User talk:Dhoffryn

This user updated my Man Gucci Mane’s discography 10 minutes ago — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:3710:DF0:61A3:F930:970C:CD98 (talk) 09:24, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Robby.is.on. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Songs for the Deaf, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 14:41, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Ellipse (album), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Robby.is.on (talk) 14:49, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at You Are Free, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: You Are Free was changed by Dhoffryn (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.876892 on 2017-08-04T16:27:41+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dhoffryn! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Worm That Turned (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 20:03, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

It looks like you're a new user. We're happy to have you here but your edit to Embryonic was rolled back because you used a self-published source. Please take a look at WP:SOURCE to get an idea of what is and is not acceptable. Please post to my talk if you have any questions. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding more sources, such as at Illinois (Sufjan Stevens album) and Carrie & Lowell. You're doing a great job but you still added some self-published sources to Imgur, which is just an image hosting site. Linking to the original is fine--since it's a database and you can't link to a particular record, some users will write an explanatory note. Thanks again and let me know if I can help. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:06, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding sources for your edits, such as here. I'd encourage you to take a look at WP:LINKROT so you can get a better feel for why it's important to have more complete information about sources. Bare URLs is a start but they are not very durable. Thanks again. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that when you add French certifications and sales from Infodisc, you are linking to an old version of the site, and the links you provide are not directing to the correct page on Infodisc in order to verify the information you are adding. Therefore you are likely to see a lot of your work reverted in future because other editors won't be able to check the information is true. I've changed your edits on Oxygène to the correct pages, for example.

Please also note that the sales figures given on Infodisc are not official – the website clearly states that they are only estimates supplied by the Infodisc team. Thanks. Richard3120 (talk) 13:43, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In certifications sections, there is a parameter specifically for the sales reference. Add |salesref= followed by the reference. Do not put the sales reference right next to the figure. Thank you. Ss112 19:53, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. You have been informed above that InfoDisc is not a reliable source for music sales figures in France, yet have continued massively adding information to articles using this website as a reference.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at xx (album), you may be blocked from editing. Dan56 (talk) 11:31, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't use Twitter as a source for sales or basically anything. It is not reliable except for very specific claims (see WP:TWITTER). Also, please stop adding "autocat=yes" to certifications you add; it is deprecated, outdated and has no use anymore. Finally, use the salesref parameter. Do not just place the reference for the sales right next to the amount. Type |salesref= followed by the reference. I asked you to do this before, so please start incorporating it into your edits. It would also be helpful if you'd stop using bare URLs per WP:Link rot. Thank you. Ss112 23:19, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited UB40 discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page GLF (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:23, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Dhoffryn and record sales figures. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:26, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DonIago (talk) 19:51, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please get consensus that the website www.artistas-espectaculos.com is a reliable source before using it to add Portuguese certifications to various articles. There is no way of confirming that the certifications stated on this website are genuine, and many of them look highly suspect – e.g. Tindersticks' Across Six Leap Years being certified 6× platinum in its first (and only) week on the chart, and still only charting at no. 22. You may find that you will have to revert every edit that you have made using this website, so I advise you to ask the Wikipedia community to investigate it and accept it as a reliable source. Thank you. Richard3120 (talk) 18:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your Vanessa Paradis (album)'s edits are false. First, you can watch on pages of other famous albums (Thriller, Ray of Light, Music Box...) : the mention "IFPI" is just for Europe, and not for worldwide's sales. Then, as I already told you, your Billboard's link talks about "350.000 sales in France", so it's unuseful and false to write "900.000". You can use Infodisc for certifications (they're official) ; it's their sales estimates that are not a reliable source. Thank you. Bobby80 (talk) 09:33, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dhoffryn,

