Talk:Billboard 200/Archive 2

Soundgarden
Soundgarden hit #96 with "Black Rain." Take them off the list of those with a #1 album but no Hot 100 hits.75.142.54.211 (talk) 07:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Ō — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.200.217.41 (talk) 08:57, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Finally done, suprised no one corrected it yet. The Man Who Needs No Introduction! (talk) 03:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Removed Soundgarden as one of the artists to have topped the Billboard 200 without appearing on the Billboard Hot 100, as Black Rain charted at #96 in 2010. Here is the source: http://www.billboard.com/artist/279997/soundgarden/chart GD1223 (talk) 03:57, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Billboard 200 No1 albums for two consecutive years
Is it possible to add a special section that will include the extremely rare feat of having an album topping the Billboard 200 for two consecutive years in a row? Only two studio albums had achieved that feat according to Billboard Magazine (Thriller by MJ & 21 by Adele) http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/1481410/the-year-in-pop-2012-adele-repeats-as-top-artist-gotye-scores-no-1-hot-100. Along with the OST albums we have four albums since 1960 achieving that feat CK_Bad (talk) 14:12, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

No italics for "200"
Why is the "200" in "Billboard 200" not italicized? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 04:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Chart names are not italicized, but Billboard, as the name of a magazine, is. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 00:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I don't understand: it was a question, not a request—and who's being accused of having a conflict of interest? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 02:10, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Under the section "Most Weeks On The Chart" the album "HYMNS" by Tennessee Ernie Ford should be tied with "THE KING AND I"  for 277 weeks on the charts. I would appreciate if you could add this title as it is a milestone. Thanks!

Bruce Springsteen
Bruce Springsteen has 11 (Albums) #1's, not 10. Billboard links: http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/5877848/bruce-springsteen-high-hopes-11th-no-1-album-billboard-200-chart & http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/6259282/barbra-streisand-no-1-partners — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.137.184.194 (talk) 23:58, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

how the charts work
How do these charts work? Are the R&B, rock, country, latin and christian music all within this chart if they have enough sales? If yes, was there a time when they did not?

I'm asking because Let It Loose (album) article claims it charted #6 on 200, #16 on Latin Pop Albums and #55 on R&B/Hip-Hop Albums. That would mean there were 15 better sellers in Latin Pop, 54 in R&B/hip hop but only 5 in all genres together. That is only possible if the genre-specific albums were not all eligible on the main chart, or the album somehow was not considered a latin/R&B album for a part of its chart run. 82.141.95.243 (talk) 04:12, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Though, I just noticed that the US chart positions are the only ones without a source in that article... 82.141.116.89 (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


 * There are more like this: Whitney Houston's Whitney #1 in main chart and #2 in R&B chart, and Whitney: The Greatest Hits #2/#3. If her second album Whitney was the most sold album for 11 weeks, then how the hell it was not also most sold R&B album for even one week? Or are there some other rules (than commercial success) for the genre charts? 82.141.95.68 (talk) 04:41, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Italics
This is the first time I've really noticed how in this article (and title) it is "Billboard 200". But Billboard really should not be italicized because "Billboard 200" is the actual name of the chart in Billboard magazine. It's not italicized in any other website that I can see -- because it's really not necessary (and looks kind of dumb too). --Musdan77 (talk) 02:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Linkin Park under "Most consecutive number-one albums"
Linkin Park only has 4 consecutive number one albums, not 5. Is the the fifth title supposed to be "Collision Course", which is a Jay-Z collaboration? This not a true Linkin Park album, and is also an EP, and not a full album. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.117.186.225 (talk) 20:24, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

