User talk:Apoxyomenus/Archive 3

Welcome
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * Welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or ←sock puppetry
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Legion fi (talk) 18:15, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Nine years on Wikipedia

 * Thank you! :) --Apoxyomenus (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!
 Happy First Edit Day! Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Juan Luis Guerra
Because it is removing my updates, if they are true information included by All Music Magazine and the artist's official YouTube channel.

here are the quotes or references:

https://www.allmusic.com/artist/juan-luis-guerra-mn0000291502/biography

https://m.youtube.com/user/juanluisguerra/about

Even the official artist is telling you that he sold 70 million records, I do not understand why you edit it and put information that is not.

I wait for an answer, thank you. Fmonterocustodio (talk) 02:08, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Hi, surely. I actually like you have reached me in my user talk page and wait for an answer instead making an edit war. Let's see how to explain clearly as possible this matter. In regards your sources, Allmusic is generally acceptable in album reviews/styles & genres information, but isn't for music sales and other details. We should avoid an artist's official page/YouTube channel especially for music sales or from their record label since they could be consider self-references or a conflict of interest. In Wikipedia, we try to use artist's claim sales based on their certifications, because most of the times and cases, fans, media, own artists and their record labels inflates figures.


 * So, in others words and with this background information, a 70 million claim for Juan Luis Guerra it's clearly inflated, and more than 90% sure, it's a hoax originated from Spanish Wikipedia thanks to a vandalism (because everyone can edit a page) and because nobody reverted it. Now is a kind of "cyclic information" that is supported by many sources that we could consider "reliables" but certainly, are hoaxes and a woozle effect.
 * Futhermore, we have tons of references since mid-2000s, claiming sales of 15 million or even 14 million/+ in his case. That's impossible to say, also, in 10 years or more (from 2008 to 2018 e,g) Guerra sold more than 50 million records, or his album Bachata Rosa sold since its debut 5-8-10 million. Once again, those claimes are thanks to vandalism in Wikipedia and/or inflated claimes from "bad sources". Even, claims of 30 million are actually inflated. But after all, we need to understand just a few Latin artists actually sold 30-40 or more than 50 million records, but it's hard to believe it with these exaggerations that are common in our nordays. His sales are as high like 15-20 million that are pretty good in Latin terms actually.
 * So finally, I need to tell you that context matters in music sales, even if they came from "reliable sources". Should be hard to believe that according to CNN en Español José José sold 250 million records, or Julio Iglesias has 300 million records sold. These figures could automatically converted both of them in one of the 10-15 best-selling music artists worldwide, but they certainly aren't, they didn't sell more than Pink Floyd (250M), Eagles (200M) or same as Madonna (300M) and Elton John (300M), not even close. It's not also a matter to put the next available sales for everyone, that's the reason why all artists like The Beatles or Elvis Presley have 500/600 million instead 1 million and other countless examples. I hope you understand. Thanks, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 04:27, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

I call this racism and it is very unprofessional on your part, since for the simple fact that it is Latino or Spanish-speaking, that means that it could not sell 70 million, when even the artist himself is cheering him I have even respected magazine like All Music rectifies it, so by not comparing it with Anglo-Saxon artist it means that he could not sell 70 million, I go back and repeat it for me that would be called racism and being an anti-professional editor on his part. Fmonterocustodio (talk) 06:48, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


 * First at all, don't take it personal, and please assume good faith. Forget about if he's Latino or not (that's not despective and wasn't even the intention based on your impression). In others words, doesn't matter any nationality and ethnicy when you can see largest music markets are domininated by English countries and acts. So we could have great French, Italian, Russian, Latino artists and a large etc but if they haven't sell millions and millions in the largest markets, including United States where standard certifications includes 500K copies for gold, 1 million for platinum and diamond for 10 million probably higher claim sales are just inflated and promotional based on marketing purposes by own artists or their record companies.


 * And second, how do you pretend to put a figure based on primary sources generated thanks to vandalism in Wikipedia?, how do you pretend use two references (Allmusic + JuanLuisGuerra YT account) that's fails our verifiability policies? How do you pretend to change our recommentations and guidelines to put sales based on certifications?, How can you explain others current reliable sources indicating sales of 15 or 20 million in his case? It's possible sell 50 million albums in matters of months/few years or all of these journalists and media are liar? We need to breaks all of these and more rules in Wikipedia to include his sales up to 70 million?. Once again, this is not a matter to put "the next and highest available sales" on any artists. I brings back again examples like The Beatles or Elvis Presley 500/600 million against 1 billion (did you see that? it's not a matter of ethnicity). I feel you will disagree one more time, probably because your own conjectures will be stronger that the reality we have in front, so i could recommend you discuss this on the talk page in his article and reach a consensus in order to add his 70 million figures one more time if anyone agree with you. Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 07:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

thank you very much, but even so I am going to propose my conjecture on wikipedia, I will even report it to the moderators, since I feel a bit racist on your part and we should not observe any ethnic group, here we only write information that is valid and even if the artist himself speaks it. Fmonterocustodio (talk) 18:16, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