It seem that you didn't read the Wikipedia rules about original research since you keep reverting my edition on Believe (Cher album).The souce that you put there is an ad provided by Cher and Warner Bros., Wikipedia accepts only secondary sources as reliable. Look here: Wikipedia:No original research and here: Wikipedia:Record charts#Certifications. Hope that it was not your intention. You can talk to me here or in my talk page.--88marcus (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mike Oldfield discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BPI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Apologies for the confusion at Mazzy Star discography. The reference used on that page wasn't really a direct reference to the album's UK sales, merely a link to the specific issue of Uncut. The 70,000 sales figure was contained within an addendum to the actual article, which you can see here—"The Prettiest Star" (it's an image, so you need to down to see it). I purchased that issue of Uncut digitally from a French website back in October 2013, but that website won't allow me to access it anymore. I've e-mailed their customer service, so will re-add the figure when they get back to me. Also, Nielsen SoundScan only began operating in the UK in 1994, so the British Phonographic Industry wouldn't be unaware of a hefty chunk of She Hangs Brightly's sales in the UK (1990 → early 1994). Just thought I'd explain this before I re-add the 70,000 figure (eventually). But I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you for all your work adding sales figures to album articles. You may not have noticed, but I took all the sales figures you added to Cat Power album articles and added them to Cat Power discography (thanking you). Just thought I'd take this opportunity to thank you again. ;) Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:53, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reporting that IP editor, I've re-blocked them for an extended time as there's a pattern of incorrect info being added. ~ mazca ^talk 00:05, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, but I am genuinely mystified – it really honestly wasn't showing any certification at all when I checked the NZ charts website. And this wasn't just an oversight on my part... I deliberately went and checked several other weeks either side of that date as well, just in case, and they were all showing a blank for the certification. I wonder if the website had a glitch for an hour or two, and I happened to check it during that period. Anyway, it's sorted now, so thank you. I suspect the album probably received a certification in the Netherlands as well, but the year 1981 seems to be missing from the NVPI database – I may message them and ask if this will be rectified. Richard3120 (talk) 18:51, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the clarification, I try to check it every time when I edit something (in case I am wrong) but honestly did not even think that ther might be a glitch in the system. The only other weird thing I have noticed while going through the NZ charts that an album would get a gold/platinum status on one page and it would remain that way on that page but later on an other page of a next week it would not have that status. But that was rare, whatever that was. Dhoffryn (talk) 09:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah's single AIWFCIY was certified 6x Platinum by RIAA during October. The website glitches always back and forth. It is verified by multiple journals and I was the one who updated her total claims on the page List of best selling music artists of all time. The master tone was verified 2x platinum over a decade ago and there is no way they reissue the same certification a decade later. The website had the certification updated and now for some reason it doesn't show it. fidelovkurt 17:18, 21 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you not wholly undo edits that improve the article and preserve its consistent style of sourcing? Thanks isento (talk) 16:22, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Platinum means certified 1M unites sold you don't need old citation anymore Jit.cuet (talk) 06:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC) Platinum is based on shipments plus streaming, combined in US. Many other pages show combinations of Certifications and actual sales, different numbers. And platinum does not mean automatially that really one million are sold, it can be shipped one million and sold 922,000, not the same thing. Dhoffryn (talk) 07:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC) You could've done combination for sales and shipped units Jit.cuet (talk) 00:57, 29 March 2020 (UTC) I have add it like on the page of the Old town road (Billy Ray, Lil Nas), well Fiona's version is 1,000,000 // 922,000 .... that is the only thing I can remember right now. Dhoffryn (talk) 01:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC) you should read Recording Industry Association of America , Album-equivalent unit, Album sales, International Federation of the Phonographic Industry etc. and their definitions. I have and it it is not that simple, check Mariah Carey's page, Christmas album, certified 6 times platinum with included sales of 5,700,000. Many other pages are like that. Dhoffryn (talk) 08:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bonobo (musician), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BPI (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 14:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked the IP for edit warring but please note you are also at risk of violating WP:3RR. Please be careful or you could also be blocked. Thanks. Glen 08:38, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• To return the previously removed edit, should I wait a day? Dhoffryn (talk) 09:14, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Dhoffryn, you would be violating 3RR if you did it so I would not recommend reverting. Glen 09:33, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Dhoffryn, I'm not close to the edit in question so cannot comment on its legitimacy (or not) but my recommendation is to point your reasoning out on the article talk page and get consensus from other editors. Thanks. Glen 09:35, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Glen, I have left on some other talk pages such questions, it still awaits to be answered. So I don't know. Here some other users can get blocked for some time but will continue to return regardlass what action was pulled. Thanks anyway. Dhoffryn (talk) 09:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Lover (album); that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Adam9007 (talk) 21:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dhoffryn. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 01:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• On second thought, I have overturned this grant. Please follow up on Perm regarding this. ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 01:24, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Could you add a Norway certification in "Dangerous Woman" (song) please? It's certified 1x platinum. Thank you very much for updating. :) AnthonyFG (talk) 08:40, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AnthonyFG: Sure, I have missed that one out. Thanks. Dhoffryn (talk) 09:36, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem! AnthonyFG (talk) 16:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dhoffryn. Can you please take more effort to make sure the footnotes you use on certification tables are correct? To set the footnotes you can edit the parameters of {{Certification Table Bottom}}. For example in this edit, the table does not need shipments and sales footnotes, so they should be removed, the way I did it here. More recently, in this edit, the table actually does use shipments, so I corrected it here. I'd be happy to assist if you need more data. We just had a bot fix about 13,000 of those, so I try to keep it clean from now on. Your work is much appreciated as always. --Muhandes (talk) 15:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: Sorry for the inconvenience, I will pay more attention to it in the future. Dhoffryn (talk) 17:12, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Certified Sales amount number corrected as referred from Pro Musica Brazil.^[1] Brazil now recognizing 40k sales for International Singles to certify Platinum and 20k sales for Gold, FYI. This is different from Brazil only singles. Jit.cuet (talk) 22:12, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jit.cuet: As it was pointed out to me by some other user, certifications in Brazil are certified by the date of release, so with extra parameters like relmonth, then the certification table automatically calculates everything. Quote: "In some countries like Brazil the album was certified based in the date it was released but in others like Denmark it's based in the date of the certification, the certification table is already programmed to include the number of copies using the criteria of each country" by user 88marcus Dhoffryn (talk) 22:22, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:50, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Shania Twain; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.   Aloha27  talk  22:36, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aloha27: The person in question is repeatedly using a primary source, artists own web sites should be avoided for album sales claim (especially self published sources), third party sources should be used. Other editor Caldorwards4 has reverted the user in question, and the same user has returned and removed it and continued with his vandalism. I have reported the user Aquamarine for vandalism, and nothing happened. But then I am the one who is "problematic". And talk pages can be utterly useless, especially if the other person does not care for interaction (or even does not know how to use it). Dhoffryn (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discuss it on the talk page. I believe that to be the only option at this point in time. Even if 3RR is not broken, editors can still be blocked for edit warring. I would hate to see that happen to you whom I consider to be a good editor. Better still, IF the information can be sourced elsewhere why not fix it?