While Billboard may include collaborations in some of their articles, if the "ARTIST" isn't an exact match then it shouldn't appear here. Similarly Kanye and Eminem both have 7, not 8, because the other albums were both collaborations. If "Kanye and Jay Z" did 9 collaborations and each one debuted at number 1, they'd then be listed separately from either "Kanye" or "Jay Z".Dobyblue (talk) 01:44, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Jay Zs solo albums were all No. 1s since Vol. 2... Hard Knock Life. If you don't count collabs, he should be first. --Gbuvn (talk) 16:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think you'd have some disagreement on Dynasty as it was definitely a various artists marketed as a Jay-Z solo for sales, but indeed if you look at just true Jay Z solo albums there are 10 in a row (Vol 2 > 4:44) that debuted at #1 on Billboard. I'll edit that section, they were consecutive and they all debuted at #1 and because this is just artist solo records, the collabs he was involved in that didn't hit, don't count.Dobyblue (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2015
In the "Most Weeks on the Charts" section, Pink Floyd's The Dark Side of the Moon has now been on the chart for 892 weeks (and still rising!), not 874 weeks as shown. Also the reference is to a static Billboard page instead of a dynamic page that shows the current total number of weeks. Thus, replace:

with
 * (874 weeks) The Dark Side of the Moon – Pink Floyd
 * (892 weeks) The Dark Side of the Moon – Pink Floyd

(Also note that there's a reference in the line "Note that totals are for the main albums chart only, catalog chart totals are not factored in.[15]" to a Billboard article about The Dark Side of the Moon reaching 800 weeks. I expect that very soon it will surpass 900 weeks.)

Source:

Jimbilsborough (talk) 02:59, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  18:27, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Becky :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.218.16.83 (talk) 02:15, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry to ask what might be a stupid question, but is the listing for TDSOTM's run on the BB 200 now dynamic? IOW, will it increment each week, or is someone manually changing the count? Thanks. Jororo05 (talk) 21:53, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

New tracking week adjustments occuring in July
Link to the story so that this info can be inserted into the article when it occurs: Please add this message to other talk pages of Billboard-related articles (so that I don't hve to do ALL of them!) Thank you! - eo (talk) 19:23, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

New #1 album
Pentatonix new #1: http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/6738540/pentatonix-first-no-1-album-billboard-200-chart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.53.98.113 (talk) 14:48, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Blind Faith
"The first UK group to debut at number one with a debut album is One Direction on March 31, 2012 with the album Up All Night."

This is wrong, Blind Faith topped Billboard 200 with their only album. Progenie (talk) 16:29, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The distinction here is to debut at #1: to have so many sales pre-ordered that at the point of the album's release it was immediately the top album. Blind Faith's album reached #1 but did not debut at #1.Sensei48 (talk) 16:58, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Doo-woop & hooligans
If you counted Adele's '21' also Bruno Mars' album should be in the 'most weeks on chart' section with 267 weeks on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.36.28.21 (talk) 14:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Edits, May 2, 2016
Prince's 5 albums in the Top Ten is based on an article in Forbes dated May 2, 2016 here:.

However, that article fails to distinguish between the Billboard 200, the subject of this Wikipedia article, and the Billboard catalog album chart, which is alluded to in the Wiki article, albeit less than completely accurately, which is not the topic of this article nor the source for the "Milestones" section.

Here is the Billboard 200 for the current May 7 issue -. BB describes this chart as "This week's most popular albums across all genres, ranked by album sales, audio on-demand streaming activity and digital sales of tracks from albums as compiled by Nielsen Music" at the top of the page. Note that Prince has 3 albums, not 5, and that 2 are compilations and one a soundtrack, making all 3 ineligible for "Milestones" here in this article; extensive discussions of this can be found in Archive 1 for this article.

The 200 listing for the previous week of April 30 here -  includes no Prince albums of any description.

