit seems pretty questionable. The source was explicit in saying 51M singles and 13M albums, and WP:OR doesn't prohibit simple addition.—Kww(talk) 15:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Music Box (album)

Hello Harout, Im having a small issue with the articles formatting. For some reason, the singles box that listed in the top of the article (single #2. Hero - released " " ") is not showing up. Even though its formatted and written its not coming up on the screen. Can you take a look? Thanks.--PeterGriffin • Talk 16:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

The Emancipation of Mimi (Canadian certifications)

Hi Harout, hope all is well. So I noticed you changed it from 3x Platinum to 2x Platinum, so I wanted to explain something. So I know the CRIA is on a fritz, so I requested from Quentin Burgess, Gold-Platinum Program Coordinator, Canadian Recording Industry Association, 85 Mowat Avenue, Toronto, ON M6K 3E3, qburgess@cria.ca, Tel: (416) 967-7272, Fax: (416) 967-9415 all info on Mariah Carey and he responded with this attachment and its listed as 3x Platinum, Look here. So I don't know if this is enough proof for you, but if not according to this it was certified on "December 21, 2007" and the order number is 12102. So if you want, check out that month and year and it should be there. Let me know what you think, Thanks!--PeterGriffin • Talk 00:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I am pretty good thanks, although I'm getting quite tired of defending myself day to day I must admit. Anyway, so I agree that I have seen Carey's database a while back and recall it was only 2x Platinum, but then I recall that sometimes that section isn't updated as they continue being certified (sometimes). So I am wondering, what do you think of this sheet I am showing you? I mean can you tell its official, or should we wait? If you cannot read it I would be happy to email it to you. Thanks Harout! :)--PeterGriffin • Talk 01:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I know, that is my intention too, I couldn't want anything more than to have her pages at GA quality, so that is my goal! Well I tried using the media fire, but I kind of screwed up and don't know what to do. Can I email it to you and you upload it using Media Fire? It has allot of info on it to prove its directly from the CRIA, so I think its worth a shot.--PeterGriffin • Talk 01:53, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Perfect. Even if we can't use it, I really want to just show you that I really have it, just so there are no problems in the future. The thing is I don't know how to find your email here. lol. How do I find it, or if you can write it to me? Thanks :)--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:01, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

It has an attachment that is a two page report directly from the CRIA, with all listing for Mariah Carey.--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:09, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

I sent it and did as you asked :). Thanks for everything and let me know after you receive it!--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Yup! I was really surprised as well, this guy Quentin replied only like 2 days after and actually answered a few more questions for me. Is there another artist you would like me to try and get for you? Let me know what you think!--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:28, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hehehehe Peter is not my real name :) it is Nosson (Nathan). I get you, yes I wish most of them were as helpful. Is there anything we can do with that? Thanks for everything :D--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:50, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing Harout! I even have it in my user page ;) Should I call you Harout? or do you prefer something else? Hmmm, I mean I don't want to seem to obvious (lol) but I would like to place the 3x Platinum, what do you think? I mean I don't want to seem I'm doing it just to inflate the sales. Do you think it looks official enough?--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I kind of thought so, which is why I don't think I'll add it, unless I want Max24 harassing half of Wikipedia saying Im inflating her sales. lol. But yeah, I just wanted to show it to you, just to prove my point! :). Thanks for everything, and I really appreciate your trust and assistance friend! Thanks Harout! :)--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Petergriffin9901/Max24

Talk:Mariah Carey albums discography#Possible_solution.—Kww(talk) 00:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

RIAJ One-million sellers database

Hi, I was just wondering if you could provide the link of albums that have sold over one-million copies in Japan. I've been trying to find on the RIAJ website, but alas I cannot. Thanks, I greatly apprceciate it. BalticPat22Patrick (talk) 01:52, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Japanese Sales

Hi Harout. So I was wondering why there was such an inconsistency regarding Japanese sales and certifications. I mean I have Billboard sources that claim "Music Box" sales at 2,030,000 (as of 1994 - Only 1 year after its release), yet it isn't certified "Million" on this list. "Merry Christmas" has sales of over 2,500,000 (as of Jan 1996) not even 2 years after its release. Next, "Daydream" has sales of over 2,100,000 (only 4 MONTHS after its release). Then we have "Number 1's" which is Japans highest seller for a foreign artist, has sold over 3,250,000 (after only 3 MONTHS). Lastly "Butterfly" has been certified "Million" but I haven't been able to find that albums sales on Billboard. Point is, all of these albums have been certified the "Million", with "Music Box" being uncertified, so why the inconsistency? I have found proof that they do issue multiple Million awards to western artists. Take a look here, as you can see, Celine DIon's album is certified 2x Million, which I understood from you was impossible for western artists. So Im confused in short. :s.--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Heheheh, thanks Harout, I assure you I fully understand it now :). I will add that it most definitely is a tricky system! Anyway, thanks allot for everything! :D--PeterGriffin • Talk 04:17, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hi Harout. I have a quick question. I came across this and i'm honestly a bit puzzled. So I know the source (Charts in France) is reliable, but I can't tell if the list is just part of some forum, or posted by some editor who's BSing us (thats what it looks like). What do you think?--PeterGriffin • Talk 05:18, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Thats what I thought, thanks. Also, as you know I'm promoting many Carey articles to GA or FL level, so I came across something in the discussion I don't understand. Look here and at the bottom you will see what I mean. Obviously they are small and minuscule problems, but I can't find a difference in them and the rest of the refs. Thanks :)--PeterGriffin • Talk 00:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't know if thats what he wanted, but if no one knows what he wants, he can really help out and do it him self. The rules encourage reviewers to fix issues themselves. Also, I forgot to tell you, I got a response from the ARIA as well :). Call me lucky, but yep.--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Hehehehehe, I'm sure you can guess :p. Do you wanna take a look?--PeterGriffin • Talk 04:49, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Correct. :). I would say so, however, that would be for you to decide. :D--PeterGriffin • Talk 05:00, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

I emailed it to you :).--PeterGriffin • Talk 21:56, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

