Template talk:Certification Table Entry/Archive 6

Certification threshold for Norway
I found out that IFPI Norway has changed their thresholds from 1 January 2018. That's no problem, but while going over past versions of the page I realised that another change occurred for singles sometime between February 2014 and September 2015. Does anyone have any information about when exactly this change occurred? I'm inclined to thing it is from the beginning of 2015, but would prefer to be certain. --Muhandes (talk) 18:37, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Addendum 1: Another change is that from 2018, Norway goes by certification date, not by release date. "NB! De nye grensene gjelder alle utgivelser, uavhengig av utgivelsestidspunkt."
 * Addendum 2: While going over it I realised we have another error in the sales for Norway. The source we are relying on is this. I'm not sure from this source when 15k/30k starts for albums. Is it:
 * "Gjelder kun produkter utgitt etter 1.januar 2007"
 * "Disse bestemmelser trer i kraft fra 6.9.2006"
 * "Nivåer for gull og platina ble sist regulert 13.2.2007"
 * Can anyone shed light on this? --Muhandes (talk) 19:12, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Copied from another thread:
 * I see that for On Top of the World (Imagine Dragons song) the song was certified under streaming for the highest cert. I added |streaming=true to it, but it doesn't seem to make a difference? It's the first I've seen that norway had a streaming equivalanet. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, the plot thickens... It's the first for me too. I am not aware of different thresholds for streaming, and the regular one move to include streaming in 2015 or so. Can anyone shed a light on this --Muhandes (talk) 07:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Expression error: Unexpected < operator
Many articles are in Category:ParserFunction errors due to changes related to this template. I'm hoping Muhandes can fix the problem. The following is from All the Things She Said.

Previewing the above in a sandbox shows "Expression error: Unexpected < operator" in the last column (sales). Another issue is that the article entries include  but I have omitted it here because it generates  in preview. Johnuniq (talk) 22:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * It appears to be because the song doesn't appear in IFPI Norway's certification database, so obviously if it's not there, the code can't find it. Richard3120 (talk) 22:45, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, I thought I tested it. On it now. --Muhandes (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * one issue appears to be that there is no relyear or relmonth parameter included in that particular article, which should be necessary. But I think it's simply that the song has no Norwegian certification - I don't think there's a problem with your code. Richard3120 (talk) 23:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No, this was bad testing on my side, it has to do with no listing certyear which I thought I protected against and didn't. Sorry about that, I really thought I tested it. --Muhandes (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * In regards to All the Things She Said, I've fixed it. Certyear is 2003 btw in the archived link not the IFPI current website. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that... I wonder why it's disappeared from the current version of the website? Richard3120 (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No idea Considering a lot of the years from the archived link are missing on the current website *shrug* --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:49, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Here's the thing. Since 2015, the threshold for singles in Norway is 2,000,000 and not 5,000. That's quite a difference. However, many singles do not have relyear or certyear. I could make that return "0" sales, which would put it in or I could just let it be as it is today and return 5,000 if no relyear is listed. What's your opinion? --Muhandes (talk) 23:57, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think they should be piped to missing information as the 2015 relyear is the deciding factor for the salesamount. However, as you've mentioned it's not 100% confirmed yet. Maybe leave 2015 for |nosales=yes and adjust that year when infomration is confirmed on when exactly the change occured. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:02, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Obviously they've changed from 5000 physical sales/downloads to 2 million streams. I'm not sure how you show that as a sales equivalent. Richard3120 (talk) 00:03, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * For now I left it as it was before - it returns 5,000 if relyear is missing. If you both (or of course other editors) think that without relyear it should return zero, I will do that tomorrow. --Muhandes (talk) 00:07, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, it is now the next day, I made the change I mentioned above and should start populating with Norway singles certifications which need relyear (or certyear if it is 2018 or after). Keeping an eye on it. --Muhandes (talk) 09:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason why The Ketchup Song (Aserejé) is bring up 0 even after adding certyear and relyear? This one is from the archived link and x6 platinum so don't know if that makes a difference. Nevermind, I found it needed relmonth. When specifically are relmonth needed for certs? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * relmonth is needed in 2002. This is because albums change threshold in July 2002. It has no effect on singles, but is required due to the way the template is built. --Muhandes (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay. That explains why the ones I null edited yesterday are back again. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:53, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

It seems like is empty again. I only corrected about twenty, so either someone else corrected many more, or there were just a few (meaning relyear was generally added for singles). Anyway, I think this escapade is now

✅ --Muhandes (talk) 07:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I fixed a few a couple of days ago and I guess you fixed the rest ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:40, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Table bottom cleanup
One thing that always bothers me is the bottom of the table used for certifications. This is added through Certification Table Bottom which has options nosales, noshipments and streaming. The idea was that editors will create the table, look at the result and set those parameters as they see fit. In practice though this rarely happens and in most cases the usage is default:

This is used even if no sales or shipments are actually displayed.

