This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum
You misunderstand how this template is used. |salesamount= is used for pure sales with a source and this number is what the source says. It is not used to specify the certified amount, which is shipments, not sales. Muhandes (talk) 14:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But did the RIAA certify it Platinum for 944,700 sales? And that "pure sales" link is from 2019. Maybe there should be separate boxes for certifications and these "pure sales". 197.86.195.21 (talk) 04:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, RIAA did not certify platinum for 944,700 sales. RIAA certification does not certify sales at all and never did. RIAA used to certify "shipments minus returns" and now uses equivalent album sales, while SoundScan tracks pure sales, which is used by Billboard 200 since 1991. If you want to learn more, read those articles. The template can be used to cite both and that's what |salesamount= and |salesref= are for. It is the editor's decision whether to use both or just the certification, for example, when the sales figure is old. However, it was the community's decision not to add another column for pure sales, overriding the certified amount instead. Listing them like you did here is also against de-facto consensus, which you can verify using the thousands of articles using pure sales override, because it provides misleading references. You can suggest to change this practice on Template talk:Certification Table Entry, but keep in mind this a template used in 38,000 articles and this practice is probably standing for more than 15 years, so an RFC may be needed. Muhandes (talk) 12:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is misleading is stating that an album has been certified Platinum by the RIAA, and then listing a years-old number that is lower than the number required for RIAA Platinum Certification. And that as the only number... 197.86.195.21 (talk) 15:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for "overriding". This edit added the Certification: [2]. March 2016. And then, this [3], this was altered. But, if it's about "pure sales"(and nobody has ever kept track of all actual sales, it's just a sample), then why bother with Gold, Platinum etc. Certifications at all? Hilariously, these "pure sales" appear to be somewhat recent(you said ax of 1991), meaning all 1990 and earlier releases have the exact figures(eg. 1 million). As an example, the 4 KISS solo albums don't have their "pure sales", despite all being known to have had mass returns AFTER the Certifications. It's really 2 totally different methods posing as the same thing. Three, if you know how RIAA(and BPI) album Certifications originally worked... 197.86.195.21 (talk) 16:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not saying I disagree, but this reflects the current consensus. If the consensus changes, I’d gladly adjust it so both numbers are automatically displayed, as it’s not technically difficult. However, I don’t think this discussion, taking place on an article’s talk page, is contributing meaningfully in either direction. Muhandes (talk) 17:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