So I emailed her again, and asked for it in PDF format, in the form of an official ARIA document attachment. Let's hope she gives it to me, so it can be more easily presentable and usable.--PeterGriffin • Talk 01:28, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

German certifications

If an album is certified platinum twice by two different labels, does that mean its total certification is 2x platinum (Platinum+Platinum)? 203.101.45.224 (talk) 10:06, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Normally, that is very rare; however, that seems to be the case for the album Backstreet Boys. I'm also guessing that they may have released the US version in 1997 which is the one having been certified Platinum the second time, but I can't be sure as they Bundesverband Musikindustrie has not specified the version.--Harout72 (talk) 15:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I thought the US version was only released in the United States 203.101.45.224 (talk) 09:53, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the US version was originally put together for US market, and since Bundesverband Industrie doesn't mention 2x Platinum for Backstreet Boys, it's either the US version (which is only an assumption) or just the same international version re-released again on Rough Trade and reached first the Gold and then the Platinum status in '97. We could also remove the second Platinum, since it makes us both think how it got there.--Harout72 (talk) 15:20, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

It is really confusing because even Millenium got Platinum status under Rough Trade and 3x Gold status under Zomba and it is better to keep it 2x Platinum because some album or the other has got 2x Platinum anyway, whether it is the American or the International one. 203.101.45.224 (talk) 15:39, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Jennifer Lopez Discussion

Hello, please join the discussion here.--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Hehehe, thanks Harout, just did :).--PeterGriffin • Talk 03:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists

Hi Harout :) how are you doing? So first I wanted to tell you that unfortunately Tara, the lady from the ARIA could not give me a PDF, because she says they don't have the ability to :(. Oh well, anyway I have a few concerns regarding this page. I don't understand why ABBA or Queen are allowed on that list on the top. They both have very weak certifications. Now you might say, well they were around a long time ago, so not all certifications are available, but rememberer the largest music industries, US, Japan, Germany, France and UK all have accessibility from before they started, so if we have availability to these "power countries" shouldn't that be the majority bulk of their certifications? Even if its only 50 percent, I'm afraid that is still not impressive for their sales.--PeterGriffin • Talk 00:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Cool, I guess we have to make the best of what we have! Yeah I feel you. I agree, I mean Jackson has only maybe released half of the material Madonna has (or less) so if we go by certifications they are around the same (maybe he's even a bit less). Also yeah, I agree and what I thought, however, If I find reliable sources for those 2 saying like 150-200, we can include those figure too right?--PeterGriffin • Talk 01:38, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

This in itself should be enough to demote ABBA completely. Billboard, which is about as reliable as you can get claims 100 million records or so, look here. What do you think?--PeterGriffin • Talk 02:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for your work on the Boney M discography. I appreciate it--this guilty pleasure. Drmies (talk) 19:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

German certificayions for Millennium

How do you know that certification levels dont affect records released before it? 203.101.45.224 (talk) 00:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

It is only SNEP and RIAA which apply newer certification-award-levels to records released before the date of the amendment. If you'd like, you could contact Bundesverband Musikindustrie and ask them, as I have. One good example; however, for Bundesverband Musikindustie would be Madonna's album Like a Prayer, it was certified Platinum in 1989 for selling 500,000, and then it was re-certified 3x Gold in 2006 for selling 750,000. The Bundesberband Musikindusrie's certification-award-levels for albums have been reduced to Gold=100,000, and Platinum=200,000 in January 2003. As you can see in the example of Like a Prayer, 3x Gold with newer album-levels would mean 300,000, whereas that album had already been certified in 1989 for selling over 500,000. I hope you see my point. --Harout72 (talk) 03:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Re: Hilary Duff Discography

what i am trying to accomplish is to have a table were the albums most charted, for example, mexico, only one studio album charted, why have that in the table? resources are including, so i feel a whole reversion insted of helping improve the page, was uneeded, thanx Ifiwere (talk) 15:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC) - did, with one user agreed, tough only one... secondly, reverted to an earlier state, in untrue & false, and lastly, anyone can edit if its not wrong information and/or vandalism, thanx for for the warning, but i do not need your permission to edit. because my edits arent false or vandalism, thanxIfiwere (talk) 16:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments made

but, when you say numerous of users you mean yourself and chase, right? because i took a look and saw the page being controlled by you two. Ifiwere (talk) 17:07, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

~ the thing of many user's editing is not only false and incorrect but prove that only chase and you have edit, and revert other users. when i get all the things straighten out, i will re-edit and if you and chase don't control the page, i expect not to be reverted. Ifiwere (talk) 05:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey

Hi there Harout. Its been a while, how are you? :) An editor showed me this source for Australian certifications, and I wanted you opinion on them. This archive from Pandora again claims "Music Box" to have been certified 11x Platinum by the ARIA. What do you think? Look here.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 00:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

So look at the second page of the report, there is a llittle paragraph on her, use the search bar. It says it there :)--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 18:27, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you. Also as for Eminem certification. Do you understand why I removed them?--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 18:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Yup I agree. Japan actually is the largest ater the US. I don't know why R&B charts are there, they only take up room.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 19:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, so we are trying to get something cleared up here, so since you wondered about it, take a look :)--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 23:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Tina Turner