However, the Catalog Albums chart for this week of May 7 does include 5 Prince albums - here - with the description "This week's top-selling albums across all genres that are at least 18-months old and have fallen below No. 100 on the Billboard 200 or are re-issues of older albums. Titles are ranked by sales data as compiled by Nielsen Music." But this is not the Billboard 200, which indicates that comprehensive sales data for this week have Prince with 3 re-issues in the Top 10, with 2 of those as compliations and 1 as a soundtrack, as above. Sensei48 (talk) 00:18, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Case for CSNY being included for Most in 200 simultaneously
I have placed CSNY on the list with 8 during the week of July 17, 1971, only to have it taken off as only two were by the group proper with six more by the individuals within the group. I believe this should be left on the list for the following reasons that go beyond simple categorical definitions: 1) It was the first time any group had this many albums on the chart - even the Beatles did not accomplish this feat at a prior time; 2) This happened while the band's career was still active, as opposed to Prince, David Bowie, and Whitney Houston who achieved this posthumously and the Beatles decades after they had broken up. Led Zeppelin's 9 happened late in the band's career, but also while still active, and everyone else has less than CSNY; 3) The fact that six of the albums were by the individual members of the group makes it more impressive, not less. Generally, individuals from groups who release 'solo' albums do not fare as well commercially, either not making the 200 chart at all or only briefly before disappearing. Every member of CSNY had an album on the chart that week, all of them Top 40 albums with five Top 10 and every one certified for at least gold record sales. This also had not happened before, and only the Beatles would go on with high individual sales and simultaneous chart position in the 1970s but never that many at once, and virtually no one has done anything resembling that since, not even the ladies from Destiny's Child. PJtP (talk) 23:41, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Doo-Wops & Hooligans Bruno Mars
For Billboard 200 week ending September 3, 2016, Doo-Wops & Hooligans Bruno Mars is running at 289 weeks on the chart. That puts him on top of Adele's 21 with 288 weeks (and counting). Bruno's Doo-Wops should be listed together with (289 weeks) Led Zeppelin IV – Led Zeppelin

Source: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psilud (talk • contribs) 02:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

9 consecutive No. 1 albums for The Beatles.
According the next link The Beatles have 9 consecutive No. 1 albums. Please check and fix if you agree.

http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/7511380/the-beatles-32nd-top-10-album-billboard-200-chart-hollywood-bowl

The albums are between 1965, The Beatles ’65 and 1968, The Beatles (White Album).

--Fgonmar (talk) 20:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Addition to biggest jumps to number one
Ashlee Simpson's album "I Am Me" jumped from 158 to number 1 on November 5, 2005, according to http://www.billboard.com/artist/280066/ashlee-simpson/chart?f=305 Would that be a worthy addition to the list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Icecreamlollipop (talk • contribs) 22:41, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation
Janet's 1989 album is the only one to produce a different number one hit for 3 consecutive years, creating 4 in that time span. Most albums don't bring popular singles over many years, especially #1 songs. The 10th Doctor (talk) 21:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Deleting "Artists with the most albums on Billboard's Top 200 Albums of All-Time (1963–2015)"
This section needs to be removed and will be after appropriate discussion. Someone misread the explanatory note from Billboard. It is not in fact a list of the top albums or top album artists at all. It is rather a list of the greatest record sellers of all time according to BBs formula - albums and singles combined'. That makes this list irrelevant to this article, which is about the BB Top 200 - albums only. Here we go - when you go to the source and click on "How This Works," here is the pop-up text:

"These all-time rankings are based on actual performance on the weekly Billboard Hot 100 (from its launch on Aug. 4, 1958 through Oct. 10, 2015) and Billboard 200 (from Aug. 17, 1963 — when we combined our two leading pop album album charts for stereo and mono releases into one all-encompassing weekly chart — through Oct. 10, 2015). Titles are ranked based on an inverse point system, with weeks at No. 1 earning the greatest value and weeks at lower rungs earning the least. Due to changes in chart methodology over the years, eras are weighted differently to account for chart turnover rates over various periods. Artists are ranked based on the combined point totals, as outlined above, of all their Hot 100 or Billboard 200 chart entries."