I have found a third-party source, umusic.ca. Regards,   Aloha27  talk  23:59, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Aloha27: What do you mean, that is a press release from Universal Music Canada? Dhoffryn (talk) 01:28, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

34+35 (the single) is now certified "Gold" in Canada. Are you able to add it on the page? AnthonyFG (talk) 07:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recently added the Canadian sales of Eminem’s Kamikaze album on Eminem albums discography, which you removed, stating that the article was covering US sales and not Canadian sales.

Kamikaze sold over 400,000 units in its first week alone in the US, which you can check on Billboard. If we are saying that the article is talking about US sales, this means the article is claiming that the album sold around 300,000 in a few months, which does not add up at all.

The article is taking about Canadian sales, so would it be possible for me to revert your changes?

Joeee777 Joeee777 (talk) 13:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joeee777: It is not Canadian sales, just like it says it is Buzz Angle US report, other sales that are also mentioned in the article are the Greatest Showman sales, and those most definitely sales of 1.27 million are not Canadian, but American ones. Also you have to know the difference in between sales and all together combined units. Sales is a term used for such called pure sales which are physical sales and downloads (copies sold, like in a traditional sense). And then you have all together combined sales + streaming. Like the Kamikaze article says "opened at number one on the Billboard 200 with 434,000 album-equivalent units,^[1] consisting of 252,000 traditional album sales as well as 225 million streams" It sold in fact in the first week 252,000 copies but with streaming equivalent sales it had 434,000 album equivalent sales. Overall in that year alone Kamikaze sold 373,000 copies in traditional sense. And those are the reported US traditional sales that are mentioned in the article. Dhoffryn (talk) 13:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I’m aware of SPS and pure sales etc. No problem, thank you for the info. Joeee777 (talk) 13:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dhoffryn, I just wanted to ask if you know whether the account 'chartdata' on Twitter is a reliable source for album sales on discographies? I have seen other pages source it, such as Drake discography. Let me know. Thanks. Joeee777 (talk) 16:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joeee777: Chartdata is on the list of websites to avoid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Record_charts Basically it is an unverified twitter account that publishes data, we still have no idea who runs it (owner remains anonymous). In general social media (Instagram, twitter accounts etc) should be avoided as sources. Chartdata takes data from various sites, some are good like Billboard, but others like mediatraffic are not. Still, should be avoided. Also check out if you haven't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums/Sources // Also I tried finding Kamikaze Canadian sales, can't find at the moment year ends 2018 Canadian report. Only other one I did find is this: https://www.fyimusicnews.ca/articles/2019/01/09/2018-billboard-year-end-chart-top-10s total consumption of albums in Canada I guess. Dhoffryn (talk) 16:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, appreciate it and I’ll be sure to check out that page of sources to avoid in future. Nice find, is album consumptions the same as sps or album-equivalent units? If so, I’ll add those stats to the discography later. Or also been looking for alternatives of the worldwide sales for Eminem’s latest 3 albums, as the last ones were on a fan page as you know. The only ones I could find are either first week sales, unreliable sources or outdated. Let me know if you manage to find anything. Joeee777 (talk) 16:59, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joeee777: Total consumption is sales + streaming. Nielsen year end report is more detailed and it can point out the sales, sales + streaming or most streamed tracks, top vinyl sales etc. This other report the FYI News article, you can add it to the commercial performance of the album's article. Updated worldwide sales are trickier to find, and that is why they are missing. News agencies can report it, usualy best sellers end on IFPI global sales report annualy. I have gotten used to outdated data lol, because sometimes not even that exists. Hard to say. Dhoffryn (talk) 17:50, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it is tricky tho, and hopefully one day Nielsen will release worldwide sales of different artists over the years or something. So the FYI news article can’t be added to the sales table on the discography? As I believe some of the other stats referenced are sales + streaming, especially all stats for the UK, so it would be a good addition. Joeee777 (talk) 01:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah just checked and the majority of other stats in the sales colum are ALBUM + TEA + ON-DEMAND SEA, which is the case on lots of other discographies too, so it should be fine to add the FYI website one. Joeee777 (talk) 01:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, is it fine to add that source? Joeee777 (talk) 12:38, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Joeee777: I missed this one, you mean FYI News? That source is okay I guess. Sales section on wiki discographies as it was explained to me should be without streaming, just pure sales. Dhoffryn (talk) 13:03, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that too for a while but it seems that that’s only the case for US sales now, while the rest can be both. Strange... Joeee777 (talk) 13:07, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