Hi Harout. So I'm distraught by thee figures listed for Tina Turner. In the best-selling page shes listed at 180 million records, and in her bio (GA) 200 million. There is no way she has sold anything near Mariah Carey (200), Celine Dion (200) or Whitney Houston (170). I mean her certifications/sourced sales are nowhere near that, not even half. I would say 110 is pushing it. Can you present her basic certifications? I mean the sources that are used for her don't even seem that reliable if you ask me. I see she has strong sales in Germany, that seems to be the only really strong country outside the US, the rest are't so big. And in the US, her biggest market, she's not even one of the best-selling females at all. Anyways, thanks allot! :)--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 16:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, so don't mean the sources that list 180, I mean the ones on her GA bio that list 200. Thanks Harout! Take your time :D--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 09:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Harout. Yes that is what I mean. I mean even if she has 50-60 (I doubt it) million in certifications, there is no way she can have sales almost at the level of Mariah or Celine, who both have certifications/Billboard sales of over 135-140 million a piece (counting Japan's estimated sales by Billboard, which equal far above the million sellers). Anyway, glad you see it too. Thanks :)--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 18:13, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Hiya Harout. Awesome! Yes I will comment there momentarily. So I do not think Max can provide a source for that, but I know them to be true, they match all the Oricon figures I have seen. However the only downside to the info he gave me is its according to Oricon, which doesn't include imports. For example Oricon lists Number 1's at 2.8 million, whereas Billbaord/Shimbun list them at 3.25 million only 3 months after its elease. I mean it must have sold over 4 with imports if thats the case. Oricons sales are much lower than actual figures. Anyway, so back to showing to what I have. Butterfly is a Million seller so we know it sold over 1 million copies (according to Billlboard/Shimbun around 1.5M). Next we have Daydream, whcih sold 2.1 million copies only 5 months after its relase. Next we have also Merry Christmas whcih sold over 2.5 million according to Billboard. Again here for Music Box, we have salles of over 2 million. Lastly, Sony Music list Emotions as having sold 1 Million in Japan. For singles, we have All I Want for Christmas Is You which sold over 1.1 million copies in Japan. As you see Harout, only including maybe half of her albums (they happen to be her biggest sellers but still) and her Japanese sales are over 12 million from just these) And these sales arne't even updated, they are only months after its release. If we had all of Carey's sales up to date, or just listed, her Japanese sales would equal well over 20-25 million copies.--PeterGriffin • Talk2Me 00:16, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

"Discussion"

There is not consensus to include the Japanese charts over the US R&B chart. Discussion is not simply stating your intentions on the talk page and continuing with your controversial edits. You need to let other users come to the discussion and let them voice their opinions, and consensus will form that way. Your last edit to Eminem discography, reverting my reversion of your edits which have no consensus, was not appropriate but I will not edit war any further. But please do not edit this way in the future as it is disruptive and violates Wikipedia's consensus policies. –Chase (talk) 23:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not the one making controversial edits without consensus. And I'm also not making any "incorrect" edits so stop with the incivil remarks please. There is no consensus for including Japan over the US R&B chart and thus I will change that back. Until there is consensus for your edits, please do not revert back. Continue the discussion at the talk page, not my user talk page. –Chase (talk) 23:48, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I and other users have discussed, and so far, you are the only person arguing for the Japanese charts over the R&B ones. Previous and (at the moment) current consensus is against your opinion and therefore you should respect it and not add back the Japanese charts until there is consensus for doing so. Revert back, and I would be glad to report you for deliberately edit warring against consensus. –Chase (talk) 23:53, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I am not a regular editor to Eminem discography. Including the R&B chart has been a long running consensus that I'm sure was either discussed or formed silently over time. Your idea of consensus is extremely flawed, Harout72, and you probably need to read up on WP:OWN in addition to looking again at WP:CONSENSUS. I don't establish a consensus with you over a consensus that already exists. You're the one who wishes to add the Japanese charts, which is against consensus, and that's absolutely fine that that's against consensus. However, you need to discuss with other editors since your edits have proved to be controversial.

If you would not like to be reported, don't edit against consensus, and wait until a consensus forms to add the Japanese charts before adding them back. –Chase (talk) 00:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

The consensus to include the R&B chart was formed over time by the fact that it remained without removal (see WP:SILENCE). You're the one wishing to go against current consensus, so you need to establish consensus with other editors. I don't have to reach any agreement with you, over which charts to include for right now, until the discussion reaches its end. And until it is over, you need to respect the current consensus and leave the R&B chart. –Chase (talk) 00:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

You may wish to take a look at this report and leave comments as you see fit. –Chase (talk) 00:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

BVMI certifications

You said that you have contacted BVMI before. Why don't you contact them again and find out if Backstreet Boys sold 500,000 or 1,000,000 in Germany? 203.101.45.224 (talk) 06:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Harout72. You have new messages at WP:RPP.
Message added 21:20, 3 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Question

Hi there Harout. How is everything? :) I have a quick question. Do you see here in the music video section of "Better in Time" there is a small photo? So I was wondering something. I thought that you couldn't upload any photos in Wikipedia unless you personally took it or have rights to it? I mean is it different here? Because if you can upload any photo for the article I have many I would like to add. Anyways thanks allot! :D--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 03:25, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Hello. Actually things are pretty good! I just earned my first GA, and have many waiting and ready, and one FA in the works with supports :D. So for One Sweet Day, if I make a section "Music video" can I upload and use this photo?--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 19:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Ohh, nope, Eminem article :p. Heheh just playin, yepp you know me too well :). Its Merry Christmas, and Number 1's is in the FA process :), Music Box should pass soon as well. Ohh, I see, thank you! I will def start doing that --CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 19:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Swiss certifications

You have said that they may have mistyped it as Platinum instead of Gold in 1999. However, that's the exact same thing with Britney Spears' debut as well. I don't think they could have possibly mistyped certifications for two albums (which are similiar too). Besides, it would be hard to believe that Millennium got only gold certification in 1999 as Millennium had huge first week sales in most countries including Switzerland and a lot of albums were pre-ordered too. It probably went platinum in a few months. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 19:56, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, they unfortunately, do make mistakes, that's not the first one I'm noticing, there are many others too.--Harout72 (talk) 20:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

The point on making is, you just can't make assumptions that it is a mistake. Also, as I mentioned, Britney Spears' album which is on the same label, also got certified the same way. I don't think they can ever get two albums from the same label wrong and it definitely wouldn't have taken Millennium seven months to get Platinum certification in Switzerland, if it actually got Platinum certification in 2000. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 20:34, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

With all due respect but you're the one assuming. It clearly states 1x Platinum. I could go ahead and show you many more like that, but unfortunately, I don't think you somehow will be convinced.--Harout72 (talk) 20:51, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

You seem to have had a discussion with an IP about the Backstreet Boys' debut album and I think you have stated that platinum under two labels may equal 2x platinum and that is what is stated in their discography as well. Now you go tell this user something opposite. How can it be different for germany and switzerland? I even had that long discussion with you on the discography page. Now you say that fir Switzerland it is different f203.101.45.224 (talk) 20:59, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

