Revision as of 12:27, 15 July 2024 editAngiricc05 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users999 edits →US sales of Whitney Houston: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:40, 15 July 2024 edit undo157.100.143.88 (talk) →Let's suggest ideas to change this article for the better and update it: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit → | ||
Line 214: | Line 214: | ||
::::::6) Julio Iglesias: 500 million nightclubs | ::::::6) Julio Iglesias: 500 million nightclubs | ||
::::::So far that is the exact list. ] (]) 18:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC) | ::::::So far that is the exact list. ] (]) 18:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC) | ||
:::::::I agree with you ] (]) 12:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
::::::How are you Paladium? let us start the process. My vote is for these resolutions: | ::::::How are you Paladium? let us start the process. My vote is for these resolutions: | ||
::::::A) album Equivalent Unit. I concur with you on this. | ::::::A) album Equivalent Unit. I concur with you on this. |
Revision as of 12:40, 15 July 2024
This article was nominated for deletion on 18 May 2024. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of best-selling music artists article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49Auto-archiving period: 10 days |
Skip to table of contents |
List of best-selling music artists is a former featured list candidate. Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated List-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
edit
It is essential to provide reliable sources when editing this article. For examples, see the references section. Unsourced or unreliably sourced additions will be removed immediately. The list is frequently edited in good faith to update the certified sales figures; however, claimed sales figures need to be supported by reliable sources, preferably from news organizations. Artists with claimed sales figures below 75 million may not be added to the list. Whilst we encourage editors to be bold, it is highly recommended to discuss changes on this talk page before editing. Below you can get an understanding as to when certifications for songs are added to the total certified sales of the listed artists.
The year next to markets below indicates how far back the certification systems go in each country. The percentages stand for the global market share based on a 2007 IFPI report.
|
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 2 July 2024
It is requested that an edit be made to the extended-confirmed-protected article at List of best-selling music artists. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any extended confirmed user. Remember to change the |
Please Update AC/DC, Metallica, Black Eyed Peas, Killers and Post Malone Sales in Brazil https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=AC%2FDC&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano=, https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=Metallica&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano=, https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=Black+Eyed+Peas&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano=, https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=Killers+&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano=, https://pro-musicabr.org.br/home/certificados/?busca_artista=Post+Malone&busca_tipo_produto=&busca_tipo_certificado=&busca_pela_gravadora=&busca_ano= Carlosmarkos2345 (talk)
Lack of credibility
It is not a good article, it must necessarily be modified, in fact it was nominated for elimination and I agree and I did not vote because I was not aware, the quality of users who have defended maintaining this article is very doubtful, there is history, there are artists and this is not a fan page especially for Michael Jackson. The previous history cannot be analyzed from the current perspective, which is what they are doing, under erroneous assumptions, for this reason, in their respective times there have been institutions that were in charge of that, such as Guinness is an example and many more.
This List is highly discussed and the level of credibility is very low and we seek objectivity, to be frank, no one has sold more albums than The Beatles as a group and no one has individually achieved more global sales than Elvis Presley, Bing Crosby both with 1 billion albums . sold globally and Frank Sinatra has sold 500 - 600 million records globally, I am so impressed in the debates on Quora about the popularity of these guys, I should include Al Jolson who was the first artist to sell 10 million records globally. In the 10S, a surprising actor for the time, I also don't find Patti Page the best-selling female artist since the 50s, Julio Iglesias, world famous, in fact has been the best-selling artist in China, Cliff Richard must be included.
This list must necessarily include Bing Crosby, it's that simple and with the corresponding figures equal to Frank Sinatra. 2800:BF0:170:B69:7DA7:3C51:9B94:7138 (talk) 23:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Lack of credibility? yes, I agree. However, I also would like to point out that it is a work in progress. I haven't been contributing lately due to the fact that some of the editors are still gathering information and learning about the subject at hand. I am a political science and history teacher with a law degree. Moreover, apart from engaging in tutorial services in my daily living, my level of education has also made me aware that when I ask certain questions about the nature of any political, history or current affair topic, the majority of the students may not be suitable to give me a response or are not aware of the different subjects at hand. It is, to reiterate, a learning process and a work in progress to be able to divulge facts through a cohesive, coherent grammatical or verbal accurate response based on factuality to any question. This is one of the reasons that I somewhat vociferously (without offending) defended maintaining this article. Moreover, I also agree with your point that "the previous history cannot be analyzed from the current perspective". And that we all seek objectivity based on trustworthiness and factuality. More and into the point, no one has sold more units than Elvis Presley as a soloist or The Beatles as a group. We know this; and both acts (especially Presley) have sold way over a billion records. Many of us have the documentation to prove it; I owned and have in my possession an incredible number of encyclopedic books and articles including but not limited to, as you stated, old copies of Guinness Book of World records dating back through the 1980's that will collaborate and agree on your point. However, getting back to the subject at hand; how many knowledgeable inquisitive people know firsthand, about this particular subject? let alone people or Wiki Editors who are still delving and gathering information about the complexity of this given endeavor? they may not be aware of who Bing Crosby was? Or Tino Rossi? who may have sold over 200 million albums and is one of the best-selling and mostly forgotten artist of all time. You mentioned Al Jolson and Patti Page, and their historical content. And we can go on and on and on. Yes, Frank Sinatra's and Julio Iglesias claimed sales are dubious and are in need of proper adjustments, perhaps through knowledgeable contributors like you who can point out certain discrepancies that need correction. All in all, and your points well taken, with all due respect, we need to give this article a chance to improve itself. I can also point out the faulty computations of the RIAA which only counts and tabulates certified levels. To be fair this applies to all entertainers. However, an artist such as Elvis Presley who has released so many units, loses millions in sales of albums and singles; for the RIAA omits in between levels of Gold, Platinum and Multiplatinum levels of sales certifications. If you combine all these sales including the albums which have not reached the 500 thousand thresholds needed in order to be certified, Presley surpasses by a long shot every other act away, including Garth Brooks and The Beatles who are being posted erroneously as selling more albums than Presley. And yet are we to discard or eradicate the RIAA best-selling list? Well so far everyone uses it as a reference, including but not limited to, The World Almanac and the Guinness Book of World records. In closing my friend, the Misplaced Pages's Best-selling artist list is a work in progress needing feedback from contributors like us so the Wiki Editors can make the proper adjustments and modifications for improvements so avid readers can obtain a valid reference from this article and page. Let's give them a chance. Victor0327 (talk) 16:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. Record sales are a minefield, sadly. Perhaps industry measurement for record sales in their time was different, as it is today with the streaming era. We have people who believe record labels are the most trustworthy sources because they know firsthand their artists' sales, but we also have examples of record labels inflating sales for promotional purposes, or some have compared record labels' sales reports to COI. If we move forward with that approach, perhaps assuming that an artist like Crosby even sold 1.2/1.5 billion records "according to his label," we might infuriate others. Even if a claim came from a newspaper. We also have plenty of artists with reported sales of over 75 million but haven't been added to the list, and some are perhaps little known by average consumers, and those with higher claims, of maybe over 200 million, can surprise others, especially if they are above of artists like, idk, The Rolling Stones. Take additional examples, like a few albums with claimed sales of over 50 million in big markets alone, like China or India; if we add them to the best-selling albums list, someone else can dispute it too. With the increase of Chinese market and streaming figures, a hypothetical future example of an album or single selling over 150 million, can be also disputed; a similar situation occurred with a Chinese single "selling over" 50 million "sales" in the best-selling singles list. Back with this list, there exist artists with uncertified works, for sure. Both of you are welcome to elaborate how the list can be improved; perhaps, we could borrowed minor approaches from other existing lists, but will need a consensus to effect a major change/restructure the list. