User talk:FanDePopLatino

Hi FanDePopLatino! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Masumrezarock100 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks for the invite. I will check it out.

Hi FanDePopLatino,

You didn't provide any source, the only source that is in the page I provided myself and it says the album was certified Gold and the other one says the album sold over 150,000 in Mexico. Unfortunally I couldn't find any reliable source that says it sold 200,000 and was certified 2x Gold in Mexico. There is photos and a video in Youtube, but that can't be included as a source because the video is not included in a official website so it can have probleams with copyrights.--88marcus (talk) 18:45, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 88marcus,

I do know about the video of Thalía receiving the 2x gold certification but I couldn't find a source for it but I was able to find a source for the sales being 200,000 that's why I only changed the sales number and I did provide a source. This is the source I found: https://elsolnewsmedia.com/thalia-mantiene-su-brillo-y-triunfa-con-valiente/ If you read the source you will find where it mentions the sales. If you could read it and tell me what's wrong with this source I would appreciate it.

You're right. That's all my bad. It's because there are many user that goes to that page and only change the number of sales without the source. Unfortunally I didn't see your source. So sorry. I reverted my edition.--88marcus (talk) 20:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thanks for clearing that up.

You are invited to join invite to join the WikiProject Latin music, a WikiProject dedicated to improving articles related to music performed in Spanish, Portuguese and languages of Ibero-America. Simply click here to accept! Or, if you're interested in reading more on Latin music, you may want to check out the Latin music portal.

I've worked on a copy of articles on Latin pop articles including albums and songs from Luis Miguel and Cristian Castro. If you need any help, just let me know. Cheers! Erick (talk) 20:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Erick Thanks for the invite. I just joined and I'm excited to be a part of the community! :) FanDePopLatino (talk) 21:30, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it! If you need any help, you can just ping me anytime or leave a message on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. You can also look at my user page to see the good articles and featured articles that I have worked on the accomplishments page as examples of how to do albums and songs articles. The Latin music project also has an accomplishments page that you can also use as a reference. Again, welcome aboard! Erick (talk) 15:09, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Erick Thanks Man! There actually is something that I need help with. Do you know how to add an image/cover to a song article? There's a couple song articles that I want to add the cover art for them but I don't know how. Can you help? FanDePopLatino (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, use this form to upload an image you want. Click on "It is the cover of an album or a single" and follow the instructions there. Where it says "summary", you fill out the name of the record, artist, and the record label that it belongs. Before you upload images, read these pointers because Wikipedia is being strict about copyrighted images:

• Don't upload images exceeding 300 x 300px in size. If you can't find an image smaller than that, a bot will reduce the size for you.
• Never upload copyrighted images to WikiCommons. That place is for public domain images only. So no cover arts of albums or singles there, only here in English Wikipedia.
• Don't upload alternative covers to albums/songs as well. Only the main cover should be uploaded because Wikipedia wants to keep the number of copyrighted files to a minimum.
• You can use the form I linked above to create music samples. Read WP:SAMPLE first before you do. It tells how long a sample can be for songs less than 5 minutes. Songs that are more than 5 minutes can go up to 30 seconds of sample.

If there's anything I above that you don't understand or need clarity, don't be afraid to ask. I'm here to help. Erick (talk) 05:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Erick Alright man. Thanks for all your help. I really appreciate it! :) FanDePopLatino (talk) 07:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Chayanne-Salome.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:30, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Thalía - Por Amor.jpeg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Maricarmen Marín Por Qué Te Fuiste?.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:49, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work in Thalía's discography, but don't forget when you edit the chart that the right was is "Year-end charts" not "Year End Charts". Thanks anyway.--88marcus (talk) 18:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: Oh okay. Thanks for letting me know. FanDePopLatino (talk) 18:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thalía discography, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lali (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:20, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FanDePopLatino,

I saw that you made a recent edition in Thalía's En Extasis's article, but you didn't included any info such as title, date, accessdate, work, author... I already fix your edition, but I hope that you do by yourself next time you edit one article. When the source came from the Gooble books (like the one you put in En Extasis's article), you can use this tool, it's way easier to do it: link.--88marcus (talk) 17:53, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Many things in that website MTV Latin is copied from Wikipedia's articles, if you search in Google some parts of the MTV Latin article you'll see that the same content is used in many blogs and sites, MTV Latin is only one of them. That's why I reverted your edition. See this: link--88marcus (talk) 15:40, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: Yeah I understand your edit, I just wanted to let you know that the same source I used on that article is also used in the article Paulina so that you could correct that article too (which I see you just did). Thanks for correcting that.FanDePopLatino (talk) 15:53, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied to your query at Wikipedia talk:Record charts#Are these charts reliable? in case you haven't got a message about it. Richard3120 (talk) 00:24, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Walter was pointing out that the website was not reliable - the UK charts listed on Zobbel are the official UK charts and certainly don't fail WP:BADCHARTS. ;-) My point was that the Mexican charts listed fail as both an unreliable chart and hosted on an unreliable website. I'll check the Paulina Rubio articles today and remove any bad charts I find. Richard3120 (talk) 11:32, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I have a full list of Billboard's Latin year-end charts from 2002 to 2005. I was able to archive the charts two years ago before Billboard took down the urls. Here are the full year-end Latin charts:

• Latin Albums: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
• Latin Songs: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
• Latin Pop Albums: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
• Latin Pop Songs: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
• Regional Mexican Albums: 2003, 2004, 2005 (I couldn't find the one for 2002 unfortunately)
• Regional Mexican Songs: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
• Tropical Albums: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005
• Tropical Songs: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