KingdomHearts25 please be wise and log in and sign under "KingdomHearts25", now I know that you discuss issues under both IP "203.101.45.224" and as "KingdomHearts25" and pretend to be two different persons. I suggest you stop doing that if you don't want to get reported. And please note that I have suggested that the second BVMI's certification for Backstreet Boys album is for the US version. You don't even remember your own discussion. And again, the Swiss certifications are all by the same label, it is different from what we see for Germany.--Harout72 (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

First of all, let me make this clear: IP "203.101.45.224" and myself are not the same person and I am not sockpuppeting by any means so I see no basis in reporting me. However, I do know him in real life, but that's personal. Also, it was not me who had the discussion with you regarding those German sales so post it in his talk page. Coming to the point, I see no reason to certify an album platinum twice unless there is a reason behind it. As you said, it could be a mistake on their part as they might have mistyped platinum as gold but that is highly unlikely or at least you can't be sure of it. The only reasonable explanation is that it might have been certified platinum twice for multiplatinum status. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 14:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

It's funny that you both have an interest in the same article, on a very specific point. I've had only one long discussion and it's this, now you're saying above that you're the one who's had that discussion with me, yet you have signed as IP "203.101.45.224". Which means you are admitting that you discuss issues under both IP "203.101.45.224" and as "KingdomHearts25", and that is Sock puppetry. I suggest that you log in when editing, because if one decides to report you, you will most probably not stand a chance, and you might very well get blocked from editing. As for the Swiss platinum certification, we are to leave it as it is as the highest award reads Platinum. Because posting it as 2x Platinum will look like an inflation in the number of Platinum-awards, when someone tried to verify it. Perhaps, it's 2 x Platinum, and perhaps the first one was supposed to be Gold. But the fact and the matter is that the highest level reads Platinum, therefore, we are to go with that, especially when they are both under the same exact label.--Harout72 (talk) 15:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I seriously don't understand it when you say It's funny that you both have an interest in the same article, on a very specific point. I've had only one long discussion and it's this, now you're saying above that you're the one who's had that discussion with me, yet you have signed as IP "203.101.45.224". You have totally misunderstood me. When I said it was not me who had the discussion with you regarding those German sales so post it in his talk page I meant that I (KingdomHearts) did not have the discussion rather 203.101.45.224. However, the IP is not mine. It belongs to a friend of mine (as I've stated above I know him in real life). So I don't see how i admit to being the IP and also how I am sockpuppeting when I always log in with this account. You say that we edit the same articles. I don't think that is the case with non-backstreet boys articles. However both of us edit Backstreet Boys articles as we know them well to a certain extent. I don't know what you mean by saying we edit with the same points as well. As for the Swiss certifications, it is better to ask someone who has more insight into the particular industry. I got this idea from Baby One More Time's article as it was stated 2x Platinum there. I am not saying we should do the same for Millennium just because the same is being done for that article but the editor who put 2x Platinum in Britney Spears' article may have some idea so I think I'll first ask him. Also, accusing me of being that IP is just baseless. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 16:05, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

This is what you wrote above: You seem to have had a discussion with an IP about the Backstreet Boys' debut album and I think you have stated that platinum under two labels may equal 2x platinum and that is what is stated in their discography as well. Now you go tell this user something opposite. How can it be different for germany and switzerland? I even had that long discussion with you on the discography page. Now you say that fir Switzerland it is different . Do you see my point now? As for the page of Baby One More Time, it should be corrected too. To prove you that the mistakes in posting certifications by Swisscharts.com is legendary, let me show you this one example: Bon Jovi's Crossroads gets certified 2x Platinum in 1994, and then in 1995 they post 2x Platinum for Crossroads again. According to your theory, the 2x Platinum posted for 1995 should have been 3x Platinum, correct? Wrong, in fact the 2x Platinum posted for 1994 should have been only Platinum. Because the album Crossroads has received its 3x Platinum in 2000. I hope, you're somewhat getting the idea as to what kind of mistakes they constantly make, and you just have to be someone who constantly goes over certifications everyday to detect this minor typos and interpret them correctly.--Harout72 (talk) 23:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

You seem to have had a discussion with an IP about the Backstreet Boys' debut album and I think you have stated that platinum under two labels may equal 2x platinum and that is what is stated in their discography as well. Now you go tell this user something opposite. How can it be different for germany and switzerland? I even had that long discussion with you on the discography page. Now you say that fir Switzerland it is different . I am sorry but I don't see you point. It is evident that I did not type that but 203.101.45.224 and by IP he must have referred to himself, probably just reminding you of the discussion. Again, I am not "203.101.45.224" KingdomHearts25 (talk)

07:03, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

No reply from you, do you still accuse me of sock puppetry? KingdomHearts25 (talk) 12:38, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Let's just say, that I still believe that no one other than you and I has participated within this very discussion on my talk-page. I will be asking of you this; however, when you edit Backstreet Boys' articles or any others, please be sure to be signed in under KingdomHearts25 and also leave comments about all your edits in edit-summaries.--Harout72 (talk) 16:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't agree with you. First of all, I have always signed under "KingdomHearts25" and secondly, as I've said before, I'm not 203.101.45.224 and hence you and I are not the only ones who have participated in this discussion. KingdomHearts25 (talk) 17:57, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Eminem Discography

I see you you deleted my changes because ten charts are already online but I think French charts are more notable than Swiss or New Zealanders ... Datafolk (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

If you want to replace one of the smaller sized markets such as New Zealand with France, then you would have to open a discussion at the talk-page and gain consensus first. Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style editors are to include markets with better chart performances, and singles wise, Eminem's French positions are not looking that appealing. However, I'd support your suggestion, because France has the fifth largest market in the world; whereas New Zealand is one of the smallest in the world.--Harout72 (talk) 20:38, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually, we should remove Danish positions from the album-tables and insert the French positions. And for the single-tables, we should remove Ireland and insert the French positions, that way we'll have consistency throughout the entire page. Because we don't have Irish positions for album-tables, and we don't have Danish positions for the single-tables.--Harout72 (talk) 21:21, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Iron Maiden

(Re: Iron Maiden) Your discussion predates EMI's official press release on the subject, nor are the same criteria applied to the other artists in that section. So perhaps you should revert your revert of my changes as your older (than the newer) information I provided supersedes it. ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 01:50, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Related side note: I provided 3 more recent citations with my change, and can provide an additional one (again more recent) from EMI themselves (which covers US releases as over 80 million). ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 01:52, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Gimme a bit to re-read the earlier discussion on the matter to formulate a response. :-) Best, Robert ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 01:54, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Responded here - thanks for your patience. ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 02:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Roxette Record Sales

Hi Harout72,

I provided newspaper article links for Roxette's sales number of 75 million in the article discussions. Just didn't figure out yet how to link them in the articles. Please check them!