Bolding is mine. The "Hot 100" is singles, so this list offers nothing definitive about Billboard album charts at all. Sensei48 (talk) 14:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * And Further
 * One of my edit summaries overstated the situation - not all of section 6 must go. But a careful differentiation must be made here between "albums only" and combined singles&albums as quoted above. BB confuses the issue with misleading headlines. The methodology note that I quote in full above appears on all of the pages cited as sources. For example, this chart clearly is albums only, though not dating from 1958 but 1963. (A 1958-63 date range would have had to include Harry Belafonte, Bob Newhart, The Kingston Trio and others who had multiple top 10 and Top LP albums but divided into mono and stereo charts until the latter date.)
 * But this chart is a compendium of Hot 100 singles and Top 200 albums per the note above.
 * All of the 2015 articles are mysterious and/or misleading in terms of methodology and highly suspect in terms of objective accuracy. The methodology note quoted above smacks of a Kentucky-fried-herbs-and-spices-secret-sauce approach which skews to recentism, likely as a vehicle for the magazine's self-promotion - or else why would Adele be listed as the top album etc. with 24 weeks at #1 when our Wiki article's list below of weeks at #1 includes Fleetwood Mac's Rumours at 31 weeks at #1 and Prince's Purple Rain and the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack at the selfsame 24 weeks at #1? What exactly is the formula for "Top Ten Albums of All Time" that justifies inclusion of Dr. Zhivago and Nickleback on the list when the cited albums were #1 for one week each? If the criterion is total sales/downloads - then where is the recipe for the secret sauce?
 * Part of the problem is the lack of sourcing for the previously-existing "Album Milestones" in the article. I am almost certain that the source for most or all of those lists is the Joel Whitburn books, most notably his 2001, 2005, 2009, and I hope 2015 volumes on Billboard top albums. No secret sauce here: Whitburn's research is exhaustive and based exclusively on album chart movements, positions, and overall sales, and he has operated with the blessing of and as a licensee of Billboard for 40 years - as the magazine is proud to point out here in a 2014 article.
 * Whatever else happens with this suspect section, it must at least be accurate in headers and dates. Beyond that, my vote would be to dump it in favor of a better-sourced series of milestones using Whitburn's two most recent books as more reliable sources than BB's under-explained series of 2015 articles. Sensei48 (talk) 15:39, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Also -
 * The "Artists with the most albums on Billboard's Top 200 Albums of All-Time (1963–2015)" appears to be WP:OR and/or WP:Synth, as though someone counted the albums and came up with the numbers. The BB article that deals with this discusses Adele, Beatles, Stones, and Taylor Swift but does not include the comprehensive listing included here. Sensei48 (talk) 15:54, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

______________________________________________________________________________

Billboard used the same explanatory note for the Billboard Hot 100 all-time list. By the way the chart isn't based on the amount of albums or weeks at #1. But also the amount of weeks in the top 10, top 100 etc. It's about the overall performance of an artist or album. BrunzPOP (talk) 17:44, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Right you are and thanks for the clarification. I did, however, adjust the dates correctly per the same note.
 * Having said that, however, much of the rest of my comment above still pertains. BB's formula here is still obscure and I would say suspect. If these lists were akin to Rolling Stone's endless lists of "best" this and "greatest" that - simply the critical judgment of editors who work in the field and are expressing an opinion, informed perhaps but still an opinion - then I think there would be less problem with these 2015 BB articles. The magazine's charts through its history have also always been something of educated guesses, but guesses rooted in hard numbers and though weighted differently in different eras of its long history - always with the formulae explained in some detail at the head of each different weekly list. These 2015 explanatory notes say basically, "We came up with our own witches' brew to make these rankings but we really don't have to explain it in detail and don't want to be bothered to do so." The aforementioned Joel Whitburn is far more transparent in his painstaking methodology in his 30 or so books. lending more credence to his work. BB's 2015 articles are probably good enough for Wikipedia, but I wouldn't go using them as a source in, say, a college paper or a serious critical or academic book. They just don't pass muster as dependable, serious, and clearly defined research. Sensei48 (talk) 18:46, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Adele - Adele's 21 now has the record for solo female album with the most weeks in the Billboard 200, 319 weeks, surpassing Carole King's Tapestry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.252.56.98 (talk) 22:06, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Pet Shop Boys not listed in the list of artists with most Top 200 Albums
Maybe the list is incorrect, as noted above. I've found that the Pet Shop Boys have placed 17 albums in the top 200, the first one being Please (1986), and the last one "Super" (2016): Please (#7), Actually (#25), Introspective (#34), Behavior (#45), Discography (#111), Very (#20), Disco 2 (#75), Bilingual (#39), Alternative (#103), Nightlife (#84), Release (#73), Disco 3 (#188), Fundamental (#150), Yes (#32), Elysium (#44), Electric (#26), Super (#22). It also amazes me that Madonna is not mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.76.122.180 (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

