Talk:Daddy Yankee discography

	Latin music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latin music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Latin music (music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and the languages of Ibero-America, see project scope for more details) 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.Latin musicWikipedia:WikiProject Latin musicTemplate:WikiProject Latin musicLatin music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Reggaeton task force.

Discographies

This article is within the scope of the Discographies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's collection of discography articles and lists. If you would like to participate please visit the project page. Any questions pertaining to discography-related articles should be directed to the project's talk page.DiscographiesWikipedia:WikiProject DiscographiesTemplate:WikiProject DiscographiesDiscography articles

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Daddy Yankee discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Daddy Yankee discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:32, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is acharts.co reliable?

@Magiciandude: @Ss112: Sorry to bother both of you, I have a quick chart-related question. In Italy, according to italiancharts.com, the single "Gasolina" peaked at number 2 on April 28, 2005, but according to acharts.co the song peaked at number 1 on May 13, 2005. This is odd because most official charts (such as Billboard or Hung Medien) are pretty much the same on acharts.co.

"Gasolina" on italiancharts.com — [1]
"Gasolina" at number one in Italy on acharts.co — [2]

Which chart should I use? Acharts.co states that it compiles data from the Federazione Industria Musicale Italiana (FIMI). This is the only chart whose song's peak differs between Hung Medien or Billboard charts and acharts.co.

EDIT: "Shaky Shaky" ranked at number 50 in Portugal (on acharts) but it didn't even rank on portuguesecharts.com."Shaky Shaky" on acharts.co Should I add it too? Brankestein (talk) 00:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the country for that site. See WP:GOODCHARTS which country is and isn't acceptable from achart. Erick (talk) 00:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

acharts is generally not used for most countries if it can be avoided; WP:GOODCHARTS says it should not be used for Italy or Portugal (I'm guessing as nobody is aware of what source it uses). I'd use FIMI for Italy where possible. As for Portugal, the archive for singles doesn't go back very far, so that might be why. Having said that, though, the acharts Portuguese chart and the singles chart now hosted on portuguesecharts.com (which I'm pretty sure is the official AFP one) are not the same. Ss 112 05:09, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Despacito

Why are some of the chart positions for the original version showing chart positions of the remix version. I've tried to fix this by using the chart positions off the songs page but for some countries they are combined as well in a mixed table. So is there a reason why the original has been given the chart positions of the remix but not vise versa? Mn1548 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:09, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All chart peaks for "Despacito" on the As featured artist sub-section have mixed data with the remix version featuring Justin Bieber, except US Latin, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland. In those countries, the original version ranked at number one before the remix's release. Brankestein (talk) 01:44, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brankestein: So are you saying that the "combined" charts use data from both versions for a there chart entries. And in that case I know for a fact that the remix charted no. 1 in the UK not the original, so why is the original shown to have done? Mn1548 (talk) 21:27, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mn1548: The UK chart combined data from both versions after the remix was released, ascending from number 4 (original alone) to number 1 (original+remix). I left a note clarifying that. Brankestein (talk) 21:32, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brankestein:Still, should the table still show no. 4 for the original and no. 1 for the remix then insted of saying both versions went to the top?Mn1548 (talk) 21:38, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: What do you think we should do? Should the table show both versions peaking at No. 1 or should it show separated peaks (eg for original: US #44, UK #4, AUS #26, and CAN #56)? Brankestein (talk) 21:45, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Either way works, just as long as you can source the original version peaking at those numbers. Ss 112 21:47, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brankestein:@Ss112: In the notes that are already in I noticed that there are already references for that. I think it would work better as it shows the information in more clarity. Mn1548 (talk) 21:58, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brankestein:@Ss112: Question, is this happening as no one has given a final yes or no? Mn1548 (talk) 17:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mn1548: You don't need to keep pinging me, this page has been on my watchlist for months. If you post here, I'll see it (I'm pinging you as I don't know if you have the page on your watchlist). To answer your question, that's up to Brankestein, he's the one who has worked on the page the most. Ss 112 17:13, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mn1548: I'm going to edit the original version's peaks and keep the notes for the remix's peaks. Brankestein (talk) 19:42, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Brankestein: OK, sounds good. Thankyou. Mn1548 (talk) 09:26, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Certifications

@Ss112: I noted that you stated on an edit summary that "Discography style uses the acronym of the recording industry association, not an abbreviation of the country's name." I looked for FL-Class Discography articles and it seems that some lists use the acronyms of the associations, while others use an abbreviation of the countries' names. Is there any "rule" about certifications on discographies lists? This is just for curiosity. Brankestein (talk) 03:03, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Modern consensus seems to be to use the name of the associations. Some featured lists were promoted to that status years ago, before it was so common, and perhaps by less discerning editors. Quite a number of featured lists also go over the recommended 10-column limit and combine Hot 100 and Bubbling Under peaks (which is against WP:USCHARTS), so they're not always the best to go by for current standards. Ss 112 03:15, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: I realised that the "As featured performer" Singles sub-section has 12 columns. Should I remove two columns for the recommended 10-column limit? I case I should remove them, which ones should be? I was thinking of removing two columns that only have one song ranked. In this case, Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom only have "Despacito" ranked on their charts. So, which countries should be removed? Sorry to bother you this much. Brankestein (talk) 02:50, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Singles - As featured artist - Despacito

@Ss112: @Magiciandude: Hey, I was thinking about combining the Billboard Hot 100 peak for "Despacito" with its remix version through a rowspan. The original version alone managed to reach No. 44, and combined data with the remix let it reach the top ten in one week (and later peak at No. 1). The same goes for Canada (original alone: #56), the Netherlands (it literally charts as "Despacito / Despacito Remix"), and the United Kingdom (original alone: #4).

The table would look like this (the example doesn't show certifications nor albums). Maybe the Hot Latin Songs peak for the remix (in which the original alone peaked at No. 1 but Billboard now combines data from both versions) could have some note.

Title	Year	Peak chart positions
Title	Year	US	US Latin	AUS	CAN	FRA	GER	IRE	ITA	NLD	SPA	SWI	UK
"Despacito" (Luis Fonsi featuring Daddy Yankee)	2017	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
"Despacito (Remix)" (Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee featuring Justin Bieber)	2017	1	1^[a]	1	1	—	—	—	—	1	3	—	1

^ Example of note: The remix version of "Despacito" peaked at number one on [date] with combined chart entries. The original version alone reached that position on [date] (before).

I would like to know what you think, and sorry to bother both of you. Brankestein (talk) 00:21, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That would make more sense that putting "Despacito (Remix)" in "other charted songs". How is it just a song that charted? The remix is also a single. Ss 112 05:38, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The only trouble with this table is for the remix Daddy Yankee is credited as a main artist but as a featured artist for the original. So while both versions are singles, they should be in separate tables anyway. Mn1548 (talk) 21:34, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard Year-End charts

@Ss112: I was wondering if it's worth having a Billboard Year-end charts table for Daddy Yankee's albums and songs. Brankestein (talk) 20:11, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the discography? That isn't really standard. Generally those are left to the song and album articles. Ss 112 20:23, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Party animal

His remix of Gyal you a party animal by Charly Black is missing, no? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:1470:FAC2:526:29B9:88AB:1C02:8FC (talk) 15:44, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Example of note: The remix version of "Despacito" peaked at number one on [date] with combined chart entries. The original version alone reached that position on [date] (before).

[a]