Pumadog (talk) 17:29, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed them, I also commented on there. I also had a discussion on Roxette's sales at the List of best-selling music artists with another editor, see it here.--Harout72 (talk) 17:32, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've read that. It's just that my sources are just as reliable as the other ones and articles always talk in the sense of "over xx records" which doesn't make the lower numbers wrong. I don't know how you check if the certifications are globally complete and up-to-date – and how you rate different sources as serious – so I leave it in your hands! At least Wiki is provided with additional sources, so maybe someone can back that up. :-) Pumadog (talk) 17:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The certifications for Roxette are these:

• US certified sales: 2,000,000 Albums, 1,000,000 Singles, 50,000 Vieos
• UK certified sales: 1,460,000 Albums, 200,000 Singles
• German certified sales: 4,900,000 Albums, 500,000 Singles, 25,000 Videos
• Canadian certified sales: 1,250,000 Albums, 150,000 Singles (I have retrieved this before CRIA site went on construction)
• Brazilian certified sales: 450,000 Albums
• Dutch certified sales: 300,000 Albums
• Swiss certified sales: 580,000 Albums
• Austrian certified sales: 400,000 Albums, 75,000 Singles
• Swedish certified sales: 690,000 Albums, 285,000 Singles
• Finnish certified sales: 307,349
• Argentinean certified sales: 90,000 Albums, 16,000 Videos

We have some 14.7 million in certified sales from above markets, and that is really low for a band that has supposedly sold 60 million records. The markets above cover 70% of the global sales. Note that Roxette have no certifications for France (albums, singles) which is the fifth largest market in the world. They have just one Gold for Norway.--Harout72 (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The CAPIF database is screwed up, changing the options gets this (3 certs); also according to a Billboard magazine article from 1992, sales from South America were over 1 million at that time. I've also found 250,000 for C!B!B! in Japan, but I would need a miracle to find the 10 million+ records needed to make 75million records look realistic. So I agree with you Harout it should be left at 60 million. Mattg82 (talk) 22:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, even with those included not much will change as most of the south America's 1 million+ I'm sure is generated by Brazil and Mexico. Also, I am guessing Roxette may have sold some 2-3 million records in Japan, but clearly that won't change anything either. Yeap, 60 million is high enough.--Harout72 (talk) 22:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Too bad there's still no official global counter for record sales. Looks quite hard to catch all the actual numbers! Anyway, I don't think Roxette or their management exaggerate their success that much. They're not that braggart type of persons, judging from my 21 year long experience with that group. Btw. they have a huge fanbase in Argentina, right after Germany. There are for sure lots of certifications missing... Maybe the local EMI offices will request updates along the new album release. AFAIK that has to be done actively by the labels, right? Anyway, thanks for your work here!

One more thing: Roxette have reportedly sold 1 million copies of "Favourites from Crash! Boom! Bang!" via McDonalds in the US, which were never mirrored in charts or certifications. Don't know if there's a way to proof that. Pumadog (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Hey :). Please join the discussion here.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 14:25, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Sweden

I do think they have mistyped the platinum certification for Backstreet Boys.This is because it was certified platinum the sam week tat backstreet's back was relesed. You must remember that the debut album's sales might have stopped long ago since it stopepd charting before that. How can backstreet's back be the only album on the list to have gone platinum without gold first and yet the debut album gets a certification the same week it was relesed. Also the debut album stopped selling by then so you have to believe in three concidences: 1)Backstreets back is the only album not have been certified gold 2)the debut gets the platinum certification the same week as backstreets back release 3)the debut gets a certification half a year after exiting from the charts

So Backstreet Boys' platinum certification may have been meant to be backstreet's back gold certification afte all and they may have mistyped it. Hope you can understand what im saying 203.101.45.224 (talk) 09:45, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Those are assumptions and please do not change anything that are supported by the provided sources, that is in fact vandalism. Also, keep in mind that certifying bodies do post the certifications when they receive the required fee from the record companies, therefore, when they post the certification doesn't have anything to do how long before that the albums/singles have disappeared from the charts.--Harout72 (talk) 15:18, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Then why does the portuguese page state it as gold and not platinum 203.101.45.224 (talk) 16:56, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you should ask that same question to them as to why the IFPI (Sweden) has it Platinum and it's only Gold on the page you're referring to.--Harout72 (talk) 21:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

CRIA document

Hi Harout, I hope all is going well :) I have another CRIA thing for Celine Dion, I was wondering if I could email it to you and you upload it? Thank you :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 15:19, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much Harout :D--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 16:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Lady gaga Open discussion