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, and your point is also well taken. However, we cannot just dispute the validity of "all" record labels claimed sales, in this particular case, for one, namely "Decca" (Crosby's record label) by stating without irrefutable evidence that the sales have been inflated for promotional purposes. Also, and more and into the point, a major troubling issue, one of a handful, is being the omission of Bing Crosby from this Misplaced Pages best-selling artist list, as he has been omitted from this particular list. That is more than just troubling, it is irresponsible Misplaced Pages journalism. Let us consider some of the facts; 150 to 200 million sales from one single alone, according to an unaccountable number of reputable sources, that being for the single of "White Christmas" written by Irvin Berlin and recorded by Bing Crosby in the 1940's. This song was (as you are perhaps aware) a global sales phenomenon, to state the least. We cannot be just so dismissive for fear of infuriating others especially when there is an overwhelming amount of information contrary to the "inflated sales" point of view being replicated and used, by a handful of Wiki editors. It would also hamper the erroneous belief that Crosby's sales have been "inflated" by his record label for "promotional Purposes". Crosby's claimed sales stand at 550 million, way before Nielsen or SoundScan originated, (they were introduced in the 1990's) as you are probably aware, Crosby started selling records in 1926. We cannot just be so dismissive of the facts. Don't you think? Like the individual (whose brief I responded to) stated; "we cannot preclude the previous history from the current perspective" which is what got this article in trouble to begin with. We cannot, in all fairness, have this article be nominated for deletion again and again and sadly, again. Another major point of concern? is Elvis Presley's claimed sales. 500 million? really? this claimed sales consensus being reached by some Misplaced Pages editors whom with all due respect, reached a bogus consensus in the Presley Wiki talk page. Again, dismissing hundreds of factual documents and press releases, let alone RCA and BMG (Presley's labels) who both coincided with this Presley's unit sales phenomenon report. These Wiki Editors who are perhaps in all fairness, limited by knowledgeable circumstances have irresponsibly stated without fact or evidence that Presley' sales have been "inflated. I respectfully ask, is this ethical? also, is it for fear of infuriating who? perhaps and this is not an accusation; some Wiki editors, and not all, are lacking the essential knowledge about the subject at hand in order to formulate a valid conclusive determination. Well in this case that's understandable. It is as I stated, a learning process. But regardless, we cannot just, to reiterate, be so dismissive as to the point of just obscuring these vital issues. Presley's claimed sales of over a billion units in all formats have been factually established since the 1980's by hundreds of newspaper articles, magazines and press releases, including but not limited to, CNN, Billboard, Time Life Books, The Guinness Book of World Records and hundreds more of respected newspaper, magazine, and literary articles, let alone RCA and later BMG, (Presley's record labels) who vociferously defended the billion sales claims. They have concluded this argument with a factual thesis; correctly pointing out the 299 RIAA certificates awarded to Presley in the United States alone, for albums and singles, more than any other recording act in the history of music, that will dispute this erroneous "inflated figures" argument. In closing, I can amplify the errors that this list/article needs correction. However, I will stop here, thanking you for your response and professional courtesy, and for your invitation to elaborate on how this list can be improved. Once again, thank you. Victor0327 (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- 150 to 200 million? All the reliable sources I've seen say 50 million. Richard3120 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- How are you doing Richard3120? Haven't heard from you lately. According to the RIAA its 50 to 60 million in the United States. Again, the RIAA was introduced in March of 1958, and only a fraction of these sales figures has been certified by the Recording industry Association of America. What's been computed in the USA from that single alone? 50 to 60 million. Globally, Decca (Crosby's label) has claimed sales of 150 million from that single alone. And, to reiterate, it is the biggest selling single in the history of recorded music. Victor0327 (talk) 15:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- So agree with you Victor ! 2800:BF0:170:B69:14AB:D80C:4403:2B80 (talk) 16:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I see the Guinness Book of Records state 100 million+ now. I still think 200 million is a stretch, though. Richard3120 (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes Richard!! I had a whole bunch books and newspaper memorabilia growing up in the 1970's that believe it or not, father time literally destroyed what was left of the pages. I had old beat up 1970's Guinness book of world records that became old and raggedy. I wish I had them back. The information in question was in those books. it's a shame I cannot have them back. Regardless the seasonal tune of White Christmas by Crosby sold immensely and of course, it was playing on everybody's record turntable way back then especially during Christmas. I guess the exact sales will always be in dispute, but the sales were astronomical back in the day. Victor0327 (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I see the Guinness Book of Records state 100 million+ now. I still think 200 million is a stretch, though. Richard3120 (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- So agree with you Victor ! 2800:BF0:170:B69:14AB:D80C:4403:2B80 (talk) 16:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- How are you doing Richard3120? Haven't heard from you lately. According to the RIAA its 50 to 60 million in the United States. Again, the RIAA was introduced in March of 1958, and only a fraction of these sales figures has been certified by the Recording industry Association of America. What's been computed in the USA from that single alone? 50 to 60 million. Globally, Decca (Crosby's label) has claimed sales of 150 million from that single alone. And, to reiterate, it is the biggest selling single in the history of recorded music. Victor0327 (talk) 15:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- 150 to 200 million? All the reliable sources I've seen say 50 million. Richard3120 (talk) 14:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, and your point is also well taken. However, we cannot just dispute the validity of "all" record labels claimed sales, in this particular case, for one, namely "Decca" (Crosby's record label) by stating without irrefutable evidence that the sales have been inflated for promotional purposes. Also, and more and into the point, a major troubling issue, one of a handful, is being the omission of Bing Crosby from this Misplaced Pages best-selling artist list, as he has been omitted from this particular list. That is more than just troubling, it is irresponsible Misplaced Pages journalism. Let us consider some of the facts; 150 to 200 million sales from one single alone, according to an unaccountable number of reputable sources, that being for the single of "White Christmas" written by Irvin Berlin and recorded by Bing Crosby in the 1940's. This song was (as you are perhaps aware) a global sales phenomenon, to state the least. We cannot be just so dismissive for fear of infuriating others especially when there is an overwhelming amount of information contrary to the "inflated sales" point of view being replicated and used, by a handful of Wiki editors. It would also hamper the erroneous belief that Crosby's sales have been "inflated" by his record label for "promotional Purposes". Crosby's claimed sales stand at 550 million, way before Nielsen or SoundScan originated, (they were introduced in the 1990's) as you are probably aware, Crosby started selling records in 1926. We cannot just be so dismissive of the facts. Don't you think? Like the individual (whose brief I responded to) stated; "we cannot preclude the previous history from the current perspective" which is what got this article in trouble to begin with. We cannot, in all fairness, have this article be nominated for deletion again and again and sadly, again. Another major point of concern? is Elvis Presley's claimed sales. 