آرمین هویدایی (talk) 19:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Dhoffryn. I hope you are doing well!. Do you have any update for the Latvian certifications (1998-2001)? I tried months ago find something related in Latvian sources with no results. I've also noticed your additions into the List of best-selling albums in Italy, a list that is part of my To-do list. But I think we should remove examples of 300-499,000 copies. Not even in the post-2009 era, an album reached sales of 500,000 units but in the album era, 500,000 units were sufficiently common, mainly among Italians. There is a lot of albums to be added, and eventually even I think we should trim the list with only albums from up to 700,000 or 800,000 for example or only above a million. Also, by any chance do you have access or know how to read articles in Corriere della Sera without subscription? I noticed there is some articles talking about "sales", and tried to found something related to Madonna but not a limited preview is available. Thanks for your contributions. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Apoxyomenus: Hello. I tried contacting Latvian association (LAMPA was the name, I think), but there were two of them, first organization gave me an email to the other one, the one I was looking for but they have never responded. Elsewhere, I had no clue where to look. // When it comes to best selling list, I have seen some other page with best selling lists by countries and they had lower entries as well, so I added some as well (I don't really know the process). Initially, I wanted to focus and find and add bigger updated numbers, just I couldn't find it. You are a better judge what to remove, so then what, keep from 500,000 and up like you said? So I know what to add. When it comes to Corriere, that is why in the end I subscribed to some basic search for 7 something euros per month, if you want you can send me the links so I can check it out, if I can. Dhoffryn (talk) 20:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll try to do a further research regarding Latvian certs when I'm available. With Corriere, I don't have a specific link just first results when I put "Madonna copie vendute" or similar key words, while I also know they probably aren't sales related to Madonna. In a general sense, I'm trying to find updated sales or missing sales such as from Evita or GHV2 (I know during its released she was among the best selling foreign acts). By the way, this is another good source to find stuff from Italy. With the best-selling list, we don't have guidelines but I definitely would remove sales below 500,000. In the very future, we could re-evalute the additions beyond 500,000 (or below 1 million) while we keep adding more examples in that range. Also, do you happen to know if there is a source to find sales in Hungary? Thanks --Apoxyomenus (talk) 20:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone through with Madonna's sales more than once, mostly using copie, mila copie, sometimes vendute, with other artists dischi platino, d'oro and that is not that much mentioned. Most of it it is added here, Evita - I tried and didn't find much. Looking at release date, Pink Floyd Echoes was released in November 2001, just like GHV2 and both were best sellers, and Echoes sold 400,000 copies in two months. Maybe she is in that range as well? Just my guess. L'Unita, I have used but not that much as the rest. Hungary - good luck, I really don't know. Dhoffryn (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I did the same. I guess at some points homonymous titles sometimes affects if the coverage is deeper to the other works, the film instead the album e,g as well some media outleats spelled a name very different to the original release. Thanks and keep it up. Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 01:38, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eros Ramazzotti discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page AFI.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of best-selling singles in France, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Art Company.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of best-selling albums in Italy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Elisa.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent edit to Renaissance. When you use {{Certification Table Top}}, you should also use the caption field to add a table heading per MOS:TABLE. So for example instead of adding {{Certification Table Top}} you should type. {{Certification Table Top|caption=Certifications for ''Renaissance''}}

You can see the difference below:

Without caption:

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
* Sales figures based on certification alone. ^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

With caption:

Certifications for Renaissance

Region	Certification	Certified units/sales
* Sales figures based on certification alone. ^ Shipments figures based on certification alone.

This is requirement per the manual of style for accessibility, which ensures that website content can be accessed, read and understood by everyone, regardless of how they access the internet. >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 22:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC) >> Lil-unique1 (talk) — 22:01, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will do. Dhoffryn (talk) 08:05, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just letting you know that instead of this, which would require a source, you can do this, which will automatically give the correct amount for jazz, classical and world music albums. Happy editing! --Muhandes (talk) 07:57, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I did not know which exact parameter to use there. Thanks. Dhoffryn (talk) 08:02, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I cheated a bit. I just added this parameter ten minutes ago for your future convenience --Muhandes (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, ok. Thanks! If I can ask while we are at it, were there different classical certifications in Spain that you know of? Because of this stating 10 times platinum - 250,000 for a classical album in Spain: ^[1] Dhoffryn (talk) 08:44, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a source for the levels for classical certifications in Spain? I don't see it in Productores de Música de España. --Muhandes (talk) 08:50, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to find it. Dhoffryn (talk) 09:59, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of best-selling albums by country, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages David Gray and Kayah.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of best-selling albums by country, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page BT.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quick sand is Platnium Tyresetheking1k (talk) 00:00, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source says gold. Dhoffryn (talk) 00:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of best-selling singles by country, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Galway Girl.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

