Talk:Dancing Queen (album)

Removing charts

The UK and Australian Digital charts are official by the OCC and Aria. Also, G Music is an official chart, it even has it's own page here on Wikipedia. So why are they bring removed? Is this going to be the same with the Billboard album sales chart in that users will remove it and only keep the Top 200 chart when it is also an official chart and arguably more important than the actual chart. StephenN17 (talk) 18:50, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Nobody denied the Australian and UK Digital Albums charts were official; I pointed we don't need them because the album already charted on the overall albums charts of those nations. WP:CHARTMATH applies here. If the entire metric of another chart was used in combination with other metrics for an overall chart (to make it more comprehensive), we use the overall chart because it gives a better representation of the album's overall performance. If we don't stop there, where do we draw the line? Should we include the UK Physical Albums, UK Vinyl Albums, and Streaming Albums charts too? The page, or any album article, would be overrun with all these charts if they were allowed, and I believe you and other editors only want to include the digital charts because Cher had a number one on them. Great, so she still sells well with people who buy whole albums. She still did not achieve a number one on the overall chart, which is more significant and important.

Also, so G-Music has its own page. Great. So does the iTunes Store and Spotify, and we don't include their charts because they are limited statistics from one retailer or one chain of stores. This goes against WP:SINGLEVENDOR. G-Music's article specifically states it is one chain of retail stores. Music is sold at many other different places in Taiwan, as in any country. This is only giving us a limited view of what sold and how well it sold there. Ss112 19:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

If you read the page it states that the chart lists the top selling albums and singles in Taiwan not just from that specific website. So it is an official chart and is listed on so many different artists pages already on here. Yes of course the main reason is because it is number 1, surely a number 1 on an official chart should be included. Obviously not include every chart but a number 1 is a number 1 and should be included. I'm sure the majority of people would agree. I would like to know what you think about the Billboard chart as Cher will most likely be #3 on the top 200 chart but #1 on the Sales chart so are you saying it shouldn't be included? StephenN17 (talk) 19:17, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

I did read the page, and it states: "The two chains originally teamed up to create Taiwan's popular music ranking, the G-Music Chart [...] they had around 60 locations in 2002." Wow, 60+ stores and that's supposed to be representative of the music sold in any given week in a population of 23 million? Doubtful. Also, if you had read the section below that, it clearly states that they track only physical sales. I don't know how you think a unified two-retailer chart can track sales from everywhere that sells physical albums in Taiwan. What benefit would other retailers get to supply their sales to G-Music? None. So I think that article is misstating the way things are. Besides, this claim is not even cited. Perhaps you and I are looking at two different sets of articles because most articles I come across (and I edit a wide variety of articles every week, seemingly unlike you from looking at your edits), none include the Taiwanese chart aside from maybe those of a few K-pop acts. Occasionally, less well-informed users will attempt to add the Taiwanese chart, at which point I or another user who has watchlisted the page will remove it. That's literally it. It is not "so many" from what I see. And as for Billboard, yes, that is what I'm saying because that is what WP:CHARTMATH states we should do. I didn't make up the guideline. You can note that she was number one on the album sales chart in the prose, not in the table. Ss112 19:52, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

'G-Music Chart remains the most popular record chart in Taiwan' Whether physical, digital or both it is the most popular chart in Taiwan and I might be wrong but I think it is the only chart recognised in Taiwan and is cited in many Taiwan articles as an official chart. Obviously we aren't going to agree on this. And there's no need to try and be rude by saying I don't edit many articles, I've used Wikipedia for years and actually there are many pages that reference the G Music album and single chart and they have remained on here for several years with no-one before saying they cant be cited. And you say it can be noted in the prose but not in the table? That's just hypocrisy, you can acknowledge it but can't at the same time. There are other posts that recognise internet albums, independent albums etc but you're saying it's not ok to do that. No-one else has a problem with it but you. StephenN17 (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

"No-one else has a problem with it but you". No, because both of what you're arguing for falls under WP:CHARTMATH and the WP:SINGLEVENDOR guidelines. I didn't come up with those. StephenN17, just because you personally have not come across users not removing them, does not mean users don't, because in my experience of editing far more album articles than you (which is fact, not being rude), users aside from myself have removed the Taiwanese chart plenty of times before. You cannot get around the fact that G-Music is a unified single retailer chart. It doesn't matter "popular" in Taiwan it is—iTunes is popular as well, but I don't see you arguing to include its charts here—and who is that according to anyway? You, using the article for G-Music that also makes unsourced claims about the chart? Back your claims up before acting like they're fact, please. It tracks only physical sales and that's limited statistics of a country's sales. End of story, not allowed per SINGLEVENDOR. Not my saying so, I'm quoting a guideline to you.