I would propose a bot that goes over all usages of Certification Table Bottom and corrects this issue. I have an idea how to implement it. Do you think this is a worthwhile idea or am I the only one annoyed by this? --Muhandes (talk) 14:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd go along with that. Presumably the bot would decide that any record released after 2014 (or whenever it was) would decide that streamingtrue automatically, and that any record before this date would not have it? Although that's not always the case... there are many singles that have had a significant percentage of their sales in the streaming era, despite being released decades ago (e.g. "Bohemian Rhapsody", or perennial Christmas hits). Richard3120 (talk) 14:31, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The bot will follow the logic that Certification Table Entry/Foot uses. This includes, e.g. United Kingdom using streams from 2014 onward, but also quite a number of other things. In essence the bot will harmonize between the usage of footnotes within the table to the footnotes section. --Muhandes (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Update Switzerland & Netherlands levels
FYI, a long overdue update was made to the Switzerland levels, which were incorrect since 2013. I only found about it since some editor reverted me with adding the levels, instead of reporting here. If you see any problems, please report them here. --Muhandes (talk) 14:13, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Netherlands also went through a long overdue update. Expect some to pop at and as always, please ping and let me know if there are any problems. --Muhandes (talk) 16:45, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * There were about a hundred pages to fix, now empty again. --Muhandes (talk) 13:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Https for Belgium, Finland, and Japan / Austria parameters
Hi, could you please add https to the Belgium, Finland, and Japan entries? Also, the other day I realized that the new Austrian certification URL allows specific parameters for artist, title and type of release (e.g., https://ifpi.at/auszeichnungen/?fwp_interpret=Depeche%20Mode&fwp_titel=Delta%20Machine&fwp_format=album), so that users don't have to manually search for certifications.  snap snap  (talk) 17:54, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, added to my TDL, will probably do it all over the weekend. --Muhandes (talk) 18:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 20:03, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you!  snap snap  (talk) 00:17, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Sweden's threshold
Since January 1, 2018, the threshold for singles in Sweden has been 4,000,000 streams (or 40,000 sales equivalents) for Gold and 8,000,000 streams (or 80,000 sales equivalents for Platinum. The template hasn't been updated, so I've had to insert the thresholds manually in a bunch of articles.  ×°˜`°×  ηαη¢у  ×°˜`°×  17:49, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting us know, I'll fix it this weekend. --Muhandes (talk) 06:30, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am looking for the source of (or 40,000 sales equivalents), can you please supply it? --Muhandes (talk) 06:46, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Nevermind - they used to have a 100/1 conversion but now they only count streams for single certifications.  ×°˜`°×  ηαη¢у  ×°˜`°×  10:58, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ I changed both the threshold and the footnote. If certyear is before 2018, it uses relyear as before. Otherwise it just uses the new thresholds. See the effect at Template:Certification Table Entry/testcases. --Muhandes (talk) 11:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you!  ×°˜`°× ηαη¢у  ×°˜`°×  11:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Update
The parameter  for such certifications as US (RIAA), France (SNEP) and Japan (RIAJ) have not signified that certifications are based on sales in case of digital albums/singles, HĐ (talk) 08:28, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I am assuming you are referring to the footnote. If so, you are definitely correct and digital sales should show &#42;. How about if we set all cases where true show it, not just those three? --Muhandes (talk) 12:40, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, I'm pretty sure the case does not work for all countries, not just the three mentioned, HĐ (talk) 13:49, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Most definitely correct. My question was, should this be fixed only for those counties, or should we set it so &#42; shows whenever true. --Muhandes (talk) 15:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Unless anyone objects, I agree with Muhandes and think it should be set to "true" to show streaming for all countries, as I think all countries now include streaming in their charts and sales figures, it doesn't really make sense to only include it for the UK and US. Richard3120 (talk) 14:44, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * My bad, yes, it'll make perfect sense to set true for all countries (with streaming inclusion starting from specific dates), HĐ (talk) 03:50, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ If you set true you get the symbol for sales, no matter what region you use. --Muhandes (talk) 13:18, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Spain certifications
I added parameter checking for Spain, and I get a flood of pages at. I had a look and they mostly seem legit mistakes, listing certifications before 2004 without a source or after that without the week, however, if you think this is incorrect, feel free to revert my edit and let me know what went wrong. --Muhandes (talk) 14:22, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Ringtone/mastertone
I've seen some articles with ringtone and mastertone certifications, done by hand since the template does not support it. Do we want to add this support to the template? --Muhandes (talk) 20:34, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Symbols need fixing
I see that for the single certification, the symbol ^ is used for Canada and Australia and other countries in songs such as "Shallow (Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper song)" which indicate certitification based on shipments. That I don't think is true anymore (and hasn't been for many years), shouldn't the symbol be a double-dagger for sales + streams? Certifications after September 12, 2016 by Music Canada are for sales + streams. Similarly in "I Gotta Feeling", the symbol ^ is used which indicate certification based on shipments, shouldn't the symbol be an asterisk * for certification based on digital sales? The symbol ^ is mainly used for physical singles before the digital era when singles were shipped to retailers. Hzh (talk) 10:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * First thing, see the section just above. I just made so if you set true, you will get the symbol for sales. Second, if you think this is not enough, you will need to be more specific. The code was written back in 2011 or so based on this featured list. If things are not up to date (which they most likely are), say what needs to be corrected/updated and show a reliable source, and we will fix both the list and the code. --Muhandes (talk) 13:22, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * In the specific case of Canada, the digital certification has been discontinued since September 12, 2016, see the note at the bottom of the page here - . The current certification is for sales + streams. The certification therefore should indicate a double-dagger for certification after that date. Using true would not solve the issue after that date. Seems like it should be done the same as the United States which do show the double dagger.  I suspect the situation is the same for Australia although I haven't been able to find a source yet, so I'm not entirely certain if they have changed. Hzh (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ for Canada. --Muhandes (talk) 21:06, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Adding for Australia, it seems they do include streams for album certification after May 5, 2017 -, but I'm not sure about certification for singles (streams have been included in charts since 2014 but apparently not for certification - ).
 * Streams are blatantly included in single certifications for Australia - there's no way songs are able to rack up multi-Platinum certs based on pure sales alone in the digital era.  ×°˜`°× ηαη¢у  ×°˜`°×  11:27, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * While I don't doubt this, the 2017 source only mention albums. The 2014 source specifically says that singles were not includes in 2014. Barring any other sources, I will have to only implement this for albums. --Muhandes (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Canada singles certification from 2017 onwards
Hello. I'm making an article on Burn the House Down by AJR, a 2018 song which was certified platinum in 2019. Problem is, when I input the parameters, it gives me 10,000 sales. But according to Music Canada, "For certifications after September 12, 2016", platinum should be 80,000. Same problems with Gold (5,000 - 40,000) and Diamond (100,000 - 800,000}. These errors are from 2017 to 2019 (unless Music Canada changed their certifications as of 2019?). Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Set "digital = true". Hzh (talk) 08:16, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That unfortunately does not solve the problem. Music canada says Digital downloads were "Discontinued September 12, 2016". Both certifications for burn the house down came after 2016. Therefore, it should be the first table cert levels shown in the article. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2019 (UTC)