All the best! Erick (talk) 03:45, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Erick Thanks for the charts! They were really useful! FanDePopLatino (talk) 19:35, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I reverted your edition in Thalía's Saliva single. There's nothing very reliable about the performance of the single in Spain. There's a book called "Sólo éxitos. Año a año. 1959-2002" and it includes all certifications and chart performance of albums and singles in Spain and there's nothing about Thalía's albums and singles in the charts before Amor a la mexicana, even En éxtasis didn't performed there (it also doesn't have certification). This book is the most reliable source about Spanish performance. About the 100k that you included with a source, you're right, when it was created there were only Gold certification for albums and singles (1974) then they changed. You can see all here: Productores de Música de España--88marcus (talk) 20:53, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: Okay thanks. By the way is there any cite where I can see that book? I'm starting to make articles for artist from my native Perú and maybe that book could help me. Thanks! FanDePopLatino (talk) 00:36, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When you answer someone in your talk page you should put "ping" where you put "re" so the person receive an alert from Wikipedia. You can see some pages of the book to download here List of best-selling music artists (see the references search for Sólo éxitos), there are four archives to download. About the charts, you can ask in the Ukmix forum, here: link, the charts for albums are corrected, the charts for songs/singles you can't use because they're from one single radio from Spain.--88marcus (talk) 12:38, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: okay sorry I didn't know about the ping. Thanks for the links. If you know of anywhere where I can see charts or certifications in Spain from 2002-2007 please let me know. Thanks! FanDePopLatino (talk) 06:26, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

you're welcome. It seems that the ping is not working anymore too. Too bad. Unfortunally I don't know where you can fide more information about Spanish charts except this one link, you should know it.--88marcus (talk) 23:57, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for all the album covers you've been uploading.

I just thought I'd leave you a quick note, because I've noticed that when you fill in |Article= in {{album cover fur}}/{{Non-free use rationale album cover}} you've been including the [[ ]] around the article name. In that template the article name is intended to be entered without any brackets/mark-up, and if you do add them then the bots don't understand it and your image page ends up in Category:Wikipedia non-free files with red backlink for someone to fix. No problem, but I thought I should mention it to you. Cheers. -- Begoon 08:34, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Begoon: Oh okay. Thanks for letting me know. FanDePopLatino 18:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It's a really common error which lots of people understandably make. One of these days we should get the templates/bots altered to understand it properly, but until then we need to leave out the brackets. Thanks again for your uploads. Cheers. -- Begoon 00:05, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Gian Marco - En Tiempo Real DVD.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Magiciandude: could you help me out with this please? I don't quite understand how to fix this so that the image I uploaded doesn't get deleted. Please let me know if you can help me. FanDePopLatino 03:25, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Intuición, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bachata (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:30, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, FanDePopLatino,

Thank you for creating Si Me Ves Con Alguien.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please add more sources demonstrating significant coverage.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Willsome429}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 23:59, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Willsome429: I was actually in the middle of editing the article with more sources but I'm a bit slow since I do it all from my phone lol. I got it taken care of and will continue to add to the article. Thanks. FanDePopLatino (talk) 00:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All good! Thank you for working on an area that is under-recognized in Wikipedia. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 00:23, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FanDePopLatino,

It seems that the sales included in Thalía's certification page in the RIAA website is wrong. Platinum certificate for latin records are still for 60,000 sold, let's base in that till the certification numbers change for 4x platinum (album) and 16x platinum (single). The sales of old records certified when the criteria was 100,000(platinum) is still wrong in RIAA website too. There's no evidence this album and the single sold that amount of copies since their last certifications.--88marcus (talk) 22:28, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Belinda Peregrín. Thank you. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 09:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@NinjaRobotPirate: ok I didn't know that Belinda's article was controversial. I thought the information on her birthday was just removed by accident so I added it back. Belinda came to my country (Perú) in 2019 to celebrate her 30th birthday which was on August 15th but don't worry I won't edit any of her articles because I don't want an edit war. FanDePopLatino (talk) 19:46, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you're adding unsourced content, not that you're editing a specific article. Please read through WP:BLP, especially WP:DOB. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:52, 12 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Laura Pausini - Sino A Ti.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Gian Marco - En Tiempo Real DVD Box Set Cover.jpeg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading File:Gian Marco - En Tiempo Real DVD Box Set Cover.jpeg. However, it is currently missing information on its copyright and licensing status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can verify that it has an acceptable license status and a verifiable source. Please add this information by editing the image description page. You may refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:03, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing out the page... I was puzzled, I just couldn't see what the link was supposed to show. I would just mention a couple of things, though: firstly, it's an advertisement from the record company, so it's not independent, and secondly, that only demonstrates notability of the album, not of the single. Richard3120 (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem @Richard3120:. I saw that many ads like that were being used on other articles but I didn't notice at first how the song's article was worded that's why when I added the source back I reworded it to it saying that "the remix was released after the album's success in Europe". If you look into to album, those 3 songs mentioned in the ad had European remixes and/or videos due to the album's success. In France, the album "Amor A La Mexicana" was released as "Por Amor" but the only song from it to chart in France was "Amor A La Mexicana". The songs did have airplay success in the other countries mentioned in the ad but unfortunately back then there were either no charts or there were but are discontinued and weren't archived on web.archived.org so no sources can be provided for its performance. This is the case for "Por Amor" in the Romanian chart. It definitely charted on the Romanian airplay chart since it was #55 on the Romanian year end chart in 1999 but unfortunately I haven't been able to find an archive of the song's peak position in the chart. (FanDePopLatino (talk) 16:08, 24 May 2020 (UTC))[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Inevitable (Dulce María song), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Pop and Digital download (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your editions in Thalía's and Paulina's articles. I wanted to change Paulina's sales based in that unreliable magazine a long time ago, but I didn't change because it could cause an edition war. But about Thalia's total sales, her amount of copies are not even near 15 million in total no way she sold over 30 million copies, how she got that amount when only 4 of her albums sold above 1 million worldwide? And the certifications is the motive Enrique Iglesias is listed with 70 million copies worldwide not 140 million like his official site says. Certifications are the more reliable about artists's sales, see the List of best-selling music artists, the total amount is based to the more accurate according to the artists's certifications (and the time they begun they career), I hope you understand.--88marcus (talk) 05:25, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: hey no problem. I too could see that the source for RevistaQ was fake. The Thalía sales number I added back because you said that her claimed sales couldn't be 30 million since she doesn't have 100 million in certifications which doesn't make any sense. If that was a typo that's fine we can move past that but I believe that the 20 million claim for Paulina is way to high since her certifications add up to just over 30٪ of that. Based on both of their careers, what percentage of certifications do they need in order to reach those 20 million and 30 million claims? (FanDePopLatino (talk) 05:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC))[reply]