 * You can do that, personally I don't feel I never talked in despective way, it's the context and anyone can read it. You can go to the admin noticeboard talked about your "impression". I've gave you examples, policies in Wikipedia etc. Maybe your worst impression actually came to you, is that Juan Luis Guerra sold that amount for you. But as a told you, there is a processes called "consensus" and you can open one. Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Latvia certs.
Hi, I have noticed that you have asked something in regards Latvian certifications, and I do not know about the remaining list, but what I have found was this, Modern Talking getting platinum discs while in Latvia: Not much to go around I know, but they are on the list of those certified albums. I know it is just one artist, but still I have contacted LaIPA (Latvian associatian, I don't know what is it in the end, Laipa or Lampa), and they have told me via Facebook that the process was initiated through BMG International so they should be contacted. I have sent some ask to BMG Germany. What do you think? Dhoffryn (talk) 19:32, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Modern Talking's reference perfectly works and I saw it in their album's article. I tried to see if we can replace current source, even with an advanced search on Google or individually but sadly I didn't see anything. Sure, you can contact them (BMG - Germany), but I don't know after all, how can be helpful without any link for replacement. You may consider point out that idea/suggestion in the same talk page I started to see exactly if this method could works and what others think. Cheers, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 01:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have sent some email, who knows when I will get an answer, anyways while I am waiting, I wanted to ask about stuff like this is this usable in any way for wiki? Dhoffryn (talk) 22:47, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Could be great if we can use that info, but seems eil.com is an e-commerce website and we should avoided them per WP:AFFILIATE. You may consider have a second opinion with the Reliable sources/Noticeboard, the album's article talk page or one of the wikiproject listed there. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 08:59, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input, will see what to do next. Dhoffryn (talk) 16:47, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you as well :D --Apoxyomenus (talk) 20:28, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Certifications
Record charts (via WikiProject Albums), it states: Certifications should be sourced directly to certifying agencies, most of which provide a searchable database. When such a database is not available, other reliable sources may be used, but they must directly state that the certifying agency has granted the certification. Many popular press articles will contain statements such as "... has gone gold ..." or "... has gone platinum ..." based on a sales figure, when, in fact, the certifying agency has not yet verified those sales and granted a certification.

It states if you’re going add on a certification that it must be coming from the official agency, (RIAA) if an RIAA source is unavailable that’s when another source comes in but it must cite the RIAA as a source. Nothing else. Pillowdelight (talk) 01:50, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

I’m honestly confused as to why several users have reverted the edits I had made even citing Record charts (via WikiProject Albums Pillowdelight (talk) 01:51, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * It's simple. That policy you pointed out talks about any addition with certifications matters, in which requires have a source from official sites in order to add them (RIAA, IFPI etc). But you're confusing the "claimed sales/copies sold", and when we have available sources like Billboard (an example with USA) it's fine to add it since they're a highly reliable source and those figures are based in the Nielsen SoundScan report. In the United States (as with other countries) certifications are based on shipments, not copies sold. That's means an album, dvd or single could sell more or even less than the certification obtained. You can see an example in both cases with first; Taylor Swift's discography: all her studio albums are "over-certified" but actual sales are different and less. Contrary, titles like Dangerously in Love or 4 Minutes sold more than the figure represented by it certifications. That's why your edits were reverted, because all of those cases are perfectly sourced. Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 02:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

But according to the official RIAA website it states that Nielsen Soundscan is not a reliable source. Pillowdelight (talk) 16:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * What part they stated it? For certifications they aren't the first or best option obviously, just RIAA but in USA-sales matters Nielsen SoundScan has been cited around the world by all type of sources, including the highly reputed. You can see them everywhere, including Guinness World Records, Billboard, in Italian, French or Spanish references and so on. In Wikipedia is the same, it's consider a reliable source so there is any problem using them as a source. Otherwise, if you don't believe that, you should consider start a consensus to have excluded them in Wikipedia (personally, i don't believe no one could support that idea). But don't removed by yourself them from certifications table/articles because they are reliable. This could make your editions disruptive. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 17:43, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Coming from the RIAA website itself and I quote “ For accuracy’s sake, we require that you send us sales figures directly from your databases. We have been asked why we don’t use sales figures from SoundScan. SoundScan measures over-the-counter sales at music retail locations, while our certification levels are based on unit shipments and digital sales/streams (minus returns) from record labels and manufacturers to a wide range of accounts, including non-retail record clubs, mail order houses, specialty stores, units shipped for Internet fulfillment or direct marketing sales, such as TV-advertised albums. In addition, SoundScan’s archive begins in 1991, while the RIAA has tracked artists’ sales levels for nearly 60 years.”