 * That issue hasn't been resolved yet (it's digital sales + streams now), so it'll do for the time being since it'll give you the right figure. Streaming needed to be set to true for the Certification Table Bottom. See the discussion above on symbols needing fixing.  I can probably try to fix it, but I rarely edit template, and I'm unfamiliar with the coding (although I have edited the album template before), so will wait for a while first before I do anything.  Hzh (talk) 19:25, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll ping for this edit. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Just landed from a two week vacation in Norway and Denmark, still a bit fuzzy. Hopefully I will look at this over the weekend. --Muhandes (talk) 13:04, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ but notice that now you need certyear for Canada single certifications, and sometimes also certmonth and certday. Therefore, note which is now filling up with invalid certifications. I gave this much thought and I think this is the correct solution, since in truth, without knowing the certification year we have an uncertainty about the thresholds. I'll work on cleaning it up and hopefully I wont be alone.
 * Let me know if there are any other problems. --Muhandes (talk) 21:04, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * NB while fixing some articles, I noticed some of them erroneously used true after September 12, 2016. The only effect this has is a wrong footnote. --Muhandes (talk) 21:46, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Sweden cert
When using Swedish certification table entry, the description on says "Select 'Visa' under songname to see certification". I do not see this 'Visa' option, so i was wondering if something has changed, or i'm just blind? Could anyone check? thanks! Kleool (talk) 06:07, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * they have changed it, it used to be there. And now it makes it more difficult to search for certifications. For example, if I search for "Little Mix" and then choose "Black Magic", if you clicked on the song title it used to tell you if it had a certification, by clicking "Visa". But now it just tells me the position on its first week on the charts ("första placering") and highest chart position ("högsta placering"), and underneath that I can click on "Veckolista Singular" which takes me to the chart when it reached its highest position, which was week 37 of 2015. But none of those things tell me if it received a certification or not: I have to check each week manually to find that it was certified gold in week 42. I can't see a way now to find a certification without having to check each week manually, one by one. Richard3120 (talk) 11:32, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * This is very unfortunate development, especially if certification was assigned after the song/album stopped charting. I already met several "cases" like these (i went through all charting weeks for the song, and there was no cert), and thought that maybe i just don't know where to properly look. I wonder if it's a glitch of some kind, or it's done on purpose. Thanks for answering! ^^ Kleool (talk) 11:39, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's a glitch, the chart pages have been completely redesigned. You are right, it is going to make certification searches very difficult, unless they create a separate certification database at some point. Richard3120 (talk) 11:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Fingers crossed on seperate certification database route. But at this time, the certification table entry template description esentially has become a lie. Kleool (talk) 13:33, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

More Canada issues.
I'm working on the above canada singles certs error and came across Wake Me Up When September Ends. It went platinum in 2006 digitally, which means it should be 20,000. But inputting the parameters in gives me 80,000. Similar problem with double platinum digital should be 40,000, not 160,000 for Hung Up. Alternatively, Call Me (Blondie song) went platinum in 1980, which should make it 150,000 but gives me 10,000. A close problem is gold in 1989 should be 50,000 not 5,000 per Straight Up (Paula Abdul song). Why is this? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:12, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You are correct, this was never implemented. Since the above post was about Canada singles certification from 2017 onwards (the September 12, 2016 change), that's what I implemented for now. I now notice there were many other changes over the years which also need to be implemented. I'll probably implement this next weekend, I'm too tired for such delicate work now. The good thing is that now we have certyear for all of them, so they should be automatically fixed when I sort this out. --Muhandes (talk) 21:54, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries! That's why i decided to have a separate section for issues ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:31, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Update: More issues at Fame (David Bowie song), Rapper's Delight, What Have You Done for Me Lately, Miss You Much, If You Leave Me Now have wrong Gold physical levels (before 1982 should be 75,000 not 5,000).