I think if Paulina has at least 10 million certified albums and singles we could use the 15-20 million claim, but her performance worldwide is so poor that she doesn't even have around 5 million. I would like to find something below 10 million copies for her and below 15 million to Thalía, but I never found. I only keep the 20 million claim in Paulina's page because I didn't want to begun an edit war, but I think is appropriated to exclude it from there.--88marcus (talk) 16:50, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: I think we should put Paulina back at 15 million. Thalía's sales on the other hand are higher since she did perform better worldwide. They both have certifications that are not on their articles because they are not properly archived online so we can't add them. Paulina doesn't have that many but Thalía does have quite a few missing throughout latin america. The problem is that the latin american countries (with the exception of Mexico and Brazil) don't have websites like RIAA or Amprofon that keep an archive of certifications and those are the markets they sell in. That case happened with Shakira for El Dorado, when she went on tour to promote the album she received certifications in Colombia, Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Mexico, Spain, and the U.S. for her album and singles. She shared pictures of her with the certifications but unfortunately the first 3 countries don't have websites that archive and I haven't been able to find a source for them so those certifications can't be included here. Now older certifications are even harder to find good sources for but I know Thalía has more certifications that are not listed here and I can't find sources for them. Sometimes her record company instead of updating her certifications they just let them be and then they gave a diamond certification when she reached 10 million records sold with their company so she did sell more records they just didn't update her certifications or certify her records in some countries or they did certify them but there's no legit sources for them so they can't be included here. (FanDePopLatino (talk) 01:16, 11 June 2020 (UTC))[reply]

@88marcus: Hey man the Paulina Rubio fan is at it again. Since I removed the Revista Q source from Paulina's articles, he started removing certifications for Thalía in retaliation saying those sources were unreliable. I added back the ones for Thalía so he started adding back the Revista Q sources on Paulina's articles. He also added back that source that you removed that said all her albums sold 3-4 million and he also added back a link to a YouTube video in a fan channel to use that for certifications and sales (plus it's not a video of her receiving the certifications plaques but a video of her "saying" that she received those certifications so that counts as a primary source and shouldn't be used). (FanDePopLatino (talk) 15:33, 11 June 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Hi, FanDePopLatino. Nice to meet you. I see your work on Thalía's articles, very good job!. Please, if you see any sales/certifications about Madonna, Daddy Yankee, J Balvin on Latin American or even around the world and hasn't been added, let me know. I also, ask you if you may be interested to give your opinion here. I don't consider this is as a WP:CAN but I've asked for more opinions in Wikiproject:Latin Music and only 88marcus has commented yet. If don't wanna/don't have time, no worries. Cheers =) --Apoxyomenus (talk) 19:43, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing content that is clearly tagged. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Continued from another conversation)

Ugh, I hate cult fans! There are three "citation needed" flags on Stuck (Stacie Orrico song), and some of the unsourced comments have been repeated in other articles.

1. "It was the official theme song of the 2004 Copa América tournament." (2020)
2. "In Japan it peaked at No. 1 on some radio stations' airplay charts. (2014)
3. "The music video was filmed in early 2003 and was directed by Diane Martel. The video stars Orrico's cousin, actor Trevor Wright." (2019) is repeated (uncited) in Trevor Wright ""He subsequently starred opposite singer Stacie Orrico in the videos for her singles "Stuck" (2003), and "I Could Be the One" (2004)." If I looked further, I'm sure I'll find more repeats. That's the way of these WP:ACTIVISTs. Yep, it also appears in I Could Be the One (Stacie Orrico song).

I suggest you don't debate with the fans using truth... instead use Wikipedia policy, such as:

• WP:CHALLENGE: "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution.", and "The cited source must clearly support the material as presented in the article.", and "Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source."
• WP:BLPSOURCES:"Wikipedia's sourcing policy, Verifiability, says that all quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation; material not meeting this standard may be removed. This policy extends that principle, adding that contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced should be removed immediately and without discussion. This applies whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable and whether it is in a biography or in some other article. The material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources."

If they continue to revert your corrections when you use policy, then you can take them to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.