i just make this statement ..."the current reference does mention 15 million sales and 40 million singles, its a pretty big error sum these completely different concepts. an album is an album and single are single i dont think i have to explain this concept far beyond, i think it was a mistake from the wiki guys let this thing slide over this list, watch out guys and read every reference people posted because some of them think with their fan heart rather that real facts that disillusioned the truth to other users. regards"... harout i'm not quite sure if you are the wiki administrator for this list but let me tell you this whole list lack of facts and that is because people are posting things of doubtless sources and even doing non-sense things like summing singles and albums, if that is the way this list is running the whole list is completely wrong!!, its like summing apples with watermelons, i dont think toyota calculates their car sells by summing cars sold with engines and tires. common sense please. i think lady gaga its the clear example of what people is doing with this list, how it is possible lady gaga with just one album (dont get me wrong its pretty good) has the same sells as red hot chilli peppers, motley crue and other artist that has been there for over 30 years? its important understand the value of wikipedia on the web, many web pages artist-bios extracts their info from wikipedia so if you said iron maiden has sold over 100 million records many band bios are going to copy this information which later are going to be use as reference for that particular statement. many magazines pull info. from wiki to get their notes, have you notice the first link of source its always wikipedia? i can not imagine iron maiden selling more than 100 million records, if you go album by album the sum does not match, even having not any riaa, ifpi or soundcan certification for any of their albums... im trying to put iron maiden as an example, same happened with gaga. wikipedia is starting to get a huge amount of incredibility and that is because the lacking of sources and administration, its a shame because the idea of wikipedia is great but someone need to control it. ps my uppercase button of my keyboard its broke hope to fix it this weekend.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Therein8383 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Harout, I definitely think there is a HUGE mistake put 55 million TO Lady gaga, nothing against her, but the title says "records". Any basic user of wikipedia can read this information and get confused. i think many of the artist on this list are not counting singles or anything like that according of what the source of lady gaga its claiming. I suggests: put 55 million and BIG asterisk on the number, the asterisk would be for reference below the able to alert the user about the 40 million are single not records. I still think we are summing apples with oranges. If you sell a car and one engine you cant count it as 2 cars sold. Ps you are welcome to the iron maiden's discussion, its getting hot. [1] --Therein8383 (talk) 03:57, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Gaga is a very new artist and her record sales have yet to be certified as it takes time for newer records to be processed by independent auditing agencies which work such organizations like RIAA. Let's be patient, RIAA and other larger markets' associations will soon certify and re-certify Gaga's records (albums, singles), and believe me the gap between her current certified sales and the 55 million will drastically narrow down. Currently, Gaga's certified singles are at 17 million from those markets that offer certification-databases. As for her albums, trust me (and I am a very skeptical person), her current certified sales on her albums are at well over 9 million, and her albums have yet to be re-certified.--Harout72 (talk) 04:10, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Gaga its a hit right now no question about. some of them said 8 until 15 million records, but my point is towards the best selling artist list. I think we just have to be loyal to the source and clear the article making the source remark. Im not saying Gaga should be out from the list but it needs clearly a clarification. Something like {55}*. below the table we could remark saying....

• *15 million records plus 40 million singles (That's it). The way its currently posted looks like gaga has sold 55 million records, that's even greater of what thriller did on the 80s. --Therein8383 (talk) 05:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, actually the list stats at the top that th figures within are based on overall record sales (singles, albums and videos). Therefore, I don't see the point of highlighting which portion of the sales represents singles and which represents albums. The 55 million is what her overall record sales is based on. We're ok, we don't need to do anything, all other artists' figures, although, are not broken down into singles and albums, their figures all represent overall record sales also, singles, albums and videos.--Harout72 (talk) 05:37, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

aha how come Lady Gaga has sold 40 million singles and she is not even appeared any of their singles or sum of them on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_singles_worldwide ... I think we should take a look to that source buddy.--Therein8383 (talk) 23:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I personally, don't have anything to do with that page. And that list documents those singles which have sold over 10 million units each respectively. I am sure at least two of Gaga's singles have already sold worldwide 10 million each, but again I don't operate that page so you should post your concerns there.--Harout72 (talk) 00:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

"Artist B"

I think my premise for "Artist B" was correct. No earned certifications, but lots of sales for lots of albums, with each under the certification level. Is there something I am missing? Do they do overall certs that aren't album based if they dont grant other certifications? Best, Rob ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 00:42, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

No, you're not missing anything, but again 10 albums 499,999 each, the combined actual sales of all of which is 4,999,990. I don't think we're missing so much out of the 100 million, if that figure were a true figure. And when it comes to other markets, the larger markets such as Japan (the second largest in the world), UK (the third largest), Germany (fourth largest), they all currently have their Gold-award-level for albums at 100,000 units, meaning we would not be missing too much there either even if Iron Maiden's albums go without being certified. However you approach the situation, the 100 million is clearly inflated. Also, there is no reason to assume that because albums just miss reaching the Gold status in the US, it necessarily means they come really close to 500,000 units, they may just be 100,000 or 200,000 maximum.--Harout72 (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, this was just a general question to expand my knowledge - not one specific to Maiden. Thanks for the answer on it. On a continued note, part of the reason I asked is because I had thought (maybe 15 years ago) I had heard of some sort of achievement cert(s), but I cant find anything about it or even if it was an RIAA cert (or not) - that may make the question make more sense. :-) Thanks again.

Other note: left you a message on my talk page. Can leave the IM Talk Page as it is I guess... my entry is in the diff. ROBERTMFROMLI ^TALK/_CNTRB 20:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Scooter (band)