I'll organize the issues:
 * Physical singles before 1982: gold 75,000, platinum 150,000.
 * Physical singles Feb 1982 - Sept 2002: Gold 50,000
 * Digital certification before 2007: platinum - 20,000, double platinum 40,000.

I wouldn't be surprised if all levels between 1982 - 2016 are off. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:57, 1 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You wouldn't be surprised, because this is exactly what I wrote above :P the only thing I implemented is the September 12, 2016 change. Everything else needs to be implemented. --Muhandes (talk) 14:39, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah I know. But i didn't know how far back they were off. And to think they've been wrong all these years... --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:53, 2 September 2019 (UTC)


 * ✅. Note that many more articles are now joining, mostly because they were setting true after 2016. --Muhandes (talk) 18:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I did come across ones that weren't digital before you implemented this lol. Now we both know there's even more errors ;) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:01, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, "digital" in this case means downloads, but not streaming, right? Because most of the songs in this category were released and certified after streaming was included in sales data. Richard3120 (talk) 23:58, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah I think so. Streams were combined with digital in September 12, 2016. I've been removing them if the newer certification came after that date i.e Ride (Twenty One Pilots song). Originally it was a digital cert, but now it's sales/stream combined. If Music Canada specifically said it was a digital (and not physical), then I leave it as a digital cert. If it's sales/streams combined, then it's no longer digital. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:04, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * thanks... this is where the confusion lies, both are digital, but obviously "digital" means something different before September 2016 than after September 2016... Richard3120 (talk) 00:12, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah. I don't know if it's useful to have |streaming=true to prevent confusion between pre September 2016 digital and post September 2016 sales/streaming certs. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think there is something that needs clarification. The flag true is not a generic flag that says that a certification is for digital sales, in the same way that setting true is not a generic flag that says the song is in Spanish, true is not a generic flag that says the song is by a local artist and true is not a generic flag that means streaming are invlolved. What these flags do, is that they differentiate between two kinds of certifications, where the authority has several in parallel. That means that there is only one condition for setting true: looking at the source, and the source says "digital single certification" or something of the sort. There is no guesswork here, we don't invent any data, we just report on the data we see. This is why if one sets true and we know it cannot be, the sales are zero. It's simply a mis-reported certification and we cannot know if the year was reported wrongly or the digitalness. Similar rules apply to Spanish, domestic etc. I hope this clarifies the confusion.--Muhandes (talk) 06:59, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Got it, thank you, that makes sense now. Richard3120 (talk) 16:38, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm very sorry, if i'm writing in the wrong place, but wanted to clarify something which confuses me while reading your conversations true can't be used for singles with certifications issued after the September 2016 change, yes (as sales+streams are used for cert)? And if it is true, shouldn't it be clarified in template explanation table? Thank you! Kleool (talk) 09:37, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * As I explained above, true should be used if and only if you look at the source and it says "digital certification". That's the only purpose of this flag. It is not because sales+streams are used for cert it is simply a matter of verification: we report what we see, not what we know. I'm not sure what you mean by template explanation table, but I added some clarification to the template documentation. --Muhandes (talk) 14:06, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * English is not my first language, so your explanation before went a bit over my head. But adding clarification in template documentation (which was the one i meant with explanation table) cleared everything up for me. Thank you for replying and your time! Have a good day! :) Kleool (talk) 18:16, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ran into as issue with This Is What You Came For. It was certified on the day that digital certs were discontinued, but it still has a digital cert. When i input the certyear, certmonth and certday, i still get 0. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:37, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, misread that. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:39, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Cleanup is ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 10:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

New website for Spanish certifications: El portal de Música
I started discussion about moving the Spanish certification to a new website, El portal de Música. Please join and voice your opinion. By the way, the same website could be used at singlechart and albumchart, but they already have a working option with Hung Medien. --Muhandes (talk) 12:07, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