As for what else you said, Independent Albums is not a component sales chart. It's a component chart for albums released independently of a major record label. There is nothing wrong with component charts in general, except when they are merely for different types of sales that already count towards the overall chart. I don't see many album articles except older ones that haven't been revamped in quite a while using Internet Albums in the table. They shouldn't. Stop resorting to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS arguments. If newer ones are using those charts, they shouldn't be. You occasionally will see it used on discographies as a column if that artist hasn't achieved a lot of success outside of the US. I'm done arguing with you here. Go complain at those guidelines' talk pages that they exist, not to me. Ss112 22:20, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Neither of us agree so the best thing to do is to create another talk asking everyone if they think the Billboard chart should be there. I think it should as it's pure sales which arguably is more important than the combined chart. StephenN17 (talk) 22:38, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Should the Billboard Top Album Sales be included or not

I've created this as I think that when the Billboard chart is released the Top Album Sales chart should be included as it will be Chers first Billboard number 1 in pure sales. So what does everyone think? StephenN17 (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

As the US is the biggest market worldwide, with Billboard being the oldest sales tracking company, all the sub-charts showing the performance of the record should be listed. Especially as if shows the performance of an album in terms of pure sales as oppose to the main chart which has streaming and album tracks' sales included. The Billboard charts are generally included in many artists' pages, so I see no issue with it being listed here. Uncleangelo (talk) 10:47, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I was just about to open that discussion as well. Usually, certain rules would apparently mean that the chart shouldn't be added to the table.

However, now it's on the editors to discuss if it should be there. It would be Cher's first actual number one album and her highest-charting in the US.

While it is not her highest on the Billboard 200 (a tie with Closer To The Truth, although Dancing Queen has Cher's highest debut sales) it IS gonna be her highest (on a Billboard chart) in the US, not talking about specifically Billboard 200. It is thus one of Cher's biggest achievements for her career in recent times. It should not only get a mention but also a place at the end of the table as it this chart means Cher reaching an/a "unusual"/special achievement for her, making this one of the exceptions where the US Top Album Sales chart should be listed.

At least that's what I think. What do other editors think? TioTayumi (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

@Uncleangelo: The addition of the Australian and UK digital charts was reverted. Do not restore the edit in whole or in part, as you are being disruptive and ignoring WP:BRD. You also claimed in your summary it is "featured on many other artists' albums and singles pages". Oh, please do point these other examples out to me—I'd really love to know what they are so I can remove them there too because they shouldn't be elsewhere if they are (oh, and you making this edit mere minutes ago, as well as all edits made by you, don't count). All of you need to stop resorting to "other articles do this so it's right to do it here too" arguments. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason. Other articles disregard guidelines all the time. It doesn't make it right to do. Ss112 00:15, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

As far as Australian, Swedish, etc sub-chart positions are concerned I can somewhat agree that they might be redundant, even though they are present on many other artists chart pages. However, regarding the Billboard Album Sales chart, it should definitely be included as it shows the performance of the album in the world's biggest market. The point of the chart tables is to showcase the performance of the records as best as possible. In this case, it shows the difference in positions between the main album chart which includes the streaming and the sales only chart, and it's even more interesting to include it as it's a veteran artist in question. Uncleangelo (talk) 11:20, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

It has been officially revealed to be number 1 on the sales chart so shall we add it to the page? StephenN17 (talk) 20:31, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

As I said, it is her first and only number one album on a billboard chart. However, there are certain rules preventing us from using it in the table unless the editors reached a consensus that the achievement is unusual / special enough to get it there, as there can be occasional exceptions. I, for one, support it. I do think we will have to wait with doing that, though, for the reason stated above. TioTayumi (talk) 20:58, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

It should be added without a doubt, for one it was highlighted in the recent Billboard article: "Dancing Queen is also the top-selling album of the week with 150,000 copies sold. It marks Cher’s first No. 1 on the Top Album Sales chart and her largest sales week for an album since Nielsen Music began electronically tracking sales in 1991." Also, it is a crucial part of the information which the charts tables should have - pure sales. It may be dismissed in the future, when the streaming takes over completely and the sales become very low, that the Billboard magazine staff themselves decide to discount the sales charts all-together. For now, it should be inserted once the chart gets published officially.Uncleangelo (talk) 09:35, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

____

Hope some 'official' consensus can be reached soon. The number one is already added to her chart history. However, as the rules goes, we can't add it unless there is consensus for an occasional exception.