. Please tell me why a stylized form of a song title is accepted in one instance (Nothing Compares 2 U) but is not accepted for another (new body rhumba). This is a serious question. If you adhere to the artist's intention of how their song titles are displayed, then why is not "new body rhumba" displayed as such? Why are some displayed as desired by the artist, yet that one is steadfastly held to grammatical rules, rather than as the artist's wishes. What are the rules and why would certain administrators (Justin) apply them to whatever their whim may be? I don't know all of the rules and I don't care to know. I made a good faith effort to improve this site by changing a page to reflect an artist's true representation oftheir work, i.e. "new body rhumba" as opposed to the incorrect "New Body Rhumba". That's how they released it, that's how it's displayed on youtube, spotify, their own website, their record company's website and a myriad of other places. Why not here? Also, I'm offended by being told by the administrator (Justin) that I'm "confused". I'm not confused about anything. LCD Soundsystem released a song called "new body rhumba". Why would Wikipedia allow some architect of disinformation refuse to allow LCD Soundsystem to have their song displayed as they intend? How does Justin think he knows better than they do what their song is called? 2023-02-16 at 06-54-41 User talk 72.182.35.222 2023-02-16 at 07-08-06 User talk 72.182.35.222 Thank you for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:FFC0:63:7122:31EF:8C5:CBE4 (talk) 20:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, "Justin" is me and I'm not an admin. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I’ve seen you edit a lot with album certifications but I opened up a discussion here regarding whether or not we’re supposed to keep an old sales ref after an album has been updated with a new cert. If you’re able to please comment there. Thank you! Pillowdelight (talk) 05:09, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

https://elcomercio.pe/saltar-intro/netflix/series/luis-miguel-la-serie-cual-fue-el-disco-mas-vendido-del-cantante-el-top-9-de-su-discografia-aries-nada-es-igual-mx-noticia/ Josemi5000 (talk) 18:40, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Josemi5000: It was already explained to you, those are simply exaggerated sales. His biggest sales are way behind him achieved at height of his fame. And rarely artists have continuously amazing catalogue sales that continue selling on (like the Beatles) Dhoffryn (talk) 18:55, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

