This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
"The average sale for a number one up to 26 April is 68,106 a great improvement on last year. Sales are currently improving, although album sales are now on a large reduction compared to previous years."
Wouldn't "increased" be a better word to use? It would give a more neutral point of view12bigbrother12 16:07, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Someone change it back so we can see album sales
what happened to the album sales? Put them back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:24, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
As I mentioned below, we do need a source, or it will just end up being removed, because anyone could put in any random figure. Does anyone know the actual source for the figures? Loveable Daveo (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Yep the list was from musicweek.com where there was an update every week for the bestsellers of the year so far but you need to be paying the subscription to access it. If one of the users is a member could you please update the page? Sebmcateer (talk) 13:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
What is the source for the album/single sales for each week? & for the year-end charts. The figures seem reasonable but we need to add a source to the list for verification. Thanks, Loveable Daveo (talk) 14:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
The description of the chart in August is much too detailed, especially in comparison to the other months. Could someone please clean up? Sebmcateer (talk) 13:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Agreed, it's gone a bit too crazy in recent months - the descriptions for the first half of the year are perfect, it doesn't need huge lists of individual sales for songs at number 67 and the like. I've trimmed it down to just the essentials. BillyH 16:25, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
'it doesn't need huge lists of individual sales for songs at number 67 and the like'. WHY NOT. WHY WOULD YOU TRIM IT. IT WAS FINE. Some people might want that information you selfish person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 20:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
There has to be a limit on what is important enough to be included; we can't include every song that made it into the top 75. Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 15:17, 8 December 2009 (UTC)