Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of best-selling music artists (4th nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep‎. I see a strong consensus to Keep this article. Editors are encouraged to remove incorrect or inflated figures and keep it up-to-date with available reliable sources. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:26, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of best-selling music artists[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It is not possible for anyone to record how many records of a particular artist have been sold nationally or internationally. Now even if we were to mention only what WP:RSs have said, then this list would be among those articles that fail that requirement the most.

This list is nothing but a WP:LISTCRUFT. This list has been probematic to core. Various RfC have been carried out but there has been no solution for this list.[1][2]

As noted by the reliable sources, Elvis Presley, The Beatles are widely regarded to have sold more than 1 billion records,[3][4] while Michael Jackson has sold over 750 million records.[5] However, this page is evidently misrepresenting their figures.

This list does not make mention of Bing Crosby who is known to have sold over 900 million records.[6] Could it be because Crosby does not have enough fans who are eager to impose their POV on this page? That appears to be biggest factor behind the names (at least the top ones) found on this list.

Not just that, but this list does not even list any artists from the most populated countries like India and China where some artists have clearly sold more than 200 million records such as A. R. Rahman,[7] Wei Wei [8] and more.

It would make more sense to have this list deleted instead of wasting any more time on it. Ratnahastin (talk) 16:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lists of people. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Hundreds of Wikipedia articles mention total sales figures of music artists and bands, so it can be asserted that the existence itself of this List is more than coherent. Apart from that, it contains very valuable information for the reader, such as the total amount of certified sales of each artist/band, with numerical (ergo, objective) data from multiple music certification systems of different countries/markets.
The claimed sales figures, even if they are estimates, are supported by RS from news organizations (as stipulated in the List's guidelines). It is true that there are sources that claim the figure of 1 billion records for The Beatles [9], Jackson [10] and Presley [11], but there has been a consensus for years not to include such high figures as they were considered inflated.

In those two RfCs mentioned above, the total deletion of the List was never considered, but rather had the objective of improving it, especially the last one, which modified the methodology previously used in the List, removing its percentage-based fabricated requirements (which were defended by the user Harout72, who incurred in WP:OWNERSHIP and decided to cease his activity on Wikipedia when he saw that the methodology he defended was going to be changed). These changes, results of a voting, make it now possible to include artists like A. R. Rahman or Wei Wei. It is true that perhaps it should have been done earlier, but there is certainly a consensus to do so. Indeed, you can see on the List's Talk page that we have been discussing the inclusion of these artists this week.
Salvabl (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct

Apple Corps, the record company that owns the Beatles stated the group had sold 600 million records which predated this article as they were listed at 1 billion at the time.

"Apple Corps Ltd. was founded by The Beatles in 1968 to look after the group’s own affairs. The London-based company has administered the catalogue of The Beatles releases of the 1960s that have sold to date more than 600 million records, tape sand CDs." [12][13][14]

For Elvis Presley, his record company Universal Music Group states that he has sold 500 million records to date "Widely acclaimed as the best-selling solo music artist of all time, Presley has sold more than 500 million records and holds the distinction for most songs charting on Billboard's Top 40 with 114 hits". [15][16]

For Michael Jackson, Sony Music Group stated he had sold 750 million records around the time the Beatles were claimed to have sold 600 million records [17][18]

This page as such is largely accurate barring a few outdated references. Never17 (talk) 15:33, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

- Keep: there's literally no reason to delete this article. We already reached a consensus from various editors to improve the page. Also Elvis Presley is claimed to have sold 500 million records Reuters (2022) - 500 Million , along with The Beatles NME (2024) - 500 Million and Michael Jackson Yahoo (2024) - 500 Million. This article is also far more reliable than the list of best selling authors page and generally one of the most well put together on the website and has been cited by Guinness World Records and various other media outlets
Never17 (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - an article not yet being "good enough" is not alone reason to delete it. Jonathan Deamer (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - As per above, the article just needs better sourcing and the topic has many reputable sources on it already. Sharrdx (talk) 02:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, the credibility factor is of utmost importance. It is as you stated problematic. If readers dispute the validity of this list in any format, then we have a problem, for we have no credibility. You mentioned Bing Crosby? Since 1926 and beyond, it is believed that yes, as you stated, that he may have reached that astronomical figure of what 900 million? and yet, where is he on the list? Where is Nana Mouskouri? Who sings in multiple languages and most importantly, according to an extensive number of sources she has sold over 350 million albums worldwide, and globally speaking, she is considered the best-selling female artist of all time. She is also nowhere to be found on this list. Moreover, other entertainers who I have mentioned in the past who are nonexistent in this list/article are Rocio Dúrcal, Rocio Jurado, Charles Aznavour, Roberto Carlos among the notables, who are not accorded in unit sales and are erroneously missing. All these artists have sold millions of units internationally. Also, for improvement purposes are some of the record claims, which are also dubious. Most notably, Julio Iglesias who in just about all websites and reputed reliable global sources establish him in the echelons of 300 million records sold globally and not the 150 million claimed by the Wikipedia article. I could go on and on with example after example stating without reservation that yes, we perhaps have a credibility problem. However, we can make adjustments and improve these omissions.