no puedes demeritar al mayor vendedor de discos del idioma español que es Luis Miguel en favor de don nadies como enrique iglesias y ricky martin a los que le aceptas ventas de 70 milloenes de copias que noooo tienen, Luis Miguel ha mantenido sus ventas a traves de los años solamente sus discos de boleros suman 48 millones hasta el dia de hoy, 60 millones segun datos de hace mas d 10ños no es real, tu informacion es vieja.. Josemi5000 (talk) 20:57, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are fine. In general people are in denial that their fave artists continue to sell in massive amounts, which they really don't. You can see the drop with sales with everyone. And when it come to Ricky and Enrique they definitely had big success with their english releases. Dhoffryn (talk) 21:50, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I edited Nicki Minaj discography yesterday. I changed her Pink Friday’s sales to make it correspond to the RIAA certification criterion and cited the RIAA website. Can I ask what did I do wrong, since you undid my edit. If I change the citation to this（https://www.riaa.com/gold-%20platinum/?tab_active=default-award&se=pink+Friday#search_section）will it be ok? Andrewliu0220 (talk) 05:16, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know RIAA includes streaming equivalent units. But we’re talking about sales not pure sales in the sales column in ‘Nicki Minaj discography’ right? Cuz 1 album sale equals to 1500 streaming. Andrewliu0220 (talk) 05:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrewliu0220: Actually it is pure sales, not the streaming figures. Also including certification's figures those can include sales, streaming and shipments (delivered to the store is not necessarily sold). On Nielsen reports you can see the sections where all of it is separated into different sections and you can see sales, sps column etc. Dhoffryn (talk) 06:48, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello i edited The Bee Gees album sales on their wiki page to a number that most music organizations have their sales placed at i even gave multiple reputable sources to support such numbers. From Warner Music Germany, Billboard, Capitol records and Warner Music group and more they all have The Bee Gees sales placed at 220 million albums sold not 120 or 200 million the 120 number is from 2001 completely outdated and not what their sales are anymore, so why do you keep removing the edit that is being supported by references that support the edit?? With wrong and outdated information 120 million is no longer their sales Warner Music has said so they are The Bee Gees record label I think they would know how many albums they sold, so why do you keep reversing my edits when they are being supported by big name music organizations that support my edit and replacing them with old, outdated & wrong information as well as non reputable sources??? RelevantChemical416 (talk) 20:20, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Labels often can exaggerate their own worldwide sales and blow it out of proportion. There were some reports for Spirits having flown that it sold 20 and then 30 million albums while Andy Gibbs own page suggested 15 million. Some sources even claiming 250 million albums sold while they have had two probable releases that sold the most (and that is not even that much verified). Bee Gees themselves talked about having many flops while finally striking a hit. Massachusetts was the big one, later on came Saturday Night Fever and Spirits having flown and then crash and burn people hating them post disco frenzy. They came somewhat with ESP. They had some further success Still Waters and some compilations. But other than that nothing that huge like SNF. People feeling the need to update sales while nothing that much huge is going on is just pointless. Dhoffryn (talk) 20:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But you have no reliable source? your just making up a number you can’t do that on here your breaking the TOS of Wikipedia we use reliable sources and references you aren’t even checking the references I put down (btw the page had it at 220 million sold before someone changed it and caused all of this chaos) your just saying that’s not their album sales when most statistics and album sales tracking websites have their sales at 220 million at least and The Bee Gees even their worst selling albums sold 1 to 2 sometimes 3 million copies sold it’s not just spirits and SNF they also had big selling albums like one night only that sold over 7 million copies and Still waters which sold 3 to 4 million copies your just making stuff up, the few