TEADY AFRO 2017
213.55.102.49 (talk) 13:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  14:23, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Billboard 200. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130114111702/http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/chart-watch-extra-the-acts-with-the-most-top-10-albums-ever.html to http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart-watch/chart-watch-extra-the-acts-with-the-most-top-10-albums-ever.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101120042513/http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/69353/chart-watch-extra-kings-50-year-reign/ to http://new.music.yahoo.com/blogs/chart_watch/69353/chart-watch-extra-kings-50-year-reign
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100312060816/http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/24901 to http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/24901
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110604161746/http://music.yahoo.com/read/story/12064351 to http://music.yahoo.com/read/story/12064351

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:59, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Sountracks
Do we count soundtracks in "Artist milestones" section, or not? 85.218.56.214 (talk) 12:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

We should if it's just the artist and no-one else involved, like Prince's Batman soundtrack.Dobyblue (talk) 01:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Artists with the top 2 albums in a single week
Prince should be added to this list, as he was #2 with 'Purple Rain' and #1 with 'The Very Best of Prince' the week of May 7, 2016 (following his passing).168.161.192.15 (talk) 21:33, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Mono and Stereo Charts
Hello,

I want to clarify that South Pacific's (soundtrack) run is mostly from the stereo chart. In fact, the album only spent 3 weeks on the mono chart. It was a great seller but an of exceptional interest to those with newer, pricier stereophonic record players. Would also like to mention that West Side Story spent 52 weeks on the stereo chart, however, two weeks where the album was #1 on the mono and not stereo, thus equaling 54 different weeks. Orion XXV (talk) 08:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Consecutive No. 1s
According to this source the list of artists with the most consecutive no. 1 albums looks quite different. It's difficult to say what counts as consecutive though. Maybe it's best to remove that section altogether. --Gbuvn (talk) 15:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It's a good section as long as it's properly defined, and Billboard use the phrase "consecutive studio albums" in some articles separately from consecutive No. 1 albums where the latter would include greatest hits and live albums - in the one you've posted they're simply talking about Number 1 albums, so they're including the greatest hits compilation and that's fine for "No. 1 albums" but wouldn't be included in "Consecutive studio albums", so Eminem has 8 No. 1 albums in a row, but 7 consecutive studio albums to debut at #1. Collaborative efforts wouldn't go in either IMO. Makes sense yes?Dobyblue (talk) 21:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * A source is needed for the Rolling Stones -Richard Hendricks (talk) 21:17, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It is in the Eminem article - "The Rolling Stones: Between 1971 and 1981, all eight of the band’s studio albums reached No. 1-- from 1971’s Sticky Fingers through 1981’s Tattoo You."Dobyblue (talk) 21:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

CONSECUTIVE STUDIO ALBUMS to debut at Number One
As of June 2018 here are the consecutive studio albums by the top artists, this will help current editors including reach a consensus and avoid an edit war. This section is for studio releases by an artist that consecutively debuted at #1 on the Billboard 200. It's clear whomever intitially added this section neglected Jay-Z's albums, but anywhere, here they are. If you arrive at a different number, explain why. For example Eminem has been involved in 8 albums released in a row to hit #1, but they are not all solo albums and they include a compilation, hence the number he has in one record category may differ.