— Normal Op (talk) 01:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will do it that way. Thank you so much for all your help @Normal Op:. I really appreciate it! :) FanDePopLatino (talk) 01:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Ping me if you need any further help. Normal Op (talk) 02:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there! There is a discussion I started regarding the usage of Billboard Latin charts and was wondering if you'd like to add your input as well. Thanks! Erick (talk) 05:36, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Erick sure no problem. I went there and commented too. FanDePopLatino (talk) 11:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I saw that you edited the Thalía's Arrasando article, and to my view it'd be better include the album as having sold "over 1,5 million worldwide", since it's not a inflated number and the certifications are not even near 1,5 million. What do you think?--88marcus (talk) 21:42, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @88marcus:, I added back the 2 million because it had originally been placed there after some posted about it on the article's talk page. That source was later removed by the Paulina Rubio fan claiming that it was inflated but they themselves use the same source (Hola) for the sales of La Chica Dorada. I figured that it's only fair that if a source is good to use on one article then it is okay to use it on other articles too. Also the close to 2 million claim actually doesn't seem to be bad because the album did perform well and there's a few certifications that I remember Thalía received for this album (as well as others) that are not on wikipedia because they are not properly archived online. I also think that the album sold more than what it has in certifications in certain regions like the U.S. for example: The album came out in late April 2000 and after just six weeks (July 2000) it was certified double platimun but the album stayed on the Latin albums charts for 79 weeks (a year and a half) and it didn't even reach its peak until September 2000 (2 months after it was certified for selling 200k) so I'm pretty sure that the album sold more based on chart performance but the record company didn't update the certification. I'm pretty sure that that's also the case in with other albums in other countries otherwise Thalía wouldn't have reached the 10 million copies sold that she got an award for in 2006. Don't you think that sounds right? FanDePopLatino (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The US certifications are based in shippments and in 6 weeks it probably didn't sold all the 200kk copies but unfortunally we don't know for sure, but I have to agree with you, Thalía's English album shipped 400,000 and sold around 200,000 according to Nielsen Soundscan (which is known for having some difficulties in calculate latin albums) but it stayed only 11 weeks in the charts and the fact that the label shipped 400,000 it's because the demand for Thalía's albums are around the same amount. So let's keep the 2 million till someone give a more accurate info about the album's sales.--88marcus (talk) 23:36, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay sounds good. FanDePopLatino (talk) 00:16, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I found this article of Cinemania magazine which says that Amor a la Mexicana sold more than 2 million copies worldwide (link) Do you think we should include in the article and change it to 2 million sold claim too? Because now we have 2 reports that says it sold more than 1 million, the Cinemania article and the Billboard which says Amor is a multiplatinum record. What do you think?--88marcus (talk) 22:08, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @88marcus:, I think that, just like for Arrasando, we can definitely use the 2 million claim for Amor A La Mexicana based on its certifications and chart performance. This album did do pretty well and if Billboard also reports it as a multi million seller then it's okay to include those sales numbers. FanDePopLatino (talk) 22:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FanDePopLatino. Just leaving a note to let you know that recently a |footnote=sales was implemented for {{Certification Table Entry}}, for use instead of using <sup>*</sup> (example here). This ensures that the bot (and now, other editors) will treat the ^* as sales reference and not remove the footnote. Happy editing. --Muhandes (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: ah okay. I was wondering why that was happening. Thanks for showing me that.FanDePopLatino (talk) 14:11, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:02, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't know the reliability of this source maybe this can give an idea of a certification in Spain by En extasis or at least, the sales. Or maybe it appears in the book highly used here for Spanish certs: Salaverri, Fernando (September 2005). Sólo éxitos: año a año, 1959–2002. You can do a further research if you are interested. Cheers, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 06:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Apoxyomenus:, I read it three times but never saw anything about sales in Spain for En Éxtasis. I did see some information about sales in Mexico and the United States for both En Éxtasis and Amor A La Mexicana so it could help with that. Based on the success of the album in those countries those sales do look correct so I guess it would be fine to use it. FanDePopLatino (talk) 06:34, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the reliability of that source, but seems a 50% and above unreliable. Maybe @88marcus: know, or have access to the book with Spanish certs or can kindly help with a further research. At least, you and him can be aware its a possibility that there are sales in Spain for this album at that level. Regards, --Apoxyomenus (talk) 03:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Apoxyomenus: There is nothing in the book Solo Éxitos about the sales of En Éxtasis. From what I saw on Discogs, the album was released there, but it did not appear on the charts and was not certified in the country. Thalía only appeared in Spain with the album AALM, she didn’t even promote En Éxtasis there, It probably was not certified there. You can download excerpts from the book with information about certificates in Spain from 1979 to 2002 on the page List of best-selling music artists, it is used as source for Spanish certifications.--88marcus (talk) 04:05, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said that source didn't say anything about En Éxtasis selling in Spain. It only said something about sales in Mexico and the U.S. so maybe we could use it for that. What do you think @Apoxyomenus: and @88marcus:. FanDePopLatino (talk) 04:45, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very sorry I misread. Yes, it has sales report both for Amor a la Mexicana and En extasis but only USA and Mexico. I'm not sure to have include them, source seems a web hosting service and maybe isn't allowed, idk. --Apoxyomenus (talk) 04:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