Hi there. First, note that there is a missing reference for the Hungarian certification database (ref 35 I think). Second, is there any problem with the {{cite gold platin}} template? It's now implemented in about 800 articles, and so far it seems to be doing the job. --Muhandes (talk) 23:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I notice you reverted the template in Let's Talk About Love (Modern Talking album) too. I'm using it to fix all the broken links since BMVI changed the website structure again, and I rather not do it a third time when they change again. It also provides an easy way to refer to the artist, title and media type, and is a means for standardization. Your feedback is very appreciated. --Muhandes (talk) 23:56, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for bringing Hungary's certification source to my attention, I must have been really tired when trying to bring the article back to looking normal again :). As for BVMI's sources, I have noticed your hard work all over wikipedia as I have countless pages on watchlist all of which have BVMI's sources, thanks for your hard work by the way. Well, I replaced Modern Talking's cites only because they would not bring up the certifications without typing the name. This way one doesn't need to type the name, it's only a click away. And no, there is nothing wrong with the template, but I prefer having specific URLs set for each artist, which will require one click. I'd like to update some more of Modern Talking's BVMI citations, and I don't know how it works with the template. I update first, and you then add the URL to the template?--Harout72 (talk) 00:20, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Much simpler, the template does it all by itself. All you need to do is enter artist= and/or title= (and type= if appropriate) and the template will (hopefully) create the correct link. In the case above {{cite gold platin|title=Let's+Talk+About+Love|artist=Modern+Talking|accessdate=2010-11-08}} creates "Gold-/Platin-Datenbank (Modern+Talking; 'Let's+Talk+About+Love')" (in German). Bundesverband Musikindustrie. Retrieved 2010-11-08.. If you have any suggestions on how to improve it, it would be very appreciated. Hope you'll find it useful. --Muhandes (talk) 00:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I tried for Ready for Romance and it worked but the citation looks messy, see under the references here. It doesn't look as neat as it does for Let's Talk About Love. What can we do?--Harout72 (talk) 00:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Never mind, my mistake, I missed the "+". I got it now.--Harout72 (talk) 01:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I enhanced the template so you don't need the "+" now. Please let me know if there are any problems. --Muhandes (talk) 06:52, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I tried it without "+" for Backstreet Boys discography, and the page was re-directed to BVMI's site, but the certifications didn't come up, so I did it with the "+" again, and it worked. --Harout72 (talk) 16:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the problem was, since in the current version I used a space and it works well. Can you point me at a version that did not work? --Muhandes (talk) 16:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, I didn't use a space, I just stated BackstreetBoys. Now I see where the problem came from. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 22:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Seems everything is working now, and other users started using the template. If anything goes wrong or you have any idea of improvement, please let me know either on my talk page or on the template's talk page. --Muhandes (talk) 08:39, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Will do.--Harout72 (talk) 16:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

German sales

When I changed 2x Platinum for Backstreet boys (international) to platinum and added a platinum certification for Backstreet Boys (US) and you did not do anything about it, I see how inconsistent you are. There is no way the american version got any certification in Germany as it was not released in Germany at all. I did it just to test you 203.101.45.224 (talk) 10:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

It is most probably the American version and I think I have suggested that before. So what's so inconsistent about me? I don't follow you. It is more than possible that it's the US version, it's possible that they simply have failed to post "US version" next to it. That said US versions before have been certified by Earopean certifying agencies, take Ace of Base's US version of Happy Nation in Switzerland for example, see here. I think I have also explained to you that sometimes when they re-issue the same record under another label they certify them separately, but that is when the release dates are many years apart and when they are going to apply the newer certification-award-levels. But that is practiced by very few associations like ZPAV for example, take Queen's Made in Heaven, in 1997 the album's been certified Platinum for sales of over 100,000 (under the label "POMATON EMI"), then in 2009 they have certified Platinum the re-issued version (under the label "AGORA") of the same album for sales of over 20,000 as certification levels had declined drastically.--Harout72 (talk) 16:31, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

But both Backstreet Boys in 1996 and 1997 has been certified under Jive so what do you mean by different labels?203.101.45.224 (talk) 17:21, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

One of them is under Munich BMG the other under Rough Trade. But they are not separate certifications for being released under different labels, but because the second one seems to be another version.--Harout72 (talk) 17:23, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

As for Ace of Base, the album was re-released in Europe called Happy Nation (US Version). It was called US version only because the adjustments made from the first version. But that doesnt mean it was released only in the US. However that was not the case with the US version of Backstreet Boys it was not released anywhere outside the US. 203.101.45.224 (talk) 17:28, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

The US version of the album Backstreet Boys was modified also. You should contact Bundesverband Musicindustrie and ask them, I really can't help you from this point on, I'm sorry. I have provided you with all logical explanations I possibly could.--Harout72 (talk) 17:33, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

All I Want for Christmas Is You

Hiya Harout, I'm having trouble with something so I was wondering if you could help out :). So I just re-vamped the above mentioned page and have having some "never before seen source issues." So take a look at ref 25. Its done properly, I've done it many times but it doesn't come up in the ref list. Next, the last section of the "Live performances and cover versions" section is also with issues. Look at refs 37-44, they are all either mis-numbered or missing from the ref list on the bottom. Its really weird! Please help :D--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

I've fixed it using AWB. A really odd error that, some refs were missing brackets, making refs just go missing. Mattg82 (talk) 01:59, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Oh wow, thanks very much! I really appreciate it :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 02:06, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey, no problem Harout! Thanks for responding. Yes everything was fixed :) It was weird, I don't know how that small issue caused such a problem with the sourcing. Thank you :D--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 04:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey again :) I got a quick question. Do you know any editors that are interested in fixing or are familiar with the band Journey?--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 00:15, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Lol me neither :s. Because I'm getting all things MC to GA :) but some of her singles are covers, which means I have to improve her section and the section of the original. For example, the song "Open Arms (Journey song)" has to be done, so I want to split the GA with someone familiar with them. I'll do the MC part and they do the other. I need an MJ fan as well for "I'll Be There (The Jackson 5 song)" :). So there you go lol.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 03:56, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Hahahahahah I knew you were going to say that! lol, that isn't the issue, but I want one thats an experienced, normal and good working user, not some psycho fan lol. Well when that point comes for "I'll Be There" I'll be sure to have my pick :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 04:27, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Love Hurts Tour

Hey, seeing you are involved in articles regarding Cher, could you comment in the good article reassessment of the Love Hurts Tour? Thanks, Xwomanizerx (talk) 04:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Peer review

Please peer review the Backstreet Boys discography on the peer review page since you make contributions to it Skaterboy2012 (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Harvnb Links

Hi Harout :) I got a quick question. On "All I Want for Christmas Is You" the links are broken. For example, if you click on ref 3 and its "Nickson 1998" if you click on its its supposed to automatically link you to the author on the bottom, like in Like a Virgin. But mine, even though I copied it, doesn't work. Care to help? :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 09:49, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi :) So any of the book sources. Take ref 3 for example, "Rosen 1996". If you click on the name Rosen on the ref, it links you to the bottom of the page to the "references" and highlights the authors and book info. Mine don't do that :(--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 18:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Ohhh Harout, you are the best!