500 million? really? this claimed sales consensus being reached by some Misplaced Pages editors whom with all due respect, reached a bogus consensus in the Presley Wiki talk page. Again, dismissing hundreds of factual documents and press releases, let alone RCA and BMG (Presley's labels) who both coincided with this Presley's unit sales phenomenon report. These Wiki Editors who are perhaps in all fairness, limited by knowledgeable circumstances have irresponsibly stated without fact or evidence that Presley' sales have been "inflated. I respectfully ask, is this ethical? also, is it for fear of infuriating who? perhaps and this is not an accusation; some Wiki editors, and not all, are lacking the essential knowledge about the subject at hand in order to formulate a valid conclusive determination. Well in this case that's understandable. It is as I stated, a learning process. But regardless, we cannot just, to reiterate, be so dismissive as to the point of just obscuring these vital issues. Presley's claimed sales of over a billion units in all formats have been factually established since the 1980's by hundreds of newspaper articles, magazines and press releases, including but not limited to, CNN, Billboard, Time Life Books, The Guinness Book of World Records and hundreds more of respected newspaper, magazine, and literary articles, let alone RCA and later BMG, (Presley's record labels) who vociferously defended the billion sales claims. They have concluded this argument with a factual thesis; correctly pointing out the 299 RIAA certificates awarded to Presley in the United States alone, for albums and singles, more than any other recording act in the history of music, that will dispute this erroneous "inflated figures" argument. In closing, I can amplify the errors that this list/article needs correction. However, I will stop here, thanking you for your response and professional courtesy, and for your invitation to elaborate on how this list can be improved. Once again, thank you. Victor0327 (talk) 11:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. Record sales are a minefield, sadly. Perhaps industry measurement for record sales in their time was different, as it is today with the streaming era. We have people who believe record labels are the most trustworthy sources because they know firsthand their artists' sales, but we also have examples of record labels inflating sales for promotional purposes, or some have compared record labels' sales reports to COI. If we move forward with that approach, perhaps assuming that an artist like Crosby even sold 1.2/1.5 billion records "according to his label," we might infuriate others. Even if a claim came from a newspaper. We also have plenty of artists with reported sales of over 75 million but haven't been added to the list, and some are perhaps little known by average consumers, and those with higher claims, of maybe over 200 million, can surprise others, especially if they are above of artists like, idk, The Rolling Stones. Take additional examples, like a few albums with claimed sales of over 50 million in big markets alone, like China or India; if we add them to the best-selling albums list, someone else can dispute it too. With the increase of Chinese market and streaming figures, a hypothetical future example of an album or single selling over 150 million, can be also disputed; a similar situation occurred with a Chinese single "selling over" 50 million "sales" in the best-selling singles list. Back with this list, there exist artists with uncertified works, for sure. Both of you are welcome to elaborate how the list can be improved; perhaps, we could borrowed minor approaches from other existing lists, but will need a consensus to effect a major change/restructure the list. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 04:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding giving credit to companies like CNN, Time Life Books, and The Guinness Book of World Records, it is important to note that these entities do not track global sales of artists. Instead, they often replicate information seen in the media without independent verification. A recent example involved Madonna, who jokingly told Jimmy Fallon that she had sold 400 million records instead of 300 million. The following day, the media, including Guinness, reported this new figure without auditing its accuracy. The over 100 million sales figure for "White Christmas" includes all versions of the track, not just Bing Crosby's. It is unrealistic to think Crosby sold 500 million records since 1990 without dominating music charts, unlike Elvis and The Beatles. This topic has been extensively discussed, as seen in the page archives. Crosby is not included on the list because he lacks sufficient certifications. Although the introduction of the article once mentioned this, it was removed in favor of some who wants in the list unverifiable inflated numbers. Reliable sources that specialize in certifications do not support these claims.--Markus WikiEditor (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, Markus and I do understand the points being made. But let's not obscure the issues. Just because in your words Crosby lacks the certifications, does not by any means, established the fact that the purported claims made by Decca, or his other recording labels will state for the facts that his sales claims where all "inflated". Moreover, music did not commence in the year 1990. Nor Crosby as you have erroneously stated, sold 500 million records from 1990 to the present. No, Crosby started recording in the year 1926, his first recording hit being "I've got the girl". More and into the point, by the time he passed away in 1977, many reputable reliable sources had claimed sales for Crosby of 500 million to 900 million in sales. And of course, your point will probably be that there was never any independent audited global organization that tracked sales way back in the days of Glenn Miller, Bing Crosby and big bands such as the Ink Spots and the Tommy and Jimmy Dorsey orchestra. However, you cannot just dismiss the fact that he sold an astronomical number of records that obviously were not certified in sales. So, Markus does that mean that nobody bought records back then? and I am asking this question with the utmost respect. The Guinness Book of World records obtains or rather receives the purported information from reliable reputable sources. It is a book of records; no one can just disparage what's in the book with baseless claims; or claim that the book has no veracity or that its fraudulent in its nature. All the information that's in the book, including music sales data come from reliable sources. They also get their reference music data from the sales figures of record labels coupled with RIAA documentation, and so does Time life books and many news outlets such as CNN. They just do not make stuff up. And never mind, all the purported claims by reliable news organizations; they can be in your words wrong, but don't you think they can also be right? And much more to your point; How do you or rather the Misplaced Pages list/article track corresponding music sales? For the majority of the individuals, including musical pundits and historians, I have extensively engaged in conversation, or grammatical exchanges with, about this subject at hand, always state the obvious. That this respective list and article has little or no credibility. Now you overstate the same grammatical rhetoric that "this topic has been extensively discussed as seen in the page archives". Yet, by flatly dismissing it with the issuing of that often-repeated statement, you are in essence eradicating the credibility factor from this article. Don't you think? Another point of concern and one that is particularly troubling are the claimed sales of one Elvis Presley. In the aftermath or rather in the four months, after the death of Presley, an estimated 200 million Presley records were sold. In fact, RCA was using the pressing plants of other record labels to keep up with the demand for Elvis's music. Presley was selling millions of units intertwined in 8 track tapes, cassettes, albums, and singles. In 1981 RCA (Presley's record label) issued a national press release divulging that Presley's record sales had surpassed the billion-mark plateau. The first artist to do so. EMI later issued the same claim for the Beatles in 1985. Yet without evidence some of the Wiki editors have challenged these sales claims by using the same verbal dogma and demagoguery that states "the sales of Presley and the Beatles are inflated". I wonder if this is a common practice use by the editors of this article. And then, to add insult to injury so to speak, some Wiki Editors capitulate by always offering the same baseless argument that "reliable sources do not support these claims. Really? So, in closing what claims do you support? let me just conclude by stating the obvious; I would hate to see this article be nominated for deletion again. Us readers and contributors Markus, deserve better. Victor0327 (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Victor, I agree too with you 2800:BF0:170:B69:B963:C64A:8A65:D8D0 (talk) 00:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, thank you my friend. but what's important is that we can all come together by making the proper adjustments and modifications and thus, prevent this article from succumbing to deletion. Victor0327 (talk) 01:28, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Victor, I agree too with you 2800:BF0:170:B69:B963:C64A:8A65:D8D0 (talk) 00:59, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- In base of ? Here they must eliminate those intuitions and erroneous assumptions and the absurd ways of classifying sales, do they include the RIAA as a parameter when their certifications are regional and partial? That doesn't prove anything. Guinness Records and the individual record companies are totally reliable entities. The veracity of Guinness is beyond any pseudo-intuition that they propose here. Bing Crosby has sold 150 million with just one single, but he wasn't popular for that song. In fact, Pistol 'Packin Mama by this artist or Accent thue the possitive were massive and still are, there is no bigger singles seller than Crosby, in fact Guinness also included this in 2000 and only Crosby's version.