New Hungarian thresholds
Thresholds for Hungarian post-December 14, 2012 certifications are 2,000 for Gold and 4,000 for Platinum – and not 3,000 and 6,000 as stated by the template. Source:.  ×°˜`°× ηαη¢у  ×°˜`°×  09:33, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Added to TDL. --Muhandes (talk) 10:24, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I did some research in the sources and the situation is a bit more complicated. The actual change was at 1 January 2018 when they started including streaming and such. I'll add sources and details at Association of Hungarian Record Companies. --Muhandes (talk) 09:56, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ As usual, need to watch for a while for articles missing some parameters which will pop up after the change. --Muhandes (talk) 12:33, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Swedish certification levels
The template seems to bring up incorrect levels for singles released after January 1, 2018. The levels after January 1, 2018 are Gold=40,000, Platinum=80,000. One example I came across is "I Don't Care", released on May 10, 2019. It's recently been certified 3 times Platinum, but the template reads 120,000, it should generate 240,000 units.--Harout72 (talk) 16:56, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Added to TDL. I am between business trips, will try to attend to this next weekend. --Muhandes (talk) 11:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ The reason that the wrong sales was shown was that certyear wasn't listed, which also means the citation did not work. certyear is still mandatory for the citation, but I corrected it so if it's not listed, the sales are still correct. --Muhandes (talk) 18:10, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thank you. But it reads 24 million now for "I Don't Care" single, should we not program it in a way that it reads 240,000 units, as in 24,000,000 (streaming) ÷ 100 = 240,000? I mean that's how we do for all other certifying bodies including Denmark.--Harout72 (talk) 20:04, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Denmark has rules that can be seen here. I am not aware of similar rules for Sweden, can you provide a source for that 1:100 ratio for Sweden? --Muhandes (talk) 20:22, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I've now read this more carefully and I see these rules don't really mention that 1:100 ratio about streams, they do only about downloads. But I think there was such source before or we wouldn't have done it. I'll need to look further. --Muhandes (talk) 20:26, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm currently looking for that too, I thought I'd seen it once on their website, but I can't find it now. They all seem to break it down with either 100 or 150 with an exception of Brazil, who breaks it down using 500. I just e-mailed this question to one of their employees, I'll let you know here when I get her response.--Harout72 (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I did a bit more digging. The source for Denmark is probably the move from this "100 streams = 1 enhed", to this "1 stream = 1 enhed". It's a bit ORish but I can live with that. We don't have a similar source for Sweden for now. --Muhandes (talk) 21:05, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * So I received reply from Charlotte Appeltofft, she says they do not have any official figures such as 100 or 150 to convert the stream numbers into units. What they have is this calculator here, you fill in the main boxes including the name of artist, song title, release date and the number of streams it's received, and it gives you the certification levels it's received. All in all, the calculator is useless for us, because once we see the posted certifications, we already can tell how many streams it's received in Sweden based on this. Sources such as this, however, claim that streams between 100 and 200 can earn record companies there as much money as a single download would. Since I need a figure through which I can convert the Swedish certifications into units in order to add their certifications at the List of best-selling music artists, I'm going to use 1:100. The 100 is also used by Norway and Denmark, so I think it's also safe to treat Sweden similarly, although, I can see that this practice would be OR, but we're really left with no other option.--Harout72 (talk) 17:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