TioTayumi (talk) 02:53, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

As discussed above, the sales albums chart is vital when analysing sales and tracking data, hence why it is always reported by their staff editors in their articles. With that in mind, and with the general rule that chart exceptions may happen if the reason is valid, it should be added to the table. Uncleangelo (talk) 14:35, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

For her, there is the addition of it being her first number one on that chart which obviously adds to the sigificance. Let's hope we soon will know more (about consensus etc.) and hopefully can add it. TioTayumi (talk) 04:30, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Who gets to decide if it gets put on? I thought that if there was a majority to make an exception then we would do it but I don't understand who/what editors get to make this decision. StephenN17 (talk) 17:59, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

As well found more information on the G Music chart in Taiwan. Found this from their website:

'The music list launched in 2003 - "G-music Billboard" by Rose Mass Music Network, for the first time based on the sales record of Volkswagen and Rose Records with a market share of over 50%, through a computerized trading mechanism, When each record is consumed, the transaction data is encrypted and immediately transmitted to the head office, which is the most immediate, fair and unique music list based on pure "record sales". The calculation method is bound to make the "g-music list" a new indicator of Chinese pop music comparable to Japanese oricon and American billboards, which is indicative of the Taiwanese record market'.

So it actually represents more than 50% of sales, yet people still believe it to be an unofficial chart? This chart should be in the charts section as well.

StephenN17 (talk) 19:12, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

^interesting, however I think we should keep this about the Top Album Sales and make a seperate discussion about G-music. TioTayumi (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Firstly, the Billboard Top Album Sales chart is not on the 'do not add' charts list, secondly, considering all the reasons listed above, and if we all agree that the decision is the correct one, we can proceed to adding it.Uncleangelo (talk) 14:33, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

This is absurd... Does this site have owners, instead of being a community?! because I see a consensus here among all and especially if the chart is real, if the apposition is official and was confirmed why not add?? I would like to know where is the rule that prohibits official charts from being added? This is very important information. Lucas.sarkisian (talk) 10:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Normally such chart would not be added from what I know. If an album charted on the Billboard 200 you usually don't add the Top Album Sales chart. However, there can be exceptions and well, the reasons why have been stated above. TioTayumi (talk) 16:25, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, however if an album is #1 on lets say the R&B chart it can be added as it's a 'genre'chart. So why shouldn't this be added? I understand if we were saying as it's featured on several charts they should all feature. For example it is #1 on the Top Current Albums and Internet Albums as well as featuring in the Digital chart and Tastemakers chart. But we're not saying lets include them all just the Sales chart as being #1 in pure sales at the age of 72, 53 years into your career should be considered an exception. StephenN17 (talk) 16:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

From what I know, genre charts have a general right to be included. While I agree about the Top Album Sales chart for sure, even I would be kind of reserved with using the Top Internet Albums. However, it's about the Top Album Sales one and I really hope we soon get the approval for adding it. TioTayumi (talk) 17:28, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

I see that the Billboard Top Albums Sales position has been inserted, as it should be, and I hope it will stay there as the majority here thinks so.Uncleangelo (talk) 17:18, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Taiwan G Music Chart

I have found more information on the G Music chart in Taiwan. Found this from their website:

'The music list launched in 2003 - "G-music Billboard" by Rose Mass Music Network, for the first time based on the sales record of Volkswagen and Rose Records with a market share of over 50%, through a computerized trading mechanism, When each record is consumed, the transaction data is encrypted and immediately transmitted to the head office, which is the most immediate, fair and unique music list based on pure "record sales". The calculation method is bound to make the "g-music list" a new indicator of Chinese pop music comparable to Japanese oricon and American billboards, which is indicative of the Taiwanese record market'.

So it actually represents more than 50% of sales, yet people still believe it to be an unofficial chart? This chart should be in the charts section as well. StephenN17 (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

The chart is regarded as an official Taiwanese international chart, also not on the 'unacceptable charts' list on wikipedia, so it should be added as well.Uncleangelo (talk) 14:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

On this very own Wikipedia page it lists G Music as a 'chart' in Taiwan, again telling us it is a recognised chart. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_record_charts StephenN17 (talk) 17:05, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Well the reason was that it only covers a few stores/chain of stores. However, with the market share and everything that's been written, shouldn't it be included? TioTayumi (talk) 17:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