آرمین هویدایی (talk) 19:23, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@آرمین هویدایی: thanks for the invitation. I've added myself to the project now. FanDePopLatino (talk) 15:17, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much آرمین هویدایی (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, it's been a while. I've been wondering if you have considered making any of Thalía's albums or songs good article status? Erick (talk) 13:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Erick, yeah I have actually been thinking about getting some of the articles I've been working to good article status. I was thinking about getting articles for Thalía, Gian Marco, Maricarmen Marín, Anna Carina, and Leslie Shaw to get good article status. I can start with Thalía's articles if you could help get started I would appreciate it. Thanks! FanDePopLatino (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely! I've been working on songs that reached #1 on the Billboard Latin pop and Tropical charts as well as the lists of #1's for both charts in chronological order. Right now, I'm in 1996, just finished No Ha Parado de Llover and working on ¡Basta Ya! (song) next on the Latin pop side. For Thalía's older albums and songs, you might have trouble finding articles online for reviews. For that, I highly recommend looking into Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library to request access to newspapers.com/archive and newspaperarchives.com where you will be provided with a free subscription. You can also use WP:RX to request access to an article that's behind a paywall and someone will send you an e-mail with the article. Useful for articles that are only available on NewsBank That's how I'm able to get songs from 90's and 2000's promoted to GA. It realy helped me when I was working Luis Miguel's albums. I have access to newspapers.com so if you there's an article you want to access, I can e-mail it to you. So far from a quick search, I'vee seen several articles covering her EMI albums, not much coverage on her Melody/Fonovisa albums though. Erick (talk) 16:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Erick, I will look into that and will let you know if I need help with anything. Thanks again!FanDePopLatino (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cool! Looking forward to it! @آرمین هویدایی: Figured you might want to look at this as well to help you find articles for Ricky Martin's older albums and songs that are hard to find online. Erick (talk) 13:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Erick Wow, I didn't know about The Wikipedia Library and WP:RX. Thank you so much for the info. آرمین هویدایی (talk) 15:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo, Thank you for creating Amándote (Anna Carina song). When you create an article like this with a "disambiguated" title, please make sure that the reader can find it from the basic name (ie Amándote), by adding or expanding a hatnote, or adding the article to a disambiguation page. This helps the reader to find your article, and also reduces the chance of a future careless editor creating a duplicate article with a slightly different disambiguator. I've fixed this one. Thanks, and Happy Editing. PamD 09:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@PamD: Oh okay. Thanks for letting me know. FanDePopLatino (talk) 14:33, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just a note about the Thalía song articles you've created in the past year, and potentially other articles you've made, along with any articles you may make in the future: please make sure there's a consistent date format in both the prose and the infobox. It appears you've been using date first in the infobox (14 May 2021) but month first in the prose (May 14, 2021). Please use either one or the other throughout the page. I also noticed there was at least one article you created for Thalía's songs that used dates copied from the Spanish wiki or at least were formatted to Spanish standards (e.g. "24 de enero de 2020"). Please make sure you format and translate dates to the English standard if you are translating articles. Finally, please use a list (with asterisks) to list songwriters instead of separating their names with commas in Template:Infobox song. Thanks. Ss112 08:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oh okay. To be honest I hadn't even noticed. Sorry about that. Thanks for letting me know. FanDePopLatino (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you reverted my edition about the 75 million sold by Shakira saying that it says she sold 80 million. I don't know where in the article you read that. It says exactly like this: "Shakira’s hips don’t lie, and neither do her accolades: three Grammys, 13 Latin Grammys and more than 75 million records sold worldwide, to name a few." Please undo your edition there when you could.--88marcus (talk) 13:06, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: I invite you to read the article because I don't know where you're reading that phrase. The article I'm reading says exactly this: Since releasing her first album in 1991, at the age of 13, she has sold more than 80 million records, won three Grammy Awards and 12 Latin Grammy Awards. Like I said in my edit, I was just going by what the source says. I didn't add that source so if it's unreliable then someone should change it but we were going to use the source then we should go by what it says. I don't know what article you're reading but the one I'm reading is the BBC news article that is being used as the source for her sales so you should read it and if it's unreliable then you can provide a good source and change the sales. FanDePopLatino (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@FanDePopLatino: My bad, sorry. Now I see the problem, there are two links one about the sales (bbc) and one about her being one of the best selling artists worldwide. The one I saw is from Houston Press which was the source used in the List of best selling music artists article too, it claimed she sold 75kk worldwide. Now I change the link. Thank you and I'm sorry for this for this other inconvenience.--88marcus (talk) 15:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: no worries. That's why it's always good to discuss these things so we can find a solution, specially since we have worked so well together many times before. Thanks for leaving me a message instead of just edit warring like other users. FanDePopLatino (talk) 15:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the |access-date= parameter is for the date you accessed the source (duh). You certainly didn't access this in 2007. This is probably |date=. Also, one of these certifications is digital, the other is mastertone. You need to add |digital=true in both cases. Finally, Mastertone needs to be noted using |note=. --Muhandes (talk) 12:41, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: oh okay. Thanks for letting me know what I did wrong so I don't make the same mistake in the future. FanDePopLatino (talk) 21:52, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Gian Marco - Mandarina.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:25, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The BreakTudo Awards are indeed remarkable and should have been kept here on Wikipedia. But you have put in information that is not reality and maybe you can correct it.

Telemilênio Brasil is not a television network, it is a producer, one of the largest in the field of LGBT productions in Brazil, it also has a YouTube channel with 118,000 subscribers and it was there that the BreakTudo Awards 2020 was broadcast. , the awards announced that the awards will be broadcast on a multiplatform basis, will be broadcast on Telemilenio's YouTube, for TV channel TV Cidade of Rio de Janeiro and the for streaming platform Yeeaah, that is present em Prime Box Brasil, Soul TV, Pluto TV, Sky, Vivo, OITV. The transmission of awards only through YouTube is quite common, for example, the Prêmio Jovem Brasileiro award every year transmits its awards only through its YouTube channel, which has 38 thousand subscribers.

Oh okay. Thanks for letting me know. FanDePopLatino (talk) 16:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heya. Noticed you used this as source. I will need to look at it later, but note that we are looking for sourced for International certification in Hungary for more than ten years now. They might have finally revealed the levels, or this might be domestic levels. Like I said, I'll need to look at it later. --Muhandes (talk) 20:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: Okay no problem. Like I said I used that source since the certification template didn't automatically fill in the sales like RIAA and AMPROFON do. I couldn't find any other source I could use so if you find out anything about the correct certification levels please let me know. Thanks! FanDePopLatino (talk) 22:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I finally had time to look at it and the source is most definitely the one for domestic repertoire. You can see the discussion here. We know the certification levels for pop international albums before 2002, but we don't have a reliable source for them so we are not using them. --Muhandes (talk) 13:20, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks for letting me know. We'll just have to wait for a reliable source to be able to add the sales. FanDePopLatino (talk) 17:33, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unspecified source/license for File:UNIMPRO LOGO.png