- You are wrong in many ways, Crosby had the most number 1 hits in the history of music, no one has had more number 1 hits and entered the charts 396 on the music charts Crosby sold more than 500 million before 1977, it was even published by Guinness, Crosby sales
- They reached 1 billion before the 90s, even EMI reported that The Beatles had also reached this figure in the late 80s and Elvis Presley equaled 1 billion in the 80s, there is a lot of information that supports this, another inconceivable factor here. It is the fact that they reduce the sales of Elvis Presley, dear friend, Elvis Presley is beyond 1 billion records sold globally, the point here is that Crosby and Presley exceed 1 billion records, The Beatles are much further of the 1000 million also and as Frank Sinatra cited it and his reported sales were 600 million records sold globally in the 00s, currently I would not be surprised if Sinatra reaches 1000 million records currently, another of the best-selling singles of the story is My Way, even one of the most covered along with Yesterday or White Christmas
- So let's start by modifying this list in particular, I would also have deleted the article because it has caused confusion and no one believes these figures, considering Misplaced Pages not very serious and credible, there are jokes and in contrast there are many Misplaced Pages articles that are brilliant but in fact this one is not. It is and what is also essential is to restrict Michael Jackson's fanaticism because this page is a treat for Michael Jackson fans. Their fanaticism is understood but this is not the place for it. They have their additional pages on Facebook, Instagram, X etc.
- Clinging to Victor's suggestions to improve including and modifying this list, you should take it as the most understandable and kindest way of suggesting, because in my case I would have voted for its elimination, it is simply terrible and mediocre and I don't know to what extent it was made by ignorant people. with the greatest respect to all. 2800:BF0:170:B69:A4A7:6761:B32C:9B67 (talk) 03:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- The Guinness Book of World Records does not track record sales; instead, they rely on figures from record labels or media. For example, in 2006, they awarded Michael Jackson a plaque for his Thriller album as the biggest-selling album of all time, with 104 million units sold. This figure was later revised to 66 million and then 67 million after independent media outlets questioned its accuracy. Similarly, the 1 billion figure attributed to Elvis Presley's sales has been widely discussed over the years, and it's been over 11 years since we stopped using it here. Although there were discussions on the talk page about reinstating the 1 billion figure, it never gained traction until we updated Michael Jackson's sales to 500 million (from 400 million) and placed him above Elvis Presley based on total available certifications. Since then, some Elvis fans have nominated the page for deletion, revealing their intentions clearly in the deletion discussion and this very conversation.The record sales of 1 billion or 2 billion attributed to Elvis Presley are inflated, much like the claim that 1.5 billion people watched his Aloha from Hawaii via Satellite from 38 countries, when in fact the total population of those countries was roughly 1.3 billion at the time (1973), and the actual viewership was around 150-200 million."
- We had a detailed discussion about this same topic three years ago, as you can see from this link. Additionally, a 2013 article in The New Yorker magazine examined the claims of top-selling artists like The Beatles and Michael Jackson, concluding that their reported 1 billion record sales figures are likely exaggerated. TheWikiholic (talk) 06:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Experts? Who ? Which pseudo-experts have stated this and how have they verified it, where is the proof you were? based on deductions?
- Second, it is not about Elvis Presley Fans, you cannot analyze the past with the current perspective as they said before, so please reserve that argument because it does not work here, Elvis Presley have sold more than 1.5 billion worldwide, there is data and conclusive information. 2800:BF0:170:B69:5C26:9624:139F:1B2E (talk) 08:40, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dear Wikiholic: Let me get this straight: in running into and reading your explanatory brief, perhaps I missed reading it yesterday, but nevertheless, and I do not want to mince or distort the wording, however, let me state this verbatim. You and your wiki editor counterparts increased Michael Jackson's sales from 400 million to 500 million placing him above Elvis Presley based on total available certifications? that's a hundred million in sales, that is more than the 89 million that the RIAA gives credit to Jackson for album sales in the United States. This is insane!! again, I cannot find the correct wording of virtual exclamation; but this is outlandish. Case in point: even though the RIAA uses a faulty computation method which establishes parameters in correlation to sales; they do not increase sales based on certifications. In other words, is the other way around. In order to be certified an album must reach a certain sales threshold, being 500 thousand for Gold, 1 million for Platinum, or 2 million for multiplatinum, again, in order to be certified. I have never seen an artist being raised 100 million based on total available certifications.
- Most interesting, I may add that according to the RIAA, Michael Jackson has been posted at number 6, behind the Eagles Led Zeppelin, Elvis Presley, Garth Brooks and of course the Beatles, in album sales. Are you aware what this maneuver does to the credibility factor of this article? this is one of many reasons that this page has been accused of being "a Michael Jackson fan page" and without bestowing any more wood to the fire, has been nominated for deletion repeatedly. In closing, let us be honest and more trustworthy in making the proper adjustments and modifications in order to establish factuality within this article and listing directory. Victor0327 (talk) 20:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Firstly, I was not involved in increasing Jackson's claimed sales from 400 million to 500 million. Secondly, the list is still largely based on the total available certifications of an artist and how much of them are streaming-generated in today's circumstances. They raised Jackson's claimed sales by 100 million, while his total available certifications have increased by 50 million. I'm sure Elvis will receive similar treatment once there are updates for him. Currently, there is a gap of 55 million certifications between Jackson and Elvis. Only 30% of Jackson's record sales are from the USA, whereas for Elvis, it is more than double. This is because the USA dominated the market from the 1950s to the late 1980s. Elvis' record sales are very low in non-English speaking countries, and he never toured outside of North America.
