Talk:Janet Jackson discography
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Upon entering the Janet Jackson discography - I have noticed that someone drastically altered her chart positions and in spite left false information. I have tried to fix the discography to the best of my ability. I hope someone can help fix the tables back to their original state.
The album sales seem to be inflated. 69.249.114.154 22:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
I noticed a problem with the Hot 100 Singles chart for Janet Jackson. Scream was #1 single for Michael and Janet Jackson. It debuted at #1 and quickly faded from the chart. The second problem is that the single, If, peaked #2. I have looked at my old Billboard magazines and found that these two singles peaked at #1 and #2, respectively.
- Don't know what Billboard youre looking at, but "Scream" debuted (and peaked) at #5 on Hot 100. This confirmed by back issues I have and also an archive search on billboard.biz. You have made these types of incorrect changes with other discogrphies too. Based on above comment I am going to run through this and double-check everything. -- eo 18:27, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Un-cited and unreliable sales information
The discography currently contains a lot of information that is un-sourced and needs verification (see Wikipedia:Verifiability). I've just finished tidying up the discography and I removed sales information relating to singles simply because its clear its wrong, and its un-cited. As for albums, I left the figures up there at the moment and placed a cite tag ([citation needed]) on them. The figures need to be verified or else they have to be removed. Fan sites and other personal websites are not generally seen as reliable (as fans always - without exception in my experience - inflate the figures). Please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources for further assistance.
I will leave the album sales up until the end of April - that should give ample time for a reliable and verifiable source to be found. If not, I'll remove the sales information until a reliable source can be established. Rimmers 03:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- I've just removed all the unsourced sales information as no one has been able to provide verifiable or reliable sources for the claims. Rimmers 12:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Okay, Rhythm Nation and Control did not sell the same!
- WORLDWIDE, they did, but in the US, Rhythm Nation 1814 sold 1 million more.
- I'm really sorry that I changed a few things that I knew were wrong, but although it's verry petty, my family were telling me that 20 Y.0, and So Excited werent doing good and that nobody cared or liked them, and because I hate to be wrong I purusely changed several things to make it looke like Janet was still on top, well the good is that they belived it and arent talking trash about Janet anymore, I'm realy sorry if I confused anyone. But I hate being wrong especially when its about Janet Jackson, hope you guys can forgive me, I was just defending my baby.
[edit] 'Weekend' is not the new single!!
Janet's official website has confirmed that the song is not the new single, nor will it feature on the new album. Its just a 'taster' of whats to come. The first single will be called "Call on Me". See www.janetjackson.comRimmers 19:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Sources
I have added new sources to this page. Here they are [1]
[edit] Former Discography
Alright, I think it's stupid to say that both Control and Rhythm Nation 1814 sold 14 million copies each. This is an idea of what the old discography looked like
Control - 14 million copies sold (5.2 million US) Control: The Remixes - 1.5 million copies sold Rhythm Nation 1814 - 19 million copies sold (6.4 million US) Janet. - 22 million copies sold (7.8 million US) Janet.Remixes - 1.5 million copies sold The Velvet Rope - 11.5 million copies sold (4.1 million US) All for You - 7.5 million copies sold (3.1 million US) Damita Jo - 3 million copies sold (1 million US)
[edit] Single Sales Info
What about her single sales. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.54.48.82 (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] With u
Huray Janet's single with U moved up 11 points in the R&B catagorey, yay.
[edit] Footnotes
I've removed the footnotes from the article because they are unsourced and non-verifiable. If someone can provide reliable sources (see WP:RS) then the information can be replaced - but as it it, it shouldn't be included in the discography. Rimmers 03:10, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Footnotes:
- U.S. sales of the album janet. are based on 7.0 million Nielsen SoundScan sales, and 860,000 copies of the album sold through BMG Music Club as of 2002. The album is certified by the RIAA for sales of only 6 million, since BMG Music Club is not tracked by Nielsen SoundScan, sales of "janet." are much higher than they have been certified for.
- U.S. Nielsen SoundScan sales of The Velvet Rope are 3.2 million copies, the album also sold 420,000 copies through the BMG Music Club.
- U.S. sales of the album All For You are based on 3.1 million Nielsen SoundScan sales, and 100,000 copies of the album sold through BMG Music Club as of 2002. The album is certified by the RIAA for sales of only 2 million, since BMG Music Club is not tracked by Nielsen SoundScan, sales of "All For You" are much higher than they have been certified for.
Who ever put up those last notes do not put up so random shit. Craving Janet has gone and done the research and put up the links. The sales you put had no links to back it up thus they were removed by me. You made no sense and if you have something to say about the sales you should leave a note in the discussion page you fool. Unless you put links proving that Janet has sold what you think that put your links. craving Janet has done real accurate research do not just leave a link of ambiguous riaa links what crap leave the fucking page alone. It is accurate to the most it can be nobody really knows what she has sold, in fact nobody knows what any artist has really sold are you God. Leave the page these are accurate estimates.
signed Lisksosp
[edit] Album covers
Why are the album covers not allowed on this article? What's the problem with taking the cover images featured on the main articles and linking them here? This article looks so BARREN without the album covers. 71.65.23.14 10:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
- The images are only usable under the fair-use criteria; use in articles like this doesn't meet those criteria, so including them is a copyright violation. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 11:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