Thanks for uploading File:UNIMPRO LOGO.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 10:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: can you help out with this please? It's the first time I have uploaded this type of image and I guess I did it wrong. Can you help me correct it so it doesn't get deleted? FanDePopLatino (talk) 11:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. There are scripts for adding WP:FUR, but I find that doing it manually is easy enough. --Muhandes (talk) 12:11, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: I saw that. Thanks for fixing that for me. I appreciate it! FanDePopLatino (talk) 17:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I noticed you created Unión Peruana de Productores Fonográficos, nice work. I made some minor changes, but I have a language barrier before I try to improve it further. If you don't mind, I'll make some suggestions, which you can feel free to ignore:

• I don't see any mention of music recording certification. I thought the main idea was to move towards that.
• I always enjoy pushing an article to WP:DYK. Can you think of an interesting fact that you would like to put on the first page? Here are two examples I used: Did you know ... that the album Kayah i Bregović by Goran Bregović and Kayah was the first to receive a Diamond award by the Polish Society of the Phonographic Industry in July 2000? ... that after IFPI Taiwan established the IFPI Taiwan Charts in August 1996, the charts were noted for having their own World Wide Web site?
• You can certainly add more information about the charts, if you have access to the actual data.

Like I said, feel free to ignore me, I am just thinking of ways to improve the article and push it forward. --Muhandes (talk) 12:53, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: thanks for your help. Yes I am going to add the information about certifications. I was waiting to get in touch with the UNIMPRO office to get more information about the certifications levels so that I could have a clear idea about what they are before I add them. I also want to ask them if there's a link online for their certifications that is open to the public or if I needed a subscription with them in order to get them. Now as far as adding an interesting fact, I really like that idea and I know exactly what I will put on there. As soon as I hear back from UNIMPRO I will add the information about the certifications. Thanks for your help! FanDePopLatino (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that WP:DYK submission must be done within seven days. I'd be happy to do the nomination. --Muhandes (talk) 17:34, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: oh okay. I didn't know there was a time limit. So here's what I was thinking of putting: Did you know ... that the album Días Nuevos by Gian Marco was the first to receive a 5x Platinum by the Unión Peruana de Productores Fonográficos breaking a record and becoming the best selling album of 2011 in Perú beating all other domestic and foreign productions.

This is what I had in mind. I don't know if it's too long or if it's fine. If a source is needed then it's right here. Would that be okay? FanDePopLatino (talk) 17:48, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It can work in a shorter form, but the text needs to appear in the article itself. For that you will need to add a section about certifications. It can wait a few days. --Muhandes (talk) 18:44, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: Hi thanks for adding the information about certifications for Perú. I contacted UNIMPRO and they said they would get back to me via email to let me know about the charts and certifications I asked them about. I added the information now for the possible WP:DYK in a shorter version. This is what I have now: Did you know ... that the album Días Nuevos by Gian Marco received a record breaking 5x Platinum certification by the Unión Peruana de Productores Fonográficos becoming the best selling album of 2011 in Perú.