websites that say 120 million sold are not reliable and are using WAYYY out of date info at least over 20 years old just leave their album sales at 220 million that’s what most people & org’s have them at, it’s the popular opinion and most likely the most accurate number for modern times not over 20 years ago, are you really going to lose sleep over it???? RelevantChemical416 (talk) 07:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Official charts company is a reliable source. And you jumping from 250 million to 220 million tells me enough. Other reasoning I have already explained. P.S. 200 million others as well see as an inflated number as well. Dhoffryn (talk) 07:59, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And Billboard, Universal music group which is that largest record label in the world (also their record label) and CNN aren’t??? Cmon now dude. Official charts company is British they don’t know what the sales in America or anywhere else are they only focus on what the U.K sales are at. Your pointing our one source that has their sales at 120 when there at least a hundred that have them at 220. And i put 250 back in the page from a previous user who put that number in then I realized that it was at 220 before that my mistake, & 200 is not inflated its been 22, 23 years since they reported the 120 number plus members have died and they have had multiple resurgences from various things from TikTok & movies to documentaries which caused massive album sales movements, then let’s just put they sold over 200 million records get rid of the 120 and leave it at that, that way their isn’t the dispute over the 220 or 250 just leave it at that, an even 200 we at least know that have sold that much. Can we agree on that? The 120 number is just wrong and completely outdated like I said 22, 23 years, that is not their sales anymore and you know that. They have definitely sold over 80 million in over 2 decades. RelevantChemical416 (talk) 08:31, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CNN did not even say records sold (combination of albums, singles etc) they said ALBUMS sold. Meaning 200 million albums plus singles and videos and so on. And Billboard can pass on any kind of information as well, like they were passing just like that that Thriller sold 100 million copies (other sources range from 60 to 100, some even above 140 million). Here on wiki music editors look at gaps and try make them smaller as much as possible. And that 80 million records I disagree. Like said nothing huge is going for them through years to add up huge numbers. Their prime is long gone now. Extremely rarely bands like Pink Floyd and Beatles sell well and you can see it through their catalogue sales in biggest markets but even they are not passing massive numbers. Dhoffryn (talk) 08:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm not that familiar with Spanish charts. Can you please verify if the Thriller (song) has posted as 2x Platinum on: SEMANA 43: del 25.10.2010 al 31.10.2010 for 80k units?. Thanks in advance TheWikiholic (talk) 05:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have found one here: ^[2] I just don't know why the certification table says 100k when on the document says 80k. I don't know what extra parameters to put into certification table for correct numbers. :/ Dhoffryn (talk) 08:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Dhoffrynr, I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to bring to your attention an issue regarding the Wikipedia page for Faye Wong's Di Dar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Di-Dar There is misinformation on the page concerning the sales figures of her album "Di-Dar." The page claims that the album was certified triple platinum by the Hong Kong IFPI and that it sold 1,500,000 copies across Asia. However, these figures are not supported by reliable sources. The official website of the Hong Kong IFPI does not provide any certification information for this album. https://www.ifpihk.org/en/gold-disc-award-presented#1995 https://www.ifpihk.org/en/gold-disc-award-presented#1996 Websites such as bestsellingalbum and Billboard magazine do not contain relevant sales data for this album. https://bestsellingalbums.org/artist/4182 The album was released in 1995 but only appeared on sales charts in 1996. According to Billboard magazine, the Best -selling female artist in Hong Kong in 1995 was Cass Phang, OVER 350,000 UNITS SOLD ON THE LAST 2 ALBUMS IN HK! Current No. 1 selling female artist in Hong Kong!. https://books.google.com.hk/books/content?id=2AsEAAAAMBAJ&hl=zh-TW&pg=PA69&img=1&zoom=3&sig=ACfU3U25LirJ6GTX5_3sUSfquIRt0ciwRw&w=1308