Please scroll down to “FAQ” You’ll see the Question stating “Can I use Soundscan to send you my sales figures?”

https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/apply/ Pillowdelight (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

And every one of the albums certifications cites Nielsen Soundscan as a source, to me this sounds like it should be removed obviously if RIAA doesn’t allow it whatsoever. Pillowdelight (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I see. It's more how they certify and their requirements to obtain a certification level. RIAA "sales" are almost entirely based on shipments (now + digital sales = streams), not "actual sales" like does Nielsen SoundScan (they coverage more than 90%). Anyway, as I pointed out, Nielsen it's a reliable source (not matter if RIAA don't use them in their certs-requirements) in Wikipedia and if you remove them like with your previous editions in recent days, any revertion on your edits are perfectly fine. Using the Wikipedia:Record charts (via Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums) has nothing to do with your suppressions, because it's talking about certifications (RIAA) not actual sales (Billboard/Nielsen). --Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:18, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

To me this sounds like you’re just using an excuse to keep Nielsen Soundscan as a “source”. You’re making this sound as if the RIAA is incorrect. I mean let’s be real here if I were an artist who had a 3X Platinum album and the plaque physically stated “3 Million copies sold” and then have to come on here to see it being a random number because some unreliable source states it? I mean id be a bit confused and concerned and upset. I’ve been editing on here for only a few months but I’ve always checked and looked at certifications and never in my life have I ever witnessed a certification that never matched the actual number. And if the RIAA doesn’t allow Nielsen Soundscan then obviously something needs to be changed about these certifications. Especially if we’re going to be posting the certifications on here, yeah I get Wikipedia allows it. But again this rule in citing Nielsen needs to be changed if you can’t even use it certify any album whatsoever. Pillowdelight (talk) 18:38, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not what "I'm think", that's how we follow in Wikipedia as community. You should consider as I pointed out above, open a consensus about what are you talking about because your beliefs sounds like a complain and has nothing to do with me ultimately. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry if I’m sounding harsh, I’m just upset that this rule of citing them is reliable when the main source physically says it’s unreliable. Pillowdelight (talk) 18:50, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Where would I open a consensus at? Where would be the right place? Pillowdelight (talk) 18:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)


 * WikiProject Music or WikiProject Albums, even Record charts. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 19:01, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Madonna
Yes, I am so "old" that looking up Madonna is not on my list, although I respect her and appreciate her artistry. I am truly amazed, not only that people are opposing, but that this situation arose in the first place. (I have no idea how I arrived at the talk page anyway, you know how it is...) Searching for the name Madonna, and being shunted to a disamb page is illogical, IMO. Least surprise, please.

I added a few further cmts, but stopped myself as I realized that my sense of the ridiculous was getting the better of me. I started thinking: Bono is Bono, but what about Pro Bono? And then, Cher and share...on my! Anyway, I think Madonna is "like" Cher, as this her name. But if WP has to attach something after her name, singer is far away better than entertainer, ugh.

Anyway, best of luck. I will be watching. And remembering seeing "Madonna of the Rocks" in the Louvre, and knowing that it meant/translated as Our/my Lady of the Rocks. Please note that when I search for "Madonna of the Rocks" (the old name I think I remember from my 1960s/1970s art book) on WP, I am immediately swept away to "Virgin of the Rocks". Not surprised at all, because this is exactly what I was looking for. I shall shut up now... Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect!  06:14, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your message. I didn't open the consensus hehe, i'm just trying to help as much as I can. I also agree with you. Your experience is just how a principle of least astonishment works in our century (and late 20th) in a worldwide perspective, rather than with a selected group/s regarding the example of the entertainer properly known as her birth name, Madonna. We can see how times changes (Maury Dean) and you're right with your examples of "Lady of the Rocks". An extremely percent of cases outside Italian examples just use "Lady of"/"Our Lady"/"Virgin"/"Mary". Yes, Madonna is one of the best know example of a single name worldwide and "her name" is one of the best-know names ww (not only in the world of music). Kindly regards, Apoxyomenus (talk) 07:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion
Hello. Please see this discussion. Bionic (talk) 17:48, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Can you help me
Hi can you help me out with something please? On this article a user that keeps adding back content that states that the song was the official theme song for the 2004 Copa America in Perú even though it never was. That song has nothing to do with football and it's about teenage love and breakup. That song was released a year before the tournament and was never used in the tournament. The official theme song for the tournament was by Gian Marco and I have already added lots of sources for that in the tournament article I removed it because it was obviously false but another user keeps adding it back with a citation needed tag. On here it says : If the content is nonsense or is unlikely to be true, be bold and delete it! But that other user doesn't wanna understand that and wants to keep saying that that song was the theme song for the tournament. Can you please look into that? I don't want to edit war with them but he wants to keep content that doesn't even make sense so I was hoping maybe you could look at it and help me. If you could do that, I would appreciate it. Thanks! FanDePopLatino (talk) 18:58, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTBROKEN
Hi. I don't really think this is a big deal and I'm not going to revert anything, but just to make sure... you know about WP:NOTBROKEN, right? Or perhaps I'm missing something. Popcornfud (talk) 00:17, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Revert on “List of best-selling singles”
Hello To answer your email about my revert, making repeated links to other articles is discouraged. — Mαuri ’96  ( talk ·  cont ) 18:22, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
 * the current version you have restored have many "repeated links" (WP:OVERLINK) with many artists. I only added one wrongly in her case. I also changed Hung Up: Madonna (entertainer)|Madonna to Madonna because was recently moved. I would appreciate if you first use an edit summary instead just a revert, or a partially revert could be enought; not matter if we're long-time contributors in that list. Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:30, 31 July 2020 (UTC)