France site changed
When I went to Snepmusic.com to look up a song, I saw that the site had changed its appearance. Then, when I went to this article to see if the link was still working correctly, I wound up at a page that says "Oops! That page can’t be found." Apparently the url changed from this to this. Nowmusicfan2816 come to my window 19:07, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting us know, added to my TDL. --Muhandes (talk) 13:47, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 14:27, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Everything's showing up on the site now. Nowmusicfan2816 come to my window 14:33, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Mexico certification
Hi! For Mexico certifications, when a song has several multi-level certification (e.g. 5× Diamond + 4× Platinum + Gold for Despacito as example), it seems to be impossible to create properly with template (Despacito is already semi-manual). If i use Platinum+Diamond+Gold and number, it gets assigned to the platinum value only. And seems that number supports only 1 value. Is it possible to implement a case for it? Or should just bypass cases like these with manual entry? Thank you Kleool (talk) 13:20, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, when I implemented this template in 2011 there weren't any cases of multiple Diamond with multiple Platinum, or there were very few, so I didn't implement it. Is it worth the time to implement it now? Are there many such cases? --Muhandes (talk) 16:45, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * hi! to be honest, not that many. 2-3 songs this year? with 1-2 close(ish). But that's an increase since previous years. It isn't that big of a problem to make entries manually for these few cases ^^ . Sorry for troubling you. After your question i realised that it's quite a bother to make such big change for few exception cases. Thank you for answering. Have a nice day!Kleool (talk) 13:31, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Fine, if this changes and you feel an automatic template is needed, let me know and I can develop it. I tried to clarify in the documentation exactly what is not support. --Muhandes (talk) 15:27, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Spanish digital 2009
Hello. I added a certification for 4 Segundos, which was a Gold Original Tones and Digital downloads certification in 2009. The template should generate 20,000 sales, but gives 10,000. As the certmonth for this song is 35 (as in week 35 per the template), is this a reason why this is giving the wrong sale amount? Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:44, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Looking at the code, the template uses relyear, relmonth, relday for determining the sales amount for Spain. I suppose this is based on some source which says that the release data was used to determine the amount. If this is not the case, I can fix it. --Muhandes (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I found the solution. Turns out, I had 2008 as rel year as the infobox misled me (2008 recorded, 2009 release as single). Productores_de_Música_de_España made me believe it was the certdate, not reldate. Thanks for the clarification. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:44, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Australian certs pre 1997
Hello. I was wondering if it was possible to have a error for links that are citing Australia certifications before 1997 and do not exist in the ARIA webiste. For example Up from Down Under has a 1992 certification pointing to ARIA, but needed to be swapped to Ryan's book. ARIA only has certifications from 1997 onwards. Please note that Ryan's book does not always have the certifications needed, so the error page can't be pointed to Ryan's book. An example is ...Ish (album) that was not in Ryan's book, but the ARIA weekly chart did have. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:11, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There was a test for this in the template, but instead of returning an error it returned a mock reference from some unknown reason. It now returns an error, see Template:Certification Table Entry/testcases. It also categorizes in, and I see it already caught a few more articles which need handling. I don't have the Ryan book or I'd fix them myself. --Muhandes (talk) 10:59, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't know for sure that this contains all of the 1989 ARIA certifications (some of which are missing from both the ARIA website's annual charts and Gavin Ryan's book), but I've uploaded a copy of the ARIA top 100 singles chart for 1989 here - https://i.imgur.com/9GTxuJZ.jpg - which has annotated platinum (triangular symbol) and gold (circular symbol) certifications beside each certified title - however, multi-platinum (rare for singles here then; Cher's 'If I Could Turn Back Time' is the only example here) is only indicated by a double-triangle regardless of the level of platinum achieved. This chart was taken from the first edition of The ARIA Report (14 January 1990), a subscription service (which continues to this day) containing the top 100 singles & albums charts, among other things, such as international charts and lists of new release titles and radio/TV music video additions. I credit the publisher as ARIA, and use via=Imgur.com in the citation formatting. I can upload one for the top 100 albums chart for 1989, but the level of platinum for multi-platinum not being specified is more of an issue there.  As far as I am aware, there were very few ARIA certifications awarded in 1988, when the levels of gold (50k) and platinum (100k) were higher (but the lack of 1988 certifications does not seem to be because of that).  You may notice that e.g. Phil Collins' 'A Groovy Kind of Love', which was #20 on the 1988 annual singles chart from memory, appears on the 1989 top 100 singles chart again at #79, but doesn't even have a gold certification beside it, when surely it must have shipped at least 35k copies.Nqr9 (talk) 13:34, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Here's the ARIA top 100 albums of 1989 chart with certifications annotated, as outlined above - https://imgur.com/zGyYkJ2 .Nqr9 (talk) 13:45, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I have the pdf version of the Ryan book. I have shared it with a couple of editors who add/add references for Australian peaks between 51-100, and pre-1997 certifications. While the book has some omissions (of certifications) and errors (the 1991 end of year chart data is completely wrong, for some reason; plus much of the pre-1990 top 100 weeks-in tallies/debut dates for singles that debuted outside the top 50 before 1990 are making an educated guess, at best), I'd be happy to share it with you (it is out of print and unlikely ever be back in stock, the publisher's website says) if you contact me by email (a link is on my user page), so that you can remedy some of these errors.Nqr9 (talk) 13:49, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Of the ones that were in Cite certification used with missing parameters, four more of them were fixed by swapping salesref to certref in the template, like I did with The Best of Blondie and Street-Legal (album). Of the remaining 23, Ryan doesn't have them. I'll have to check if any of these were indeed charted, or certified by ARIA at a later year on their website. Alternativelly, I ran across John Fogerty discography which claims Centerfield went 2x platinum. I checked the PDF copy and it's not there. Problem is, this is citing the hardcopy of Ryan, so I'm not 100%. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I also have the hard copy of the Ryan book. It has the same text as the pdf edition, just in smaller font (note: the hard-copy book also does not have any page numbers).  If you give me the titles in question (perhaps on my talk page), I can check whether they had certifications during their top 100 chart run in The ARIA Report (the weekly publication of the top 100 charts).  It is, however, possible that an album was certified while it was not charting in the top 100 - in which case it won't be annotated in The ARIA Report, and I would then normally rely on Gavin Ryan's book having the cert listed.  If there is no evidence anywhere of the certification, then it is best to remove the claim, as it could be false.  I have seen a lot of pre-1997 ARIA certifications sourced to David Kent's chart books (he compiled the Kent Report chart, which was Australia's official chart between May 1974 and early June 1988) - but his books do not annotate or list ARIA certifications.  Sometimes you might also encounter a certification credited to a book or online 'encyclopedia' of Australian music authored by Ian MacFarlane - but then when I have looked at the cited article, there is no mention of a certification.Nqr9 (talk) 01:55, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * All the ones I can't find in Ryan are at the Cite certification used with missing parameters category. Please note that there are some Kent Music Report ones as well like Turbo (Judas Priest album). --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Would you mind linking to that? I'm a newbie when it comes to things like missing paramaters categories.  While the Kent Report (as in the weekly chart publication, not any of David Kent's books) did periodically list gold and platinum certifications, such as here - https://i.imgur.com/mCcNeuE.jpg - they are not easily obtainable (only the National Library in Canberra has a near-complete set of Kent Report charts from the 80s - but even then, many December and January issues are missing), and I don't know of anyone who has a full set of every page of each Kent Report/Australian Music Report weekly chart publication.  There also does not seem to have been a consistent date/time of year where such certifications are listed.  It is quite difficult to source any ARIA certifications pre-1989 (they were first annotated on the weekly top 50 charts available in record stores in April 1989), and the levels were different before 1989 too (see the 1982 image I uploaded), which the certifications templates on wikipedia are not really equipped to deal with.Nqr9 (talk) 02:26, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * It's at per Muhandes earlier post (I usually link categories differently, but this is easier for this instance). I can leave you a list of what's missing and sort them out. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:33, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that.Nqr9 (talk) 02:36, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * All of them are Kent Music Report ones except the following: I'll Be There (Jackson 5 song) Go-set chart 1970, while The Comfort Zone and Touch of Water are ARIA ones. Surprisingly those two don't show up in Ryan. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:50, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I have removed the one for "The Comfort Zone". I have found photos of certification lists from the Kent Music Report that someone sent me, from the National Library, from 1979 and 1980. It would be better to get clearer scans of these though before uploading them to use. The 1979 one has a paragraph of info for each certified single.Nqr9 (talk) 02:56, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Of the list, the closest one that could be useful is Glass Houses (album). Rest are 1981-88. As for Touch of Water, it charted at ARIA from 29-Aug-93 to 24-Oct-93 but Ryan doesn't have a cert for it.--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:01, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There is a platinum certification for 'Glass Houses' listed here, but platinum for albums then was only 50k (gold was 20k). There were different levels to reach platinum and gold for singles and albums. I've never looked through the post-1996 ARIA certifications listed online in any great detail, so I assume there is not a later certification listed for it there.  I've also got 1982 albums certifications.Nqr9 (talk) 03:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case, salesamount can be adjusted to prevent the amount from listing the current amount and certref to use that specific one. I'll place the list onto your talkpage, and you could strike out the ones you don't have information for. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 03:09, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Italian certification levels for singles
Hi! Just dropped by to say that from January 1, 2020, the Italian certification levels for singles will be Gold = 35,000 / Platinum = 70,000 / Diamond = 700,000.