List of record charts is not a list for what is acceptable to add to Wikipedia—it is an article merely denoting that said charts exist. I see it also includes KKBOX and a radio chart there, which are unreliable for being a streaming service (WP:SINGLEVENDOR) and for WP:SINGLENETWORK respectively. We also have articles on sources not deemed reliable for inclusion on Wikipedia; for instance, the Daily Mail has an article, but we don't consider its tabloid fodder fit for inclusion per WP:ALBUMAVOID. Same with iTunes Store—it has an article too, but its charts clearly fall under SINGLEVENDOR. Market share does not matter; iTunes and Apple Music have a large market share, but I don't see any of you arguing for its inclusion. G-Music does not attempt to cover all of Taiwan's sales, especially digital sales. Of course the official website for G-Music is going to hype itself and say it's the most accurate source for sales in that country. Can you find any independent news sources talking about G-Music's data and saying it is the "official" chart of Taiwan? Doubtful. I think it's time to get over it—the album was released over two weeks ago already and you're still complaining about one bloody country being left off. One country whose apparent main chart is a store hyping itself as the official chart when it's not. I bet if Cher were not number one on the G-Music chart you wouldn't care so much about including it. All of this looks like the campaign of a few Cher fans wanting to make her look better by including what number ones she achieved on component and unofficial charts you all think you can get away with adding. She still wasn't number one in the UK, US, and Australia overall, and that's what really matters. Did this album change the world? Has it been incredibly successful? As somebody who is not a superfan and is not biased for or against Cher, I can tell you right now: No, it did not. If it had had a seismic impact on the industry in 2018, I might be inclined to agree with the claims to include more chart data. As it stands, I don't. Ss112 06:10, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

So if an album has an impact on the industry you would agree that certain charts should appear? That's what it sounds like you are saying. Either they should appear or they shouldn't. You say we want to make her look better, well she was number 1 on those Official charts, fact. Aria and the OCC are official charts. There is less information about G Music though so it's hard to find out if it's official or not. Why do you keep mentioning iTunes? That chart is updated every hour and there isn't a weekly chart except for an unofficial page, that's why no-one is saying it should be included. The album has only been out for 2 weeks, it has reached the top 10 in 17 countries so for you to say it's not that successful is ridiculous. At 72 years of age and 53 years into her career any number 1 should be celebrated. StephenN17 (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Croatian No.12 on chart

I don't know how to insert this information into the chart table correctly, so please someone add that information and delete this post.

So: Dancing queen picked at No. 12 in Croatia http://www.top-lista.hr/www/lista-prodaje-strano-40-tjedan-2018/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkopet (talk • contribs) 12:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

This album

Tell me y’all agree with me when I say this album could’ve done A LOT better. I mean sure, it had a strong debut on most of the charts it got on, but it was on those charts for less than 10 weeks for the majority of them (UK being an exception because Dancing Queen was on the UK albums chart for 14 weeks). It all has to do with the fact that Cher did basically nothing to promote the songs she released from the album. She promoted one of the songs one time on live tv that being her performance of SOS on the Ellen Degeneres show on September 7, 2018. You look at how big Believe was and you might ask yourself, “How did Believe become so big?” It got to be as big a hit as it was because of how many times Cher promoted it on live tv worldwide. She promoted it so many times to the point where more than enough of her fans new about it so if they liked it (which I’m sure we all do) they could go buy a physical copy and they did. When you promote a song ALOT on live tv worldwide like Cher did with Believe, the people in the live studio audience as well as the people watching on tv will see it and when they see it, if they like the song, they’ll actually know about it so they can go buy a physical or digital copy of the song and if enough copies are sold then radio stations will start playing that song because they see that people really like it and want to hear it. So promoting on live tv and people buying however many copies because of it not only helps a song get more airplay, but the song will do better on the charts. The promotion for Believe is why it is the best selling song by a solo female artist in the UK to this day. It’s why Cher is still the oldest solo female artist to have gone to #1 on the US Billboard hot 100. It’s why Believe has sold over 11,000,000 copies worldwide. Getting back to this album, if Cher had started her Here We Go Again Tour in say early February 2019, she would’ve had a lot more time to promote Gimme gimme gimme a man after midnight and SOS ALOT on live tv worldwide. If she did that, obviously the songs would’ve done 100x better then they did, and they would also go to at least the top ten in MULTIPLE countries around the globe possibly even #1 in a few of them and I could easily see those two songs selling millions of copies worldwide. So, again, if Cher had started her tour later and then really worked on promoting those two songs the way I just described, not only would they both have done so much better then they did, but this album would’ve done a lot better too. For all we know, the promotion of those two songs could’ve made Dancing Queen go to #1 in the countries it peaked at #2 in. In the countries where it reached the top 5 like the US, maybe it could’ve gone to #1 too. Countries where it got top 10 maybe it could’ve gone top 5 instead. Countries like Denmark where it peaked at #36 on the vinyl albums chart, maybe it could’ve charted on the main albums chart instead. So I know this is long but I just wanted to get this point across. Thanks for reading. Cherfan101 (talk) 15:15, 24 June 2022 (UTC)