Jump to content

Talk:Thriller (album)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mcvoorhis (talk | contribs) at 15:57, 20 January 2021 (→‎Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020: Question about guest attribution specifics). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Featured articleThriller (album) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 7, 2009.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 7, 2008Good article nomineeListed
April 8, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
April 9, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 13, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
May 4, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
June 27, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
July 3, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 6, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
September 10, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
April 22, 2010Good topic candidateNot promoted
Current status: Featured article


Weekly charts

I'm confused. Does anyone know why the weekly charts aren't listed here? The year-end and decade-end charts are but not the weekly ones. CountyCountry (talk) 03:17, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Japan

I've returned to this article to make the same reference correction three or four times[1][2][3][4]? There's nothing wrong with the footnote as it is, why it's necessary to insist on the insertion of a useless error is beyond me. DrKay (talk) 10:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Synthwave.94: you have been told explicitly that it is an error four times. You have been told explicitly not to reinsert the error. You've been told explicitly not to undo good faith edits without explanation. What do you do? Reinsert the error without any explanation[5]. If you insert that error again, I will block you for disruption. DrKay (talk) 21:53, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@DrKay: he’s at it again throughout the whole article. Iluvdancemusic (talk) 07:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Now blocked from this article. DrKay (talk) 08:23, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Iluvdancemusic has now been indefinitely blocked as another Maria sock. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sales numbers are myth/promotion

WP:DENY. DrKay (talk) 13:07, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

US population in 1982 was 231 million. How many of those people were over, say, 40? How many others under, say, 10? Of those left, how many didn't have disposable income? Of those left, how many didn't like Thriller? Now, with the small number left, how many who DID like Thriller either.. Lived with someone who already had a copy or Simply got a copy (home taping was killing music...) In 1984 Thriller is 'certified' for US sales of '20 million'. Such a nice round number. Not 19 million, not 21 million..precisely 20 million. It's obvious that this was pure hype, and had no basis in actual reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.86.143.140 (talk) 13:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is speculation on your part. Unless you have a reliable source, there is nothing to do here. - SummerPhDv2.0 14:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So, some guy;s blog saying "65 million sold!" is a Reliable Source, but common sense isn't? I will look for sources disputing the absurd sales claims. But the article is presently locked as well...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.86.143.140 (talkcontribs)
No, that wouldn't be a reliable source. The reliable source saying 20 million units sold in the United States by October 1984 is the official certification body, RIAA. That is clearly a reliable source. The round figure means nothing, it was 21 million in 1990, 22 million in 1993, etc. That's merely how certifications work. You have to get to 20 million to be certified as a 20x multi-platinum album. DrKay (talk) 16:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So, only the RIAA is a Reliable Source? Even if there is clearly something wrong? let's look...

https://www.riaa.com/gold-platinum/?tab_active=default-award&se=thriller+#search_section Under Thriller(album)..


MICHAEL JACKSON Title: THRILLER Certification Date: February 16, 2017 Label: EPIC RECORDS Format: ALBUM

We see it certified as Gold and Platinum on January 31, 1983. Next, it's 20xPlatinum in October 30, 1984. So, it supposedly sold 20 million copies in the USA in its first 2 years of release. And, yes, it IS highly dubious, as it's such a neat number,,20 million. Not 19 million. This is clearly promotion. Following on, it goes 21xPlatinum on May 24, 1990. So, after blitzing through twenty million in two years, it takes six years to sell the next one million. Then, it seems to get a new one-million-up a year, for the next few years. (So why was 1984-1990 so fallow?) Then, there's another "down period". And, then another burst of 4 million supposedly sold in 2015-106. Obviously, this is absurd.(And I would swear they've altered the page). This is not reality. it's pure hype. This is a 'Reliable Source' the same way 'Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction' is a reliable source. 197.86.143.140 (talk) 11:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dates of certification are not necessarily identical to dates of sales. That's why we say when it was certified, not when copy number 20,000,000 was sold.
Yes, it says 20. One in five will be a multiple of 5. My father graduated college at 20. Not 19, not 21, 20. He got married at 30. Not 29, not 31, 30. (Actually, those were 20 years 1 month and several days and 30 years 8 months and 3 day.) Highly suspicious?
No, RIAA is not the only reliable source. It is a reliable source. If you do not feel it is a reliable source, please take that discussion directly to the reliable sources noticeboard as Wikipedia uses it in hundreds of thousands of articles. If you have another reliable source that argues against it, please present it here.
If you want to argue that Wikipedia should determine truth rather than verifiablity, you are arguing against one of the pillars of the project. While any policy can be changed, you will need to do so at a higher level. I'd suggest discussing the issue at WP:PUMP.
Until then, the number is verifiably 20 million. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:08, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, even though it's an impossible figure, the fact that an organisation of dubious reliability says so, makes it so..according to wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.86.143.140 (talkcontribs)


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Policy

After being stable from 2013 to Nov 2019, how did this article get moved back to a non-policy title by a non-admin on a vote with no consensus to move counter to WP:TITLE? In ictu oculi (talk) 10:19, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The closer has the extendedmover user right and closed the discussion as moved. Anyone can close requested moves, see Wikipedia:Requested moves#Closing a requested move. DrKay (talk) 10:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2020

Carousel was on the album but after hearing Human Nature it was replaced with it.--79.97.227.67 (talk) 21:43, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

REFS

--Apoxyomenus (talk) 07:32, 26 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020

The article incorrectly states that there is only one guest appearance on this album - Paul McCartney. Edward Van Halen plays the guitar solo on the song ‘Beat It’ — Please correct this error. Thanks. Pickles&Cheese (talk) 19:18, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Van Halen is never credited as "featuring Eddie Van Halen", not even in the single release. The Girl Is Mine does it. (CC) Tbhotch 23:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had also come here to mention the same thing -- the strangeness of the text about McCartney as the "single guest," where we have Eddie Van Halen, Steve Lukather, and even Vincent Price on the album. But in order to be a guest, you need to be mentioned, i.e., on the record sleeve for the single? Thanks, Mcvoorhis (talk) 15:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 19 November 2020

Link the late Bruce Swedien to his Wikipedia lemma, he deserves it. Swann (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He was already wikilinked in the Personnel section, but I've moved the link up to his first mention in the article instead (in the Critical Reception section). ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 20:59, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the wikilink to his entry in the Personnel list, if that's what you mean. Popcornfud (talk) 21:00, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It should be linked in both. Popcornfud (talk) 21:00, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]