and in 1996, it was Sammi Cheng, who released three Cantonese albums, each selling over 130,000 copies in Hong Kong . https://books.google.com.hk/books/content?id=fA8EAAAAMBAJ&hl=zh-TW&pg=PA60&img=1&zoom=3&sig=ACfU3U2-0-IhGet_hVqmM3KMEhlla3uXxw&w=1280 Given these points, it is highly unlikely that Faye Wong's "Di-Dar" album sold 150,000 copies in Hong Kong, let alone 1,500,000 copies across Asia. The market demand for Cantonese albums does not support such high sales figures. I kindly request that you verify this information and make the necessary corrections to ensure the accuracy of the Wikipedia page. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Mimi Mimi197208 (talk) 13:10, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basically it can be very tricky even with official pages, some were not updated regularely. Overall you can add certifications if they are coming from other legit sources. Some databases (like french certifications one) can be messy and not totally complete. Record sales reports, sometimes are reported, sometimes not. In regards of that Faye Wong page, that source it is some kind of Sina News, seems to be coming from Sina Corporations (wiki section mentions Cyberspace Administration of China that there were accusing Sina of distoring facts). I don't use Sina, so I don't really know that too much about it. When it comes to bestsellingalbums page that page is not reliable and it is run, well we don't know (seems to be some kind of blog run by unknown person adding sales from the net, maybe some are legit, some are not).^[3] Billboard is a valid source, but just because sales are not mentioned there it does not mean necesarily that it does not exist. However overall you have mostly explained yourself (even with examples) so if you feel like it is invalid and that those sales are unreliastic just remove those sales, and summarize it in your edit (say inflated sales, unreliable source etc.). Dhoffryn (talk) 13:43, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I have decided to remove some inflated sales figures because they are not accurate,Even if I may be life-threatening.

Faye Wong was not very popular at that time, and the best-selling female artist award in 1996 went to Sammi Cheng. In the top ten best-selling albums of 1996, she was not included.

I do not use it too, but I have read the article and can understand Simplified Chinese. There are many doubts because I read some information in Billboard mentioning the overall decline in Hong Kong's album sales, showed the picture of Faye wong , then listed Cass Phang as the best-selling female artist in Hong Kong in 1995

As for bestsellingalbum, I am not sure about the accuracy of other album sales figures, but the information on Cantonese album sales I have seen is all correct. Mimi197208 (talk) 14:46, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of her fans yelled at me , blah blah blah ,I don’t want to argue with all of her fans, I have class ,therefore, I won’t edit the page again! Keep embracing misinformation,Wish them a good dream. Let their idol be a joke…….. Mimi197208 (talk) 10:43, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask others for an opinion. Try users like Apoxyomenus or Binkersnet. If you really don't care that much just move on to something else. Dhoffryn (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]