Would it be okay like this or is it still too long? FanDePopLatino (talk) 02:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's good as far as text and citation. The problem is that right now the sentence looks detached from the rest of the article and so it seems artificial, even borderline undue weight. We need much more data for the awards section so this sentence would look like an integral part of the section. For example, other record certifications over the years. --Muhandes (talk) 10:33, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: I added more information to it now. Could you look at it please and let me know if it's ready for WP:DYK? FanDePopLatino (talk) 17:37, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's borderline, but you/we can try. Do you want me to nominate? --Muhandes (talk) 09:27, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: if you think it's ready then sure but first I have a question. If we nominate it and it doesn't make it, can we try again if we add to it? FanDePopLatino (talk) 09:37, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, we can nominate it and then choose another fact if this one is not accepted. I wanted to go ahead and make the nomination, but I couldn't find in the source where it says that this album is the first to be awarded 5× Platinum, can you be very specific about this? --Muhandes (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: I've added the best source I could find. When he received the award it was announced that the 5x platinum was a whole new record. You can see it here at 39 seconds in is when it's mentioned. FanDePopLatino (talk) 11:09, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try but I really don't know. --Muhandes (talk) 11:43, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: Ok thanks I appreciate it. I remember a source for it was available a long time ago and I spent a long time trying to find it again here but it seems that older news are no longer available and I don't have the link to see if it's archived on wayback machine. FanDePopLatino (talk) 11:51, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made the nomination. If you have more information about previous awards or awards since then I think it would help making the paragraph more integral to the article.--Muhandes (talk) 12:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: For sure. I plan to continue to contribute to the article to make it a good article. Thanks for all your help! FanDePopLatino (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FanDePopLatino. Regarding this edit, if you need help with template usage, the best place to look for it is the template documentation and if this does not work, the template talk page. In the case of this specific template you can also ping me, I'd be happy to assist. Specifically, in this case the documentation says Sales require relyear and sometimes relmonth, so the issue was a missing {{relmonth}}. --Muhandes (talk) 11:12, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: ah so that was it. Okay then thank you very much. I appreciate it! =] FanDePopLatino (talk) 15:58, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. Let me know if you want some other new article to be nominated (or helped with). --Muhandes (talk) 06:39, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Muhandes: Thank you. Also thanks so much for your nomination and for teaching me more about wikipedia! :) FanDePopLatino (talk) 06:43, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gloria Estefan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cuban.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're going to have to check these charts... I was just looking at Paulina Rubio discography, and the links for Latin Digital Song Sales now go to Greatest of All Time Latin Artists. Meanwhile, the Latin Digital Song Sales has completely different chart positions from the ones you have stated, so now they don't verify the chart positions. Richard3120 (talk) 01:30, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard3120: Hi sorry for the late reply, I had been away from wikipedia. So what happened with the charts is first of all that I used the Latin Pop Digital Song Sales not the Latin Digital Song Sales so it a completely different chart. Then the reason why it appears with the Greatest of All Time Latin Artists is because when Billboard updated their website is that this chart, as well as many others, were no longer in the dropdown menu so you need the actual url to them in order to access them. The Greatest of All Time Latin Artists chart for Paulina Rubio is actually here while the Latin Pop Digital Song Sales is here and you can verify that it is an actual chart and the positions are right if you look at archives of the chart from billboard's previous website. Hope this answered your question. FanDePopLatino (talk) 01:19, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I understand... I just mean that now you will need to update the links on the articles you have worked on, so they don't link to the wrong chart. Richard3120 (talk) 01:34, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard3120: all of the articles I've worked on already link to the correct chart. You were just reading it wrong, that's why you removed the chart saying it was fake but like I told you go back an look at the URLs instead of the dropdown menu and you'll see that the charts I put in articles (like the one in De Qué Sirve) are linked correctly. FanDePopLatino (talk) 03:20, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know... what I mean is, if you follow the link it doesn't say "Latin Pop Digital Sales", it says "Greatest of All Time Latin Artists". I know this is because Billboard have messed up their links, but it's confusing to readers, so I think the archive URL should be added, so readers can see that it is really the Latin Pop Digital Sales chart. It certainly confused me... that's why I thought it was a fake chart, sorry about that. Richard3120 (talk) 03:51, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard3120: But the problem is that new songs continue to chart in those charts so archives won't include new song like De Qué Sirve. Plus billboard's dropdown menu changes everytime an artist charts on a more relevant chart and you can tell by looking at this archive that is from before the "Greatest of All Time Latin Artists" existed the url is for the "Latin Pop Digital Song Sales" but the dropdown menu said "Hot 100". So archives that say "Latin Pop Digital Song Sales" are limited to songs that charted before December 2019 but any songs released after that date that entered those charts won't appear on the archives so the only thing we can do (both editors and readers) is look at the URLs because unless Billboard fixes their website there is nothing we can do about it unfortunately. FanDePopLatino (talk) 04:46, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're right... I hadn't thought of that. So really the only thing that can be done is add the archive URL to the older songs, and the newer ones just have to link to a chart with the wrong title heading. It's very frustrating –I don't know why Billboard can't get their charts right, there are so many artists who still don't have a chart history at all, so you can't check their old chart positions. Richard3120 (talk) 15:11, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard3120: I know right. You would think that them updating their website would make it better but instead it's like if they took a step back. FanDePopLatino (talk) 20:52, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. What do you think about including the worldwide sales of the La Chica Dorada album at 1 million copies? I don't think it's far from reality. There is a video in which Paulina says that this album has sold around 600 thousand copies in Mexico, won a gold record in the United States (the positions on Billboard were really good) and received another one in Guatemala, there alone is about 750,000 copies, another 250,000 in the rest of the world is not unrealistic, some Thalía albums do not have as many certificates but have a much larger gap. What do you think?--88marcus (talk) 23:01, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@88marcus: hey so there are a few reasons why I don't think we should include those sales for the album. The first reason is because that interview is from 1993 and she just says it, nothing is presented to her nor is it shown like in 1996 when she is with Veronica Castro and they actually show it with the highest certification being the 3x gold in Mexico for 300k. The second reason is because unlike her other albums, this one actually didn't do too well in the U.S. (which was actually a surprise to me since the lead single was a hit) with the album only staying on the general Latin chart for 3 weeks and peaking at 42. The albums by Thalía may have gaps in their sales vs their certifications but their chart performance in the U.S.(the largest market for both singers) is a lot better with albums like En Éxtasis and Arrasando having higher peaks and staying on the charts for 86 and 79 weeks respectively. I don't know why her label didn't update her certifications or if her contract wouldn't allow more than a 2x Platinum certification but the chart performance actually backs up those sales just like for Paulina's self titled album. And the third reason is that it's her just "saying" that the album achieved those sales and certifications which can lead to problems with fans like Santiago Lorde who add fake certifications for Paulina like he did here when he used a link to a video Paulina posted on her Instagram saying her self titled album was certified 6x Platinum in Mexico (something you had already spoken to him about) and 4x Platinum in Costa Rica. Like I told you before, if we let claimes by an artist or their record company be good sources then wikipedia would become a blog. It would be like using the video where Thalía is interviewed by Wendy Williams (where Wendy says Thalía has sold over 50 million records) as a source when that isn't reliable. That's why I didn't add back the certifications for Arrasando that where in that Billboard add which was removed by another editor. Those certifications (Philippines, Slovakia, and Central America) may have been true for the album but we don't have a reliable source for them. If we can find reliable sources for certifications and sales for La Chica Dorada, that will decrease the gap from the 1 million copies sold, then we could add those sales but for now the only reliable certification for that album is for 300k Mexico where claimed sales are 450k. I know that before they used [Paulina Rubio "El Huracán Mexicano". Biblioteca Nacional de España: Nuer Ediciones. 2001. ISBN 978-84-8068-079-0. this source] for the album's total sales as of 2001 being 550k worldwide. I don't know if you would want to use this source for now while we keep looking for reliable sources about other certifications for the album. FanDePopLatino (talk) 05:56, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I agree. ;)--88marcus (talk) 19:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:57, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening FanDePopLatino, I just saw your message and it would be great to expand and create articles about artists and more about Peru, let me know anything. For my part I agree.