- If you use Jackson's RIAA album certifications to question the credibility of this list, we might have to put Garth Brooks above Elvis, because, according to the RIAA database, Brooks has 23 million more certifications than Elvis.
- Currently, Elvis Presley's total available certifications are 234.7 million units, while his claimed sales are 500 million units, leaving a gap of 265.3 million units. His total available certifications in the U.S stand at 199.650 million units, including 139 million units of albums. Elvis holds a record 101 Gold records in the USA, 57 of which are Platinum. Even if we count all Gold records as Platinum, it would add 22 million to his total. Similarly, if we consider all Platinum records as multi-Platinum or update multi-Platinum records by 1 million units, it would add 57 million, bringing his total available certifications to 313 million units (234.7+22+57). There would still be a gap of 187M units for 500M units, hence the 1 Billion figures is highly exaggerated. TheWikiholic (talk) 16:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well first of all, thank you for your response to my brief. And obviously, if you were not involved then hopefully you can accept a formal apology on my behalf. Now let us delve an examine in proper perspective by making the necessary corrections, adjustments and modifications, in accordance with the subject at hand. Presley does not have 101 gold records, but 117 gold records for albums alone; he also does not have 57 platinum awards, but 67 platinum awards, again, for certified albums alone. And of course, he recently eclipsed the Beatles for multiplatinum albums they had 26, and Presley has recently been accorded the record for 27 multiplatinum albums. This is a total of 146.5 million units of albums according to the RIAA and not the 139 million units of albums that you have erroneously pointed out and need to perhaps update. Now, not counting albums but singles, Presley has 54 gold, 27 platinum and 7 multiplatinum for a tabulated RIAA 50.5 million, of certified singles. This is the overall summation of the 299 RIAA certificates, more than any other act in the history of recorded music. And perhaps, again, the Misplaced Pages editors have overlooked this matter.
- Now let me offer an analogy; Using the RIAA's faulty computation system: If Presley sells 10 albums with all of them reaching 800 thousand in sales, only 500 thousand, of each album will be computed and counted towards Presley's overall sales. The 300 thousand that is not counted or rather not computed from each album, will be omitted and discarded. In earnest, they will only count if the album reaches one million and thus be certified platinum then it will count as an increment towards platinum status and thus be computed and counted as a total sale. You probably as an editor know this. The RIAA only counts certified levels of 500 thousand for Gold, 1 million for Platinum and 2 million for multiplatinum. In other words, the in-between levels of Gold to Platinum and Platinum to Multiplatinum gets discarded and not tabulated nor counted towards the artists totality in sales. And of course, this faulty computation framework applies to all artists within the confines of the RIAA's faulty methodology system. However, in Presley's case whose labels have released so many albums and singles, he loses close to perhaps 30 million in album and singles sales from being properly computated and calculated in his overall sales. Furthermore, the RIAA only certifies albums and singles which have reached the 500 thousand thresholds. Any album or single that does not reach the 500 thousand echelon level will not be certified or counted. Presley has over 350 albums in the United States alone that have sold between 200 thousand to 499 thousand but have not reached the 500 thousand threshold or echelon level needed in order to be certified and thus computed in the totality of his unit sales. More and into the point, if you count the totality of Presley's album sales, he easily surpasses by a long shot Garth Brooks and the Beatles who in the estimation of many, including Presley's record label executives, have been erroneously posted ahead of Presley in album sales. This is one of the reasons that I dispute the validity of the 500 million claimed sales for Presley. I would concur with you on 500 million sales in the United States, but not worldwide. Especially in light of other sales that I have already pointed out to. Namely, in the aftermath and posthumously after Presley's death which RCA claimed sales of 200 million worldwide. Nevertheless, I will stop here divulging to you my friend, that this is, and will be an ongoing enjoyable debate. In closing, my friend Wikiholic, I would like to thank you, for your time and professional courtesy in responding to my brief. It was a delightful and engaging debate. Once again, thank you. Victor0327 (talk) 21:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- The RIAA website still shows Elvis Presley’s certifications as I mentioned above, which you can see here. As I explained, even if we consider all the gold records that never went platinum as platinum records and all the platinum records as multi-platinum, updating multi-platinum records with one more unit, there is no way Elvis is reaching 500 million units.