Jay-Z - 1) Vol. 2... Hard Knock Life (1998), 2) Vol. 3... Life and Times of S. Carter (1999), 3) The Dynasty: Roc La Familia (2000), 4) The Blueprint (2001), 5) The Blueprint 2: The Gift & The Curse (2002), 6) The Black Album (2003), 7) Kingdom Come (2006), 8) American Gangster (2007), 9) The Blueprint 3 (2009), 10) Magna Carta... Holy Grail (2013), 11) 4:44 (2017)

Eminem - 1) The Marshall Mathers LP (2000), 2) The Eminem Show (2002), 3) Encore (2004), 4) Relapse (2009), 5) Recovery (2010), 6) The Marshall Mathers LP 2 (2013), 7) Revival (2017)

Kanye - 1) Late Registration (2005), 2) Graduation (2007), 3) 808s & Heartbreak (2008), 4) My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy (2010), 5) Yeezus (2013), 6) The Life of Pablo (2016), 7) Ye (2018)

Dave Matthews Band - 1) Before These Crowded Streets (1998), 2) Everyday (2001), 3) Busted Stuff (2002), 4) Stand Up (2005), 5) Big Whiskey and the Groogrux King (2009), 6) Away From The World (2012), 7) Come Tomorrow (2018)

All of these are consecutively released studio albums from the artist that debuted at #1, not compilations, not greatest hits, not live releases, etc.Dobyblue (talk) 20:51, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest deleting the consecutive studio albums to debut as number one since this is original research. -Richard Hendricks (talk) 21:02, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It has been fine being here for several years, the existing references added did NOT support the changes being made. No 1 album =/= No 1 studio album =/= No 1 consecutive studio album =/= No 1 consective album to debut at #1 - there are plenty of Billboard references which we can add to support the existing numbers, they will be added shortly.Dobyblue (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * "JAY-Z: The superstar mogul has seen his last 11 solo studio albums debut at No. 1, from 1998’s Vol. 2… Hard Knock Life through his latest release, 2017’s 4:44." - Dobyblue (talk) 21:10, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I've added additional citations for Jay-Z, it's a bit like fake news to hear this called original research when the existing references, before they started being edited, all supported the category and its entrants.Dobyblue (talk) 21:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The title of the table you are discussing is "Most consecutive studio albums to debut at number-one". It says nothing about only counting solo albums, and neither does the Billboard 200 figure you are citing.  When considering all studio albums, as Billboard does and as the table states, Jay-Z actually does not have the lead.  It says so three different ways right in the article that you cited.
 * First, right in the title of your citation: "Eminem Makes Chart History With Eighth Consecutive No. 1 Debut on Billboard 200".  Note that both the Eminem album and the article about it are dated after Jay-Z's last album, so saying Eminem is the first also means he is the only.
 * Second, in the article body: "Eminem is the first act in the history of the Billboard 200 chart with eight consecutive chart entries to bow at No. 1. He previously opened at No. 1 with his last seven releases...".
 * And third, a statement in the same article specifically calls out Jay-Z's 11 consecutive number one albums as NOT being consecutive debuts:
 * "Breaking up JAY-Z’s hot streak between 1998 and the present are seven charting titles that did not reach No. 1."
 * So according to Billboard, in the same article you are citing, Eminem has the lead with 8 consecutive number 1 debuts. Jay-Z has some number less than that.  I am updating the table accordingly. LRonaldHubbs (talk) 02:04, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Eminem and Kanye were each erroneously listed as having 7 consecutive number one debuts, but each of the cited articles for these artists clearly say they have 8. I have corrected this error in both of the respective tables.  LRonaldHubbs (talk) 02:18, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The citations already provided do appear to justify Jay-Z's total of 11 consecutive number 1 studio albums in the other table. However, for him to appear in the table of consecutive number 1 studio album debuts, a new citation would be needed, as the existing citations do not support this. LRonaldHubbs (talk) 02:26, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't know why WTT is being excluded when both artists are name-checked in the listing and Billboard itself includes it in the list (it is not a list of solo number ones). So you have the official Billboard source saying Kanye has 8 number ones consecutively both to debut at number one and without a debut specified but the wikipedia list saying he has 7 https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/8460189/kanye-west-eighth-no-1-album-billboard-200-ye