The certifications for albums will remain the same. --Leo Mercury (talk) 17:54, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I added this to my TDL. --Muhandes (talk) 20:04, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 14:53, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

No Sales Certifications
Hello. Could I request that a category be made for certifications that have |nosales parameter? It could help with cleanup to determine whether cert levels/sales do exist for these articles like I'm Not Dead. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ --Muhandes (talk) 20:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Thank was quick LOL --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Spanish certifications
Is there a particular reason why these use  and not , despite the fact it's the week number that needs to be entered, not the month? I mean, I know it doesn't make any difference to the overall output, but it's kind of counter-intuitive to be asked to enter a week into the  parameter. Richard3120 (talk) 20:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No good reason. I think it was done because someone didn't know how to pass another parameter. Or it just might have been a brain fart by your's truly. Anyway, it's confusing and therefore a bad idea. We now have added certweek for Italy and Sweden, I don't see why we shouldn't do the same for Spain.--Muhandes (talk) 20:38, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I thought it was confusing for novice editors as well, it doesn't make any logical sense to have "certmonth=39", for example. Richard3120 (talk) 20:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, you should now use certweek for Spain. It's backwards compatible, but don't use both.--Muhandes (talk) 21:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you Muhandes, much appreciated. Richard3120 (talk) 21:25, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Dead refs in the Source for thresholds spot for this template
Hello. There are some dead refs in the Source for thresholds column for this template:
 * The October 2007 levels for Belgium is archived here.
 * The dead Hungary thresholds source for albums can be replaced with: 1992 to 2010 onwards

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think the documentation is protected, you can edit it yourself. --Muhandes (talk) 10:04, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah! I was clicking on the wrong edit section. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Australia DVD certs
Hi again. Is it possible to make an error page for Australia DVDs? We currently have ones for albums/singles that give an error if the year is before 1997 as ARIA doesnt have 1996 or earlier. For DVDs, could a similar one be made if the year is 2002 or earlier? I ran across this issue with Frat Party at the Pankake Festival and Janet: Live in Hawaii (fixed them both). Also per this link, there were no 2018 DVDs accreditations by ARIA, so could that year give an error too only for DVDS? Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, they will find their way into, which by the way needs some cleanup. --Muhandes (talk) 08:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Perfect! If this needs updating later, I'll let you know. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

FIMI certifications for singles
Muhandes, it looks like FIMI does apply their newer certification-levels to all singles, regardless when they're released. Ever since in January 2020, FIMI raised the certification-levels for singles from 25,000/50,000 to 35,000/70,000, there have been very few new certifications posted in FIMI's database, which is very unusual. Looking at the small number of singles that are being certified, it's quite obvious that the earlier released singles which have already been certified Gold=25,000 and/or Platinum for 50,000 units and even multi-platinum, are now going to take some months to reach the newer certification-level (Gold=35,000, Platinum=70,000). For this reason, I'm convinced we're seeing very few singles being able to reach the new levels. I think we should program the template for all newly certified singles regardless of their release date in a way so the results are 35,000/70,000 for all.