- As an Elvis fan, you might have noted that Elvis Presley’s record labels updated his certifications retrospectively in the 1990s, adding over 100 million RIAA units. According to Nielsen SoundScan, Elvis Presley sold 19.07 million units between 1991 and 2002, 37 million as of 2014, and 39.5 million as of 2018. These figures do not indicate that Elvis has sold 500 million units worldwide. However, you are echoing the claims of Elvis Presley having sold 500 million units in the U.S. alone, similar to what fans and historians like Nick Keene, Tony Galvin, and Ernst Jorgensen suggest. TheWikiholic (talk) 02:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know what website you are looking at. And the factuality of the numbers I have previously mentioned are there, 299 RIAA certifications. I'll tell you what "Google" the question who has the most RIAA certificates and it will take you to the information that I gave you. The editors need to update this information. Contrary to your belief, I am a not a Crosby or Presley fan. I like to think of myself as an objective, nonpartisan realist who believes in facts. But regardless my good friend, the facts are there. Yes, I will state this without a doubt, based on the facts; that Presley has sold over one billion records. Once again, thank you for your response. Victor0327 (talk) 03:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also, the Guinness Book of World records website has the correct information in question. 299 RIAA certificates. Victor0327 (talk) 04:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know what website you are looking at. And the factuality of the numbers I have previously mentioned are there, 299 RIAA certifications. I'll tell you what "Google" the question who has the most RIAA certificates and it will take you to the information that I gave you. The editors need to update this information. Contrary to your belief, I am a not a Crosby or Presley fan. I like to think of myself as an objective, nonpartisan realist who believes in facts. But regardless my good friend, the facts are there. Yes, I will state this without a doubt, based on the facts; that Presley has sold over one billion records. Once again, thank you for your response. Victor0327 (talk) 03:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, Markus and I do understand the points being made. But let's not obscure the issues. Just because in your words Crosby lacks the certifications, does not by any means, established the fact that the purported claims made by Decca, or his other recording labels will state for the facts that his sales claims where all "inflated". Moreover, music did not commence in the year 1990. Nor Crosby as you have erroneously stated, sold 500 million records from 1990 to the present. No, Crosby started recording in the year 1926, his first recording hit being "I've got the girl". More and into the point, by the time he passed away in 1977, many reputable reliable sources had claimed sales for Crosby of 500 million to 900 million in sales. And of course, your point will probably be that there was never any independent audited global organization that tracked sales way back in the days of Glenn Miller, Bing Crosby and big bands such as the Ink Spots and the Tommy and Jimmy Dorsey orchestra. However, you cannot just dismiss the fact that he sold an astronomical number of records that obviously were not certified in sales. So, Markus does that mean that nobody bought records back then? and I am asking this question with the utmost respect. The Guinness Book of World records obtains or rather receives the purported information from reliable reputable sources. It is a book of records; no one can just disparage what's in the book with baseless claims; or claim that the book has no veracity or that its fraudulent in its nature. All the information that's in the book, including music sales data come from reliable sources. They also get their reference music data from the sales figures of record labels coupled with RIAA documentation, and so does Time life books and many news outlets such as CNN. They just do not make stuff up. And never mind, all the purported claims by reliable news organizations; they can be in your words wrong, but don't you think they can also be right? And much more to your point; How do you or rather the Misplaced Pages list/article track corresponding music sales? For the majority of the individuals, including musical pundits and historians, I have extensively engaged in conversation, or grammatical exchanges with, about this subject at hand, always state the obvious. That this respective list and article has little or no credibility. Now you overstate the same grammatical rhetoric that "this topic has been extensively discussed as seen in the page archives". Yet, by flatly dismissing it with the issuing of that often-repeated statement, you are in essence eradicating the credibility factor from this article. Don't you think? Another point of concern and one that is particularly troubling are the claimed sales of one Elvis Presley. In the aftermath or rather in the four months, after the death of Presley, an estimated 200 million Presley records were sold. In fact, RCA was using the pressing plants of other record labels to keep up with the demand for Elvis's music. Presley was selling millions of units intertwined in 8 track tapes, cassettes, albums, and singles. In 1981 RCA (Presley's record label) issued a national press release divulging that Presley's record sales had surpassed the billion-mark plateau. The first artist to do so. EMI later issued the same claim for the Beatles in 1985. Yet without evidence some of the Wiki editors have challenged these sales claims by using the same verbal dogma and demagoguery that states "the sales of Presley and the Beatles are inflated". I wonder if this is a common practice use by the editors of this article. And then, to add insult to injury so to speak, some Wiki Editors capitulate by always offering the same baseless argument that "reliable sources do not support these claims. Really? So, in closing what claims do you support? let me just conclude by stating the obvious; I would hate to see this article be nominated for deletion again. Us readers and contributors Markus, deserve better. Victor0327 (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
This article is so incorrect and vague ( Bing Crosby ? Elvis Presley ? The Beatles ? Frank Sinatra ? )
Elvis Presley sold more than 1 billion records worldwide The Beatles the same sold Over 1 billion records worldwide , Bing Crosby sold 1 billion récords worldwide and Sinatra more than 500 millions worldwide . Nobody sold more than them. That's true 2800:BF0:170:B69:5C26:9624:139F:1B2E (talk) 01:15, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- And yet this article with the collaborations of contributors like yourself, pointing out these deficiencies will help these very capable Wiki editors make the necessary modifications and adjustments that through time will correct these and other discrepancies. As I pointed out in the previous brief, and to reiterate, this is a work in progress that in time will strive in endeavoring very satisfactory results for all of us readers and contributors. In closing, this directory list of Best-selling music artists will be an excellent point of reference article. Victor0327 (talk) 02:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
The best seller single artist worldwide are Elvis Presley and Bing Crosby
Crosby sold 1 billion records worldwide and Elvis over 1 billion records worldwide, Michael Jackson never has sold more discs than Elvis , Crosby Beatles , Sinatra or ABBA but where is Perry Como? Dean Martin? Enrico Carruso? Anybody said Al Jolson , Where is Al Jolson?
It's a incorrect and Bad page . 2800:BF0:170:B69:14AB:D80C:4403:2B80 (talk) 17:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- No only them , Where is Nat King Cole? Wayne Newton? etc 2800:BF0:170:B69:A4A7:6761:B32C:9B67 (talk) 03:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Bing Crosby and the Guinness Book of World Records
Crosby fans, you take Guinness as a reference. But according to the Guinness Book of World Records 1983, "he received a second platinum disc when Decca Records claimed a sale of 300,650,000 discs... No independently audited figures of his global lifetime sales from his royalty reports have ever been published, and experts regard figures so high as this, before the industry became highly developed, as exaggerated." : https://archive.org/details/guinness1983book00mcwh/page/280/mode/2up?q=crosby
And according to the Guinness website, "Although precise sales figures are difficult to obtain and are often disputed, it is widely acknowledged that only The Beatles, Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson have conclusively sold more records worldwide than Madonna, with most estimates settling on a figure between 300 and 400 million." : https://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/best-selling-female-recording-artist 2A01:E0A:A7D:D580:7840:63E2:24F3:31A1 (talk) 07:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Wait! , Wait! Here you are misunderstanding things friend, one thing is a fan and another to claim objectivity here it is not about being fans of Bing Crosby or Elvis Presley. What idiots! So if you claim some real truthful fact, you become a fan of that fact? I see what the absurd criteria they have been using here is and I understand why this article is so terrible.
- Presley and Crosby surpass 1 billion albums sold worldwide, whether you want to accept it or not, that is so, now that you address this issue, I ask which experts? They have no support, there is no evidence to refute this, you cannot draw conclusions based on deductions and even less if there is evidence Decca made the claim of 300 million at the end of 1969 and published in 1970 in 1973 Crosby sold more than 400 million records too Guinees reported this fact and in 1977 more than 500 million, when Crosby and Presley died there was an excessive demand for records that deliveries were postponed until 1978 from both artists, the New York Times published. I have pirated Crosby albums made in Ecuador, Argentina or Russia and Africa under local labels, it's impressive and I ask you how you measure piracy? It's impossible, that's the answer.
- They cannot be based on erroneous assumptions, this seems like a conspiratorial being with an unintelligible tendency. "How was it that Jesus Christ became famous in all cultures if there were no advanced means of communication or translators? Very simply, you cannot analyze history with current perspectives. events that occurred and that's it.
- Crosby abd Presley , both sold over 1 billion records worldwide, that's right. 2800:BF0:170:B69:5C26:9624:139F:1B2E (talk) 09:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
Four seasons: 100 million
The Four Seasons (band) page says they belong in this list with 100 million. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 04:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Let's suggest ideas to change this article for the better and update it
I am with some of the wikiusers who want to improve this article and reach a consensus that makes this article an article with updated and credible data. Improving this article has several obstacles:
- ) Many times the conversation is based on criticizing the things on which we do not agree or on criticizing the sources instead of based on finding things on which we agree and focusing the conversation from a perspective in which we help each other. to others.