/Billboard 200 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect /Billboard 200. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:55, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Big mistake made
Fellow editors, please help me undo a mistake I made. I tried adding reference to a column and ended up jamming other contents of the page into that column. While the reference was added, I have been unable to revert the mistake and make the page normal again. Thank you. Ofosomto (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

Lady Gaga's 5 consecutive #1 studio albums
In the list of artists with the most consecutive studio albums to debut at #1, Lady Gaga needs to be added since her last 5 studio albums Born This Way, ARTPOP, Cheek to Cheek, Joanne and A Star Is Born all debuted at #1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FredeContre (talk • contribs) 10:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Most number-one albums in a calendar year
There seems to be an error with the date for the Beatles. The article says 1964 however in the citation link on Billboards website they only had two Number Ones in 1964. According to this article: https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/8507983/bts-beatles-monkees-billboard-chart-history, The Beatles three albums in less than a year were Anthology 1, Anthology 2 and Anthology 3 between Dec. 9, 1995 and Nov. 16, 1996. It also seems like BTS should be added to the list? I saw someone say that they didn't qualify because the albums charted in both 2018 and 2019 but that would also disqualify the Beatles?--31.200.163.206 (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

Where is BTS? https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/8507977/bts-map-of-the-soul-persona-no-1-album-billboard-200-chart Ivanacccp (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The Beatles had three #1 albums in 1964: Meet the Beatles!, The Beatles' Second Album, and A Hard Day's Night. BTS had two #1 albums in 2018 (Love Yourself: Tear and Love Yourself: Answer), and so far have had one #1 album in 2019 (Map of the Soul: Persona). The category specifies calendar year. Sbb618 (talk) 16:22, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Number of consecutive Billboard Top 200 Albums
Supertramp had 8 consecutive top 200 albums: Crime of the Century, Crisis? What Crisis?, Even in the Quietest Moments, Breakfast in America, Paris, ...Famous Last Words..., Brother Where You Bound, and Free as A Bird. Supertramp is missing off the list. JoshuaHindy (talk) 03:49, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

The Sound of Music
Under "Additional Milestones": "The Sound of Music set the record of 109 consecutive weeks in the top 10 from May 1, 1965 to July 16, 1966, but only spent 2 weeks at number one on the Billboard 200." The linked reference article states that TSOM was in the top 10 for a total of 109 weeks, not consecutively. Suggest rewriting as "The Sound of Music set the record of 109 weeks in the top 10, but only spent 2 weeks at number one on the Billboard 200." The date range is not relevant, as "Born in the U.S.A." holds the record for most consecutive weeks in the top 10 (84) per https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/6745035/taylor-swift-1989-billboard-200-top-10. 71.121.245.86 (talk) 20:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Albums with most weeks in the top 10
Here is a article with the albums with the most weeks in the top 10, someone please add to the article. https://web.archive.org/web/20151223054953/https://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/chart-beat/6715365/ask-billboard-lady-gaga-first-artist-with-two-7-million-selling — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.243.240 (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Chris Tomlin
Tomlin debuted on the Hot 100 this week as one of the featured artists on Thomas Rhett’s “Be a Light”. Should a note be added to the “artists to top the BB200 without hitting the Hot 100” to reflect this, as he had not hit the Hot 100 when he topped the BB200, or should he be removed altogether?

CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 20:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)