---

Buenas noches FanDePopLatino, acabo de ver tu mensaje y sería genial expandir y crear articulos sobre artistas y más acerca de Perú, cualquier cosa me avisas. Por mi parte estoy de acuerdo. AlexanderShakifan29 (talk) 03:34, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AlexanderShakifan29: chevere causa entonces yo te aviso cuando empieze a trabajar de nuevo en articulos Peruanos. FanDePopLatino (talk) 05:22, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @FanDePopLatino! I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to you because I've seen that you keep changing the number of weeks that "No Me Acuerdo" and "Dame Tu Cosita" have spent on the Billboard Argentina Hot 100 from 97 to 100. While what you base your claim is correct, the truth is that the source must be wrong. See, the beginnings of the chart are rather confusing. What we know is that the first chart was issued on 13 October 2018, so that would be week one for every song that charted that week. Here's "No Me Acuerdo"'s chart run starting 13 October 2018:

2 3 5 5 5 6 7 9 7 7 8 8 13 14 17 12 13 10 10 15 15 15 10 15 15 17 21 22 23 25 28 25 23 30 32 38 37 35 25 21 25 21 20 23 25 22 25 25 23 21 20 24 24 30 33 31 30 32 31 29 34 34 37 37 44 51 54 51 50 52 56 58 67 59 61 65 62 83 82 74 80 82 91 OUT 97 93 65 79 OUT 100 97 97 98 OUT 98 95 92 92 91 98 OUT.-

As you may notice, these are 97 weeks and not 100. If you still don't believe me, I will be glad to provide the links to all 97 weeks the song has charted. If you do trust me, please let's leave it at 97 weeks each, which is the right number. Thanks for your time. Have a nice evening, Swe97 (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Swe97 I believe you on what you say since you've looked into it better. That chart's sources seem to be confusing and I know that the first few weeks don't appear on billboard main website which is why songs like No Me Acuerdo and Sin Pijama have lower peaks on there but the billboard.com.ar show something different. Now I would expect that other songs that came out later should have the correct number of weeks but as you can see here the Soltera (Remix) is said to have charted for for 80 weeks while in here it says it was for 77. So since both sources are wrong then I think the best thing we could do is add notes in the article explaining this so that readers don't get confused as to why wikipedia says something other than what the official website. Kinda like the way that notes are added on the RIAA certification article to explain to readers why the certification levels in wikipedia articles say something different from the ones on the main website. FanDePopLatino (talk) 00:10, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Espiral, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page HTV.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate! are you sure 10,000 copies is Platinum record in the 90's? According to this source says is 20k ^[1] Franlm14 (talk) 04:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Franlm14:, I can't really see your source to verify what it say. For what I remember the certifications in Perú for platinum have been for 10k since the 90s but as you can see in the article for UNIMPRO (which is the official certifying body) there really isn't a source from IFPI for what the certification levels were in Perú before 2005. I've had that doubt myself after seeing that Gian Marco's album A Tiempo was certified platinum here and the source states that it was for 15k. Unfortunately I haven't found any older IFPI source which includes Perú because for a long time IFPI only cared about posting sales and certifications for European countries while American countries where ignored with only a few exceptions in the north. If we can find a reliable source from IFPI about the sales at that time then I'm okay with it changing. Feel free to hit me up if you find one or you could just add it to the UNIMPRO article yourself if you'd like. FanDePopLatino (talk) 03:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can verify it searching that quote in google books. [1] That amount makes sense to me, every single latin country lowered their certs by the 2000's. I found a IFPI table from 1994 and in Venezuela a Platinum record was 100k, and just 20k in 2005. Franlm14 (talk) 08:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Franlm14: well even if that's true for certifications in Venezuela that doesn't mean that it's the same for every Latin American country. If you look at the certification source for the album No Me Acuerdo Quien Fuí that album was certified 2x Platinum for 20,000 copies sold. That album is also from the 90s so I'm not really sure what the actual certification levels were. Maybe @Muhandes: knows if there are any other sources from IFPI for certification levels from around that time. FanDePopLatino (talk) 22:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I know. Here is the table in case you needed it.^[2] Regards. Franlm14 (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Franlm14: that table still doesn't provide any certification levels in Perú. I would say just use you best judgment. Some sources could say an album sold a certain amount in one country but it doesn't mean that those numbers are IFPI's official certification level amounts for the country. I've run into that problem multiple times. FanDePopLatino (talk) 23:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know sorry, I was talking about Venezuela. Franlm14 (talk) 23:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add the Mods template to this page? 2600:6C5A:417F:794E:4952:BDFE:9BA8:EF84 (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What page? What are You talking about? FanDePopLatino (talk) 00:02, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Drake Bell discography, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Drake Bell discography, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the single cover real? I saw you readded it back in February. Friendlyhelper9949 (talk) 08:32, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Friendlyhelper9949:Yes the cover is real. The song was released as a single on the radio and on digital download platforms. There's another editor who was deleting several songs, from different artists, claiming that they weren't neither official or promotional singles. I looked into some of those like "About You Now" because I remember when the song was released as a single. The article just needed sources so I researched it and added sources to the article. That's what those articles need. They need to be properly sourced and not just deleted. FanDePopLatino (talk) 12:54, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that’s really cool. I wish we could find a source for the radio release. Yeah, I thought the EP might have came out but no specific single release. I’m glad you remember Friendlyhelper9949 (talk) 18:37, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know that it was sent to radio? And the single artwork was from a digital release? Friendlyhelper9949 (talk) 10:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Several years ago, there was a dispute regarding the Certifications table on album pages and whether or not we include pure album sales in its own column with sources (as certification numbers, and pure sales numbers aren’t always the same). This discussion has recently been re-opened here. If you have the chance, please comment. --Blastmaster11 (talk) 01:13, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited En Tiempo Real, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page High definition.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A GA review is underway at Talk:Entre el Mar y una Estrella/GA2. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:03, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]