I was also looking at the number of singles that have been certified in the first few months after FIMI raised the levels from 15,000/30,000 to 25,000/50,000 in February 2015. I'm now convinced that they were also applying their then newer levels to all singles regardless of release date as well. So we should also program the template so all single titles come up with 25,000/50,000 effective February 2015.--Harout72 (talk) 23:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I e-mailed FIMI yesterday shortly after I posted this above. Today I got a reply from them. FIMI confirms in the e-mail that they apply the newer available certification-levels to all singles regardless of release dates. They have done the same back in 2015, after February 2015 amendment. This is my conversations with one of their employees.--Harout72 (talk) 14:55, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice, it sounds authoritative. I think you should edit Federazione Industria Musicale Italiana and add this fact, along with that letter as reference using cite letter. I'll edit the template when I find time to do it, unless someone else beats me to it (wink wink). --Muhandes (talk) 07:35, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Will do, take your time. I think it's also worth mentioning that it's clear that FIMI is operating much like Music Canada as far as digital singles go. In other words, the earliest digital levels (15,000/30/000) which FIMI had before February, 2015 were also applied to all singles (regardless of their release date). So for example, the single All I Want for Christmas Is You released in 1994, certified 2x Platinum in 2014 (when certification-levels were 15,000/30,000), the result for that would be 60,000 units. But right now our template reads 100,000.--Harout72 (talk) 13:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Now that I re-read the email, I'm not sure I fully understand their message. They confirm that any certification done starting with week 5 of 2015, was done according to the new levels, and the same for 1/2020. But the last paragraph is unclear to me. Are they saying that all certifications done from 2010 also ignored the release date? In other words, I'm not 100% sure this applies to All I Want for Christmas Is You which was certified week 52 of 2014, just a week before the levels changed.
 * For now, I implemented it so if you add certyear which is 2015 or more, and for 2015 also certweek over 4, it will use the certification year/week as the date. That way it is also backward compatible. I'm not 100% sure what to do with certification dates between 2010 and 2015. --Muhandes (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * So I contacted Alessandro at FIMI again about whether or not FIMI applied 15,000/30,000 levels to all singles during 2010 - Feb.2015 regardless of release dates. He confirms that yes FIMI also applied those levels to all singles regardless of release dates. I uploaded my entire conversation with him here, which includes the recent confirmation.--Harout72 (talk) 14:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, All I Want for Christmas Is You now shows 60,000. --Muhandes (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Perfect, thank you.--Harout72 (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hungarian Albums (again)
I'm currently working through the certs with |nosales in them. There's quite a bit of Hungarian album certs that have them. I tried to fix some of them like Hybrid Theory but no luck. As this is a 2000 album and it was certified in 2002, this would be either the 1997 level or 2002 level. My question is: does Hungarian certs go by certification date or release date? If certification date, then I assume |nosales is because there is no specific date for the cert? Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:34, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hungarian certs go by release date. Here is how it works. First, the release date is sent to Certification Table Entry/Sales/HungarianPeriod and we get a number between 0 and 8. We then translate the number to a certification level. The code works as follows, and I am not saying it is correct, just explaining what it does: For true we have thresholds for 1-8. Otherwise we have thresholds only for 4 and 6-8. This means that we do not have a threshold before 23 April 2002 or between 23 February 2005 and 12 September 2006. This is code I developed (in 28 January 2011 mind you!)‎, so I presume it is based on sources. If you have better sources for this I'd be happy to correct it. --Muhandes (talk) 10:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case, can there be a note saying we don't have certs for those dates currently? And those missing ones are for International artists, not domestic correct? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 16:09, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I can't think of an obvious way of doing this without an overhaul of the template structure. --Muhandes (talk) 17:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean like Belgium says "Unknown thresholds for albums between 2006 and March 2007." in the Template. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh, you meant in the documentation. ✅ I made the documentation much more specific. --Muhandes (talk) 07:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

IFPI Norway
Muhandes, I was wondering if you've come across a source for Norway's singles certification-levels for earlier dates than June 30, 2002. The reason why I'm asking this is because our template brings up 5,000/10,000 for singles like The Real Slim Shady released before July 2002. Have the levels for singles been the same before July 2002?--Harout72 (talk) 20:22, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * There are some older sources in Certification Table Entry/Sales/NorwegianPeriod. --Muhandes (talk) 20:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The sources we have for earlier levels there for the template seem to be for albums. For albums, I've come across also this from 1998. But we don't seem to have sources for earlier singles levels. The earliest levels we seem to have for singles are 5,000/10,000 which are for releases after June 30, 2002. That's why I was wondering as to what our template is basing on for earlier levels.--Harout72 (talk) 02:16, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * That's all the information I have. If you think we should invalidate the results before July 2002, it is very easy to do. --Muhandes (talk) 10:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm suspecting their certification-levels for singles might have been a bit higher, it's just a guess, but they could've been 10,000/20,000. But since we don't have any sources currently to rely on, it's best to have "0" result rather than guessed/incorrect levels.--Harout72 (talk) 12:54, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅, they will find their way into (which could use some cleanup). --Muhandes (talk) 07:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

The Offspring discography false certifications
Can someone help clear out the false certification/sales at The Offspring discography? Mutliple IP addresses have added false information to this article. I'm currently clearing out false certs in individual Offspring albums that IP addresses have vandalised as well. Thanks! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:57, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the albums section is now correct, although I need to check if some of the links need updating. Richard3120 (talk) 01:53, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I've been clearing out the individual albums with false certs/boosted certifications that said they were higher than they actually were. Thank you for the help! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:43, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * this isn't the first time I've seen this on discography articles – I had to do a similar job on the discographies of Brandy and TLC... TLC's was worse because I realised that most of the chart peaks had been artificially inflated as well, so I had to check and correct all the chart positions, country by country, song by song. Will check the singles section of this article now. Richard3120 (talk) 15:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * That's horrible to hear about other discography articles :/ --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 15:40, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I think we're done, apart from the ARIA certifications for their first two video albums (unsourced and possibly fake), and their first two certified singles, which are sourced to Gavin Ryan's book. Would it be possible for you to check these, please? Richard3120 (talk) 16:29, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure thing! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:00, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * OK. The video ones are false, but the singles ones are legit. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:07, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what I suspected – thanks. Richard3120 (talk) 17:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)