Talk:List of best-selling music artists

Questions about splitting, trimming and criterions among these 26 archives

Before my talk, I will apologize that I'm not be used to editing or questiong as a amatuer and thank to your posts that I can refer through these archives. You or I should deleted my posts if the condition is not occupied, however, I beg your pardon, and, in the end of this text, I will leave my e-mail address for waiting your kind answer about my question because I couldn't figure out your (Harout72) address! [November 26 (UTC + 09:00 - Cleared!]

You was discussing since archive 24 and some criterions were changed, and the 26th archive : Trimmimg.

  1.   According to 2010~2012, the criterions was that ; 
      (~1975 : 15%), (1975~1990 : 15~35%), (1990~2000 : 35~50%) etc... 
     In this point, I can figure out that the period 3rd is shorter than 2nd. 
     But, in the new policy, (20~40%), (40~60%) is on your criterions. 
     Why you lengthened the 3rd, instead of keeping the pre-24 archive's? 
     I guess some artists were deleted during 1991~1999 cause of that sharp gap.

  2.   It seems that the large seller of music market, especially up to 80~100M, 
     will sharply increased since 2013, and some editors say that 
     it will be soon unnotable although a person made the 100M. 
     In 2012, on this mth, you trimmed 20M sales. 
     So, are you willing to trim in a decisive manner 
     if "Under 100M" will not be notable?
     If not, about 70~99M, will you split this post, 
     like the policy between 10~22 archive?

Out of this main question, as the least limit 50M(Was changed by 70M), I wonder whether the first archive's limit number was. Once I got this doubt, I searched this comment.

     [Previously, List of best-selling albums had criterion of 15 million copies 
      sold at least, but now it has changed to 20 million 
      due to the large size of the page. I think why don't we increase 
      this page criterion too, instead of splitting the page 
      with title (page 2), which violate.]

       I'm sure that It was on the 22nd archive, which asked why 50 Millions? 
      But, cuz I misinterpreted in my mother language, I couldn't understand 
      what it really means. "At first archive, the person up to 15 millions sale, 
      could be applied." or, "At first archive, the table's gap was 15M, 
      but was changed into 20M, steady keeping the limit number 50 millions" 
      That has been my doubt point, since I just had found that 22nd 1 weeks ago. 
      If the former was correct, please explain to me how the limit number 
      since 2005(1st) has been changed. If the second was correct, I can infer
      without the answer.

Thanks a lot that you kept read my very long talk! --Csciey9654above8848 (talk) 14:31, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

• To answer your first question about percentage amount: The third line for 1990-2000 (35-50%) was turned into 40-60%, while the forth line for 2000-present (50-75%) was turned into 60-80%. So we still have equal amounts overall.
• To answer your second question: We currently don't have [Page 2] anymore, it was created at one point but it was re-merged with the original. And the main reason we decided to trim the bottom 20 million is because the list had passed 350,000 bytes. For many months ahead, we won't be modifying the length of the list. And we may never will, if we manage to keep the bytes around 250,000.--Harout72 (talk) 17:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I can understand. Through the conclusion, It depends on the web-post size, and next, make sure the common notable context because this list is all over the worldwide music industry! Also, revising the criterions, whether all years-of-period number is separated with 10, 15 years, it makes clear : 20, 40, 60, and I guess it drive a more comfortable works. That's... though my favorite music aritist were lost in the list(started on October 2012).

By the way, there are two boxes (Box No.3 and No.4) left on this post. If the final comment is on talks, It makes me help the collection, correction and research, later that I can arrange and figure out that principle of editing the list. For the rest of talks, I could catch how to participate in this! Thank you! --Csciey9654above8848 (talk) 02:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Rihanna should not be on this list.

Rihanna has sold 25 million albums (not 85 million) according to the source at hand. 60 million singles should not count for this list. If it does, Eminem should have at least' 42 million units added. http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20120105005547/en/Nielsen-Company-Billboard%E2%80%99s-2011-Music-Industry-Report

Increase the status

I will increase the claim figures status for several artist in this list. Such as Aretha Franklin (75m - 100m)/http://www.thenational.ae/featured-content/channel-page/arts-culture/film/middle-article-list/the-instant-expert-aretha-franklin since the several artist certification sales meet the requirement of the certification sales.

I put my respect to the senior editor in this list, but we need to stand with what we said before and consistent with the rules.

If the artist meet the requirement of percentage sales figure and the reliable source is available. I will put their name. thanks Politsi (talk) 10:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)