Case in point: there are other entertainers' who are also European descent and should never be omitted from this list or any list, such as the legendary Spanish singers (Raphael and Camilo Sesto), but for reasons unbeknownst to many, there are not. Furthermore, add to this credibility problem the Elvis Presley and Beatles factor; Without question and with respect to those who state that their sales are inflated, they are just too many sources being indicative that these two acts have easily surpassed the billion mark in sales. So, with all these examples that are obviously flawed, do I think that this Wikipedia list/article should be eradicated or faced deletion? No!! No!! No!! we must work to improve it. We have knowledgeable contributors previously mentioned who can make the proper adjustments and corrections to this list/article so it can be the very best it can be, to the perfected core. I for one, believe in the collaborations and countless contributions of these very capable writers/editors and users who I have previously mentioned in the past. In closing, I share the sentiments of these users and contributors who want to keep it. Let us not delete this article for not being good enough but improve on it so it could be more than just good enough. It could be the envy of all other website articles, due to its authenticity and factuality. Let's make it work!! Victor0327 (talk) 03:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Absolutely a listcruft and is used for POV pushing. I don't see a List of best selling authors. Orientls (talk) 06:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of best-selling fiction authors 170.203.201.93 (talk) 14:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This page has numerous inflated and questionable inclusions like William Shakespeare selling 4 billion books (how can you even prove that?) Or Agatha Christie selling 2 billion books, completely unreliable.

Now compare that to this, it's fairly easy to prove most of the numbers provided based on the individual claimed sales figures for each of their releases. Nothing is inflated Never17 (talk) 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reasons already said above. Breaktheicees (talk) 08:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Per all the reasons stated above by multiple users. — Tom^(T2ME) 11:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reliable sources give ample coverage of the bestselling musicians, this something notable they mention. You can use the talk page to discuss any editing that needs to be done if you believe someone should be added or information is outdated. Dream Focus 12:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - seems like all of the objections in the nomination statement can be overcome with editing. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't think there is doubt over the list that it is being used simply for promoting particular fans' POV. The main articles of these artists already have details on how many records they have sold. I don't see why this list is needed. desmay (talk) 15:19, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whether you believe its needed or not is irrelevant. WP:NOTNEEDED. And its not just fans, many people are simply curious, which is why in the past 90 days, it has had 543,364 pageviews. Dream Focus 16:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The media quite literally uses this page all of the time when mentioning popular music acts, they will always quote Wikipedia's sales figures for the artist in question. It makes no sense to get rid of this page. There are minor issues with it, but it's absolutely useful and generally very well put together Never17 (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree: We need a best-selling list so avid music lovers, musical pundits and historians can use this list/page as a form of reference registry. Moreover, Wikipedia has references on an uncountable number of historical figures and subjects of study, for educational purposes, as an example, the lives of enlightened thinkers "Voltaire" and "Isaac Newton"; It also catapults into the lives of musical revolutionaries such as Elvis, Michael Jackson and The Beatles. This page could be used as a further intellectual study delving into a subject matter which many people are obviously interested in. The editors and contributors will make the right adjustments to make this list a factual coherent and cohesive one. Furthermore, and to alleviate the tensions among some contributors, POV pushing in pursuing an agenda based on fandom to any particular artist will be eradicated. We cannot promote "particular fans" POV as contributor desmay has stated. This shall not be an Elvis, Michael Jackson or Beatle fan page; but a truthful, unbiased, and impartial directory based on fact and intertwined with reputable reliable sources. As previously stated, the hard-working contributors and editor/writers for this best-selling list/article will make it work. Victor0327 (talk) 02:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Anybody who is saying that this fancruft can be improved with writing is simply not addressing the fact that this article has been impossible to fix because of its use as a fancruft. Wikipedia is not for that purpose. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most are in favor of keeping this article, we've had past attempts at trying to delete the article from fans who were upset about it and it's always been overruled. Never17 (talk) 17:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As per reasons stated above. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 14:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep: It's even totally unrespectful to nominate this article for deletion.Christo jones (talk) 19:15, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.