- ) Record labels are indeed interested parties. To have a neutral point, we cannot accept only the word of the artist himself or his record label. That is the version of that interested party. On Misplaced Pages we would have to have at least two independent sources. But failing that, an independent source that does not repeat the data as an echo will have to suffice.
- ) The work, and the burden of proof, is on the shoulders of Wikipedians who want to improve this article. However, critics and those who "ask for changes" do not consider carrying out this work. They only demand that the work be done because they say so and that's it.
I think it is obvious that the number of artists who qualify to be on this list has surpassed the ability of Wikipedians to keep this list up to date. Many artists have references from decades ago and some artists that should be on the list are not even there. To solve this I propose several measures. We can talk about them and modify them according to the consensus we have.
A) Consider whether this list is just "physical discs" or "Album-equivalent unit". Both metrics are legitimate. The criterion of using "equivalent units" is the currently predominant criterion in the industry. Major certifying organizations and official music charts use equivalent units. A1) If this list is going to use only "physical discs" I propose that the text "claimed sales" be renamed to "claimed physical sales". A2) If this list is going to use equivalent units, I propose that the text "claimed sales" be renamed to "Claimed sales AEUs".
B) Clarify that "CD single" are not equivalent to "CD album". Selling a single is not the same as selling an album. Prior to the digital era, the IFPI counted three physical singles as an equivalent of one album. This is using an "Album-equivalent" to convert 3 singles to 1 album.
C) If people agree to convert singles into album sales, through the 3:1 formula, why do people not want to use the same logic to convert digital sales and streaming to albums? So, if we want to put "physical sales" in the article, I suggest that we list separately how many of those units are singles, and how many of those units are albums.
D) If an artist included on the list has figures that may cause controversy, but are verified with sources, make a breakdown of those sources to explain why the page has those figures. Allow the article to have paragraphs explaining the numbers.
E) This proposal is to raise the requirement for an artist to enter this list. Because this list already has several outdated artists and needs to include many artists with sales over 100 million albums, limiting the entry of artists should theoretically help artists already included on the list be updated in a way due. That's why I propose that the artists who enter this list have to have at least 100 million.
I mention @Victor0327, @Richard3120 and @TheWikiholic because I see that you are quite reasonable in your comments. If we don't agree on anything I've said, let's see if we can agree on any of the points. If we agree on at least one point, it would be progress. Paladium (talk) 21:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have just finished reading and analyzing your points, and I agree with you wholeheartedly. An excellent idea. Victor0327 (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
- I propose removing claimed sales altogether and only listing available certifications. Most of the issues related to this and how its updated have to do with this claimed sales nonsense, and there being no standard criterion for vetting claimed sales and the sources reporting them. Instantwatym (talk) 01:46, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Then you would be removing 20th century "Legacy entertainers "with the highest claimed sales such as the Beatles, Presley and Michael Jackson, and substituting or replacing them with Drake, Eminem and Rihanna, who are some of the artists with highest certifications. This would be very controversial. Don't you think? Victor0327 (talk) 01:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Instantwatym I agree with you that we should give importance to certifications and that some of the sources used for "claimed sales" are very flimsy, but we can't deprecate totally the claimed sales. We should try to verify all of them and replace the claimed sales sources of newspapers (or tabloids) for claimed on music related specialized sources and official chart webpages.
- I can agree with that, but as Victor says, lots of artists with millions of legitimate sales lived in a time with less regulated certifications. We have to be more cautious with the sources we accept into the page instead of banning totally the "claimed sales". Although this takes a lot more work.
- About Drake, @Chasezt said in this same talk page 9 June 2024 (UTC) Talk:List of best-selling music artists/Archive 47 that Drake's certified numbers were already inflated because in 2024 he has only certified less quantity than what is written on the page. We could start by reviewing the sources that are currently on the page, of the artists that are in the top 5 and continue from there. Paladium (talk) 16:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough as it concerns to legacy acts and older artists and trying to calculate their claimed sales. However for artists who debuted during the digital age, priority should be given to available certifications. For example it seems a bit ridiculous that Drake has over 500 million in available certifications but his claimed sales in this article are listed as less than half of that. Such a discrepancy between claimed sales and available certifications may be acceptable for legacy acts where certifications were less regulated or not available in most regions, but it is not for newer artist. Instantwatym (talk) 16:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Impossible, because if you only consider the certifications, the list would be even more phallic, erroneous and mediocre, and I repeat, you want to overevaluate the past with current perspectives that were previously non-existent, and as they said before, that is impossible.
- Now what is a reality is that the first 4 places on this list should be headed by The Beatles, Elvis Presley, Bing Crosby (tie with Elvis or Elvis above and Crosby below or vice versa), fourth place Frank Sinatra, followed by ABBA. Julio Iglesias, Nana Mouskouri or maybe Iglesias before ABBA.
- We cannot assign the certified sales beforehand because there is no entity that calculates this. Furthermore, they are relatively new entities and with this I return to the topic that no one other than the record companies themselves have the real values of the sales of each artist, so the most that is has attributed to each artist in claims is the most correct and accurate measurement.
- This must start now! 2800:BF0:170:B69:5981:5EC4:1943:3AD7 (talk) 14:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your knowledge, understanding and acuity about this subject are extraordinary. Moreover, entertainers such as Nana Mouskouri, Abba and of course, Crosby and Sinatra as you have correctly pointed out, should be recognized on everyone's best-selling artist list. And yet to quote Paladium, we have to analyze all points and "if we can agree on at least one point, it would be progress. We somehow need to formulate a consensus in how we are going to improve this article's directory list. Furthermore, the proposal to raise requirements as Paladium correctly suggested to 100 million in sales, would theoretically assist us through this endeavor. In closing, more constructive feedback from all contributors is essentially needed. This is progress!! Victor0327 (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- The article in its present state, where claimed sales figures are prioritized over certifications, for the benefit older/legacy artists is also quite erroneous. It undermines artists in the digital age with much higher sales figures through certifications for the sake of implying that older/legacy artists have higher sales. If someone wants to keep claimed sales for older artists due to an absence of certifications at that time then so be it. But for newer artists there shouldn't be a significant difference between claimed sales and available certifications, where the certifications are much higher. If such a discrepancy exists, then the lower claimed sales figures should be removed. Instantwatym (talk) 16:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your points are well taken; however, in trying to resolve this matter; it, nevertheless, reminds me of the state of our current political environment. Whereas, we have created such a schism that it has a made our nation so divisive and stagnant, to the point, that nothing gets done. In earnest, our political climate has become so polarized that it has impeded and hindered us, to successfully address and resolve any issue, that would alleviate the plight of so many Americans. Let me sum it up this way; we cannot come together as a people or as a country anymore in order to resolve anything. This is sad!! And yet getting back to the subject at hand, we cannot undermine for the sake of "implying the claimed sales of older/legacy artists or undermine artists in the digital age. So, with all due respect, in trying to appease both sides, let us try to valiantly strive to formulate some type of accurate measurement that can be agreeable to all sides. Furthermore, to improve this listing directory regardless of the insurmountable odds and obstacles that we are confronting in the present format. Let us continue with the different and irrespective ideas of all contributors and knowledgeable Wiki editors. Victor0327 (talk) 20:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think we keep talking and talking here in this page and don't make drafts or suggestions to the text that are practical and do with this article. The questions I put before can be taken as a vote.
