Talk:Machine Gun Kelly discography

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

Hip hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip hopHip hop articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Bloom (MGK album) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Page needs semi-protection

Can someone please tell me how to request semi-protection? This page is constantly getting vandalized. Osh33m (talk) 01:50, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The claim of 20 million records

I want to make something abundantly clear. The statement in the opening section of this article is that Machine Gun Kelly claimed to have sold 20 million records. This statement is true, because MGK made that claim. The statement is not that MGK sold 20 million records. That statement in itself is still unproven, but that is not what the statement in the article reads. Therefore, the statement is valid. I have tried to get this page semi-protected but that was denied, on top of that, registered users are now removing it. From now on if it continues to get removed by registered users, I will deflect to the talk page. If it gets removed by unregistered users, I will just revert it. --Osh33m (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stil it is pointless. Wherever you go you will see sales according to Nielsen Soundscan, or sales according The Guardian. Not "Oh Nicki Minaj says that she claims she sold 100 million records" If you even tried to get page semi protected and you did not get that, what does that tell you? You are trying to pass the unproven information here, you even admit it. Sales are not true but it is true that he said it? Come on. :@Apoxyomenus: Care to pitch in with your opinion? If you have the time. Dhoffryn (talk) 05:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhoffryn: when I attempted to get the page protected, the moderators did not deny the fact that the page was being vandalized. They simply said that the threat of vandalism is not great enough for semi-protection. What does that tell me? It tells me that I am on my own for protecting this page. If you look at the history of this page's edits you can very clearly see there is a bias against Machine Gun Kelly for including this statement. So no, it isn't pointless. The point is to not let vandalism and anti-MGK editors win. Nicki Minaj has verifiably sold over 100 million records by the way, so I don't know why you would use her as an example. Also, I am not trying to pass unproven information here, nor did I ever admit that. The proven fact is this: MGK claimed to have sold over 20 million records. That is the fact, and that is what the statement says. The sentence is written as such to convey the simple fact that MGK claimed to sell 20 million records, and it is up to the reader to interpret that he is saying this without evidence to back it up himself.

Now, if the sentence read "As of 2020, he has sold over 20 million records," only then would the information be unproven. And I wouldn't allow that on wikipedia either simply because that would be an unsourced and unverifiable statement. So yes, it is true that he said it. You said it yourself. He is on camera making that sensational claim. Any attempt to argue against this is so far has only come from biased angles and I presume the biased edits will persist. Every time I see it from a registered user, I will deflect to the talk page. And every time I see it from an unregistered user, I will just revert it because it has happened so many times already. --Osh33m (talk) 13:58, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Osh33m: This is wikipedia, not some fanclub that is gathering here around to interpret what he is trying to say. Dhoffryn (talk) 14:33, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhoffryn: Exactly. Since this is not a fanclub, we should not include bias. I don't think you understood what I meant about interpretation though. It is the encyclopedia's job to cite the quotes. It is the reader's job to read the quotes and interpret them. --Osh33m (talk) 14:51, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any other reliable source instead xxlmag magazine? music sales claims from artists themself/record companies should be replaced or avoided. Actually, I don't have problems with or without the current statement because context matters and with this particular case, his certification sales under his name in RIAA are close to the 20M figure (at the same time, i guess actual sales could be less). Maybe with a footnote could be fine. You guys should consider have more opinions from music wikiprojects. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 03:03, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Apoxyomenus: The original source is available as well on YouTube. Why would music sales claims from artists be avoided though? Anyway, I can add a footnote as well. That is no problem. --Osh33m (talk) 16:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As I pointed out, my opinion was just a suggestion, although I've modified your edition since sounded awkward. Both of you guys, once again, could have more opinions in WikiProjects like Hip Hop. @Osh33m: sales figures from record companies / or from artists themself (their websites, statements etc) are usually avoided due could be consider self-references or a conflict of interest plus those type of sources usually inflates figures for marketing purposes etc. That's we follow in List of best-selling music artists, methods generally accepted from the Wikipedia community. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 18:02, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Apoxyomenus: I have to say I completely disagree with the way it is worded right now. His claim is not verified so I'll have to change it again. But sales figures from artists themselves has a whole section on the List of best-selling music artists (claimed sales) so in that regard I don't see how MGK's claim should be any different. --Osh33m (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rock/Alternative charts?

Given MGK's latest shift away from Rap into Alternative/Rock music, I wonder if we should reflect that in the table? He has had 9 songs chart on the Hot Rock & Alternative Songs chart as of today. The question is what to replace it with since the singles as a lead artist table has 10 entries already. I suggest replacing the Hot Rap Songs column, since most of his charted songs are represented on the broader Hot R&B/Hip-Hop songs chart.Gagaluv1 (talk) 15:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]