If only the other editors there were as nice, friendly and helpful as you! Let me know if you ever need help with anything! :)--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

The Velvet Rope

Hi Harout, I just wanted to know if Billboard (magazine) would be considered an acceptable source for a certification? About three months ago, I added this source, from BIllboard, to the The Velvet Rope to source certifications from Denmark, Japan, and Taiwan. Those three countries don't have a searchable database to verify certifications. Do you know of any other source where I could see if it is certified in those countries (book, website etc.). Thanks.Ga Be 19 09:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I was just concerned about the source, mainly because it looks like it was an ad promoting The Velvet Rope, most likely paid for by the recored label Virgin. Ga Be 19 22:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Hey :), please help reach consensus and vote here.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 05:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

ABBA discography

JzG is an admin, not a vandal. Looking at the references he removed, I think he was quite right.—Kww(talk) 19:22, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Huh, you're right the user is an admin, I didn't realize that. It's odd, he seems to have removed references. I have to check again what I've missed.--Harout72 (talk) 19:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Why Don't You Love Me

Please participate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Why_Don't_You_Love_Me_(Beyonc%C3%A9_Knowles_song)#Single.3F Jivesh boodhun (talk) 07:01, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

A-ha sales

Hi Harout, any helpful comments on a discussion about A-ha's record sales would be appreciated, thanks :) Mattg82 (talk) 23:33, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

You're Awesome

For defending the Rihanna 60 million album sales on the list of best selling albums. Just wanted to say that! I mean it's just simple numbers, people! :-) --mikomango (talk) 03:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you mean 60 million records (albums, singles and videos) at the List of best-selling music artists :). Because I would never support 60 million in album sales only for Rihanna as 75% of her 60 million is based on singles :).--Harout72 (talk) 04:03, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Discussion

Long time no speak my friend :) I hope everything is going well for you~! I got a little vote here lol, please help reach consensus here. Its an easy vote, so don't get discouraged :P.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 23:09, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Harout. I was wondering if you could give me your opinion here. So I explained this to Max24 and want your opinion :) I wrote "Also Max, on a different subject. There is something very inconsistent with Dion's New Zealand certifications. Now, I've never seen the book, but you have and claim Music Box and Daydream are both 5x Platinum and Dion's FIY and LTAL are both 10x and 9x Platinum. Now, here we see Music Box peaked at #2 and spent 77 weeks in the chart, and is #20 on the "all time chart". Now Daydream peaked at #1 and spent only 49 weeks in the chart and is #252 on the all time chart. Big difference, I doubt they could share the same certification level. Now it gets really weird with Dion. FIY peaked at #1 and spent 76 weeks in the chart (1 less than MB) and is #19 on the "all time chart" (1 higher place than Carey. Now it in no way makes sense that her album should have sold double. Its absolutely impossible. Now look at LTAL which like Daydream was less successful. It peaked at #1 as well spending 50 weeks in the chart (1 more than Carey), however charting at #145 on the "all time chart". Now the reason Daydream and LTAL are 100 spaces away is because Dion's spent 8 weeks at number 1, where Carey's spent 1. its understandable. Anyway, there must obviously be some flaw in the information provided in the past. Please comment :)" Now I simply cannot believe that there is that kind of inconsistency. The only thing we know about the certifications for either is what Max and MariahDaily have told us. Thanks!--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 21:59, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

You hit the nail right on the head Harout :) That is exactly my point, it doesn't make any sense, unless the situation you mentioned is correct. Even if its true however, it doesn't add up why Dion's albums would have sold such a similar amount, even though one clearly performed way better.--CallMeNathan • Talk2Me 01:12, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

"Is"

How in the world is it incorrect to capitalize "is"? Yves (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

"Is" should not be capitalized when it's not the first word in the title. Isn't that correct English?--Harout72 (talk) 01:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

"Is" is a verb. Verbs are always capitalized. I think you're getting it confused with "in", a preposition. Yves (talk) 01:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, perhaps. Please correct it for me if you'd like. My apologies.--Harout72 (talk) 01:07, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I corrected it, thanks for bringing it to my attention.--Harout72 (talk) 01:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It's no problem; an understandable thing. For reference, the page for capitalization conventions is at WP:CAPS. :) Yves (talk) 01:14, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

A warning,

This is not vandalism. Vandalism has a very, very specific definition on wikipedia.. To break it down, edits which are deliberately made to compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia are vandalism. Nothing more, nothing less. Spamming 'poop' in an article would be vandalism, because it is clearly meant to compromise the encyclopedia's integrity. A good faith edit, such as the one above, where the user was trying to improve the encyclopedia(even if they didn't realize why the policies are there, or that they need to be followed) is never vandalism.

Before I end this warning, take note that calling good-faith edits vandalism is taken as a personal attack, another thing on this website that isn't allowed.— Dædαlus^{+ Contribs} 07:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I would agree with what you're suggesting (Good faith edit) if I called his first attempt vandalism, but if the user has been warned multiple times for providing incorrect information, how could it still be viewed as a good faith edit? I strongly disagree with you that I personally attacked him as the user continuously violates wikipedia policy.--Harout72 (talk) 07:29, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether you disagree with me or not; that is not vandalism, and continuing to call it so is a personal attack, which is against policy. I suggest you stop doing so, again. Second warning, by the way.— Dædαlus^{+ Contribs} 07:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Second warning by the way? What is that supposed to mean? I am well aware of wikipedia's policies, stop threating me. You might want to scrutinize my warning that I have given him at his talk-page, my first warning does not contain the term vandalism. So I'm not at all sure where you're getting the idea that I initially thought of his edits as vandalism. Also, if you disagree with how the third level warning reads at the template for incorrect information, perhaps you should discuss that at the template's discussion.--Harout72 (talk) 08:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with the template; this is not about your warning to them. This is about your personal attacks in your edit summaries, and your promise above to continue those personal attacks. As to the second warning, I took your reply above as continued denial that calling their edits vandalism was wrong, and thus thought you were going to continue. I thus take it back, but the first remains. Unless the user is deliberately trying to compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia, it isn't vandalism. No good-faith edit, no matter how mis-guided, is ever vandalism.— Dædαlus^{+ Contribs} 08:46, 17 December 2010 (UTC)