- A) just "physical discs" or "Album-equivalent unit". Vote A or B. Don't make an argument.
- B) We want to apply the 3 singles 1 album rule to count 3 CD singles as 1 CD album or not.
- C) We want to check "singles" and "streaming" into the main amount of albums or we want to show them separated.
- D) Paragraphs explaining the numbers instead of only tables. Yes or no.
- E) Rise the requirement to 100 millions. I don't know if we can do that or no. Because there are lots of artist already on the list and the current number of 75 millions is a consensus currently.
- My opinion on this is:
- A. Album-equivalent unit. B. Whether to apply the 3:1 formula from singles to albums. C. I want total album and streaming to be separated in different columns. D. Add a paragraph explaining the numbers when neccessary. E. Rise the requirement, yes.
- I think we do not have a qualified majority (inside this conversation, currently) to say that what we approve in this conversation will be accepted by other users who edit the article. Still, I would like to invite those people who are veterans at editing this page and anyone who wants to participate to contribute proposals on the structure of the article. Not just “include this artist” comments.
- I was reading Misplaced Pages:Record_charts#WP:GOODCHARTS which explains which pages are good for looking at record industry figures, and many pages don't say the number of records, just the position. For example:
- https://web.archive.org/web/20240408112900/https://www.billboard.com/charts/current-albums/
- it doesn't say sales, even though the page title is "Top Current Album Sales."
- There is this list: List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_2024 and similar pages in Misplaced Pages. They keep sales week by week.
- This website https://hitsdailydouble.com/sales_plus_streaming makes a sales list that contains Physical albums, download (TEA), streaming (SEA) and total.
- I couldn't find this page among the list of non-recommended pages, so I guess we can use the estimates like any other journalist.
- Seeing this, I propose that we clarify if this Misplaced Pages page is going to include only physical albums or both.
- Top_Album_Sales is Billboard's chart that tracks physical album sales. The main list combines all music sources. Paladium (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- We must begin by modifying this article, first correcting the clearly incorrect order, including Crosby in second or third place. Crosby is possibly the greatest record seller in history with 1 billion records sold worldwide, and Elvis Presley equal or greater than 1000 million records sold I have reviewed as many references as possible to avoid making mistakes on this.
- Frank Sinatra's sales easily exceed 600 million records sold worldwide and not the erroneous figure of 150, ABBA sold 210 million records in 1979 according to Guinness million records sold globally, Guinness also cites Julio Iglesias with 300 million records worldwide sold in 1983, currently Iglesias has sold 500 million records and ABBA more than 500 million, conducting an exhaustive investigation of Nana Mouskouri.
- For now the correct order would be
- 1) The Beatles > 1000 million exceed the figure by a large advantage
- 2) Elvis Presley = Bing Crosby: both > 1 billion nightclubs
- 3) Depending on Crosby third or vice versa.
- 4) Frank Sinatra > 600 million nightclubs
- 5) ABBA > 500 million nightclubs
- 6) Julio Iglesias: 500 million nightclubs
- So far that is the exact list. 2800:BF0:170:B69:EC02:CA57:44B8:E066 (talk) 18:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with you 157.100.143.88 (talk) 12:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- How are you Paladium? let us start the process. My vote is for these resolutions:
- A) album Equivalent Unit. I concur with you on this.
- B) I also concur with you on the on the application to the 3:1 from singles to albums.
- C) I would like different categories or columns as pertaining to total Albums/Streaming and perhaps Singles. Again, all separated as you suggested in different columns.
- D)Explanatory paragraphs being indicative of the sales formats would essential.
- E) Raise the requirements to the 100 million sales thresholds.
- Moreover, if the majority like you pointedly stated does not agree, constructive feedback on the reasoning would assist us in this endeavor. Also establishing separate columns for Physical sales of albums and singles. Furthermore, give us feedback on how to proceed on the methodology of Claimed sales for the "Legacy 20th Century entertainers" as opposed to entertainers in the digital age sales as suggested by so many contributors and readers such as "Instantwatym". What do you think? keep me posted!! Victor0327 (talk) 02:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- D)Explanatory paragraphs being indicative of the sales formats would "be essential". (sorry Typo) Victor0327 (talk) 02:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Your points are well taken; however, in trying to resolve this matter; it, nevertheless, reminds me of the state of our current political environment. Whereas, we have created such a schism that it has a made our nation so divisive and stagnant, to the point, that nothing gets done. In earnest, our political climate has become so polarized that it has impeded and hindered us, to successfully address and resolve any issue, that would alleviate the plight of so many Americans. Let me sum it up this way; we cannot come together as a people or as a country anymore in order to resolve anything. This is sad!! And yet getting back to the subject at hand, we cannot undermine for the sake of "implying the claimed sales of older/legacy artists or undermine artists in the digital age. So, with all due respect, in trying to appease both sides, let us try to valiantly strive to formulate some type of accurate measurement that can be agreeable to all sides. Furthermore, to improve this listing directory regardless of the insurmountable odds and obstacles that we are confronting in the present format. Let us continue with the different and irrespective ideas of all contributors and knowledgeable Wiki editors. Victor0327 (talk) 20:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Then you would be removing 20th century "Legacy entertainers "with the highest claimed sales such as the Beatles, Presley and Michael Jackson, and substituting or replacing them with Drake, Eminem and Rihanna, who are some of the artists with highest certifications. This would be very controversial. Don't you think? Victor0327 (talk) 01:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
US sales of Whitney Houston
Are certifications for "The Bodyguard" soundtrack included in US certified sales of Whitney Houston? Angiricc05 (talk) 12:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages featured list candidates (contested)
- Old requests for peer review
- Biography articles of living people
- List-Class biography articles
- List-Class biography (musicians) articles
- Top-importance biography (musicians) articles
- Musicians work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- List-Class List articles
- Mid-importance List articles
- WikiProject Lists articles
- List-Class Pop music articles
- High-importance Pop music articles
- Pop music articles
- List-Class WikiProject Business articles
- High-importance WikiProject Business articles
- WikiProject Business articles
- Misplaced Pages extended-confirmed-protected edit requests