Talk:Classics (Sarah Brightman album)

Certifications

An editor has been adding certifications in Japan and Taiwan. The source given for Japan is this. While I don't speak Japanese I asked someone who does and he tells me the page does not say "Classics" was certified Platinum in Japan. Besides, all certifications in Japan since 2000 are well documented in the RIAJ database, and this doesn't appear there. As for the Taiwan certification, it has been established that Gold Typhoon has been certifying their own artists, such as Sarah Brightman, with unofficial certifications, i.e. certifications not by the authority in Taiwan, RIT. As such, I don't think Gold Typhoon can be considered a reliable source for Taiwan certifications of Sarah Brightman, unless they specifically say it was certified by RIT. --Muhandes (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

In this website http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.a-m-a.jp%2Fsarah%2Findex.html (Already translated) says that Classics sold over 300,000 units in Japan, thus going Platinum. Certifications in Japan are documented since 2003 by the RIAJ. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.10.230.110 (talk) 18:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are saying, perhaps you would like to explain. Are you saying the website says she was awarded Platinum, or are you saying the article says she sold 300,000 units (and it is your own conclusion that it must have been awarded Platinum)? Because in Japan it is very possible to sell any amount of records and not be awarded, from all sorts of different problems (like selling over long periods, selling without reaching the charts etc.) Please clarify. --Muhandes (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Muhandes I appreciate your concern on maintaining good quality in these articles, though I disagree on how you have literally OWNED the Brightman albums articles. I'm not assuming anything in the case of the Japanese certification, if it says in lots of sites that the album sold 300,000 in Japan its obvious that it eventually went PLATINUM! How it could have sold over a long period if the album was released on 2001 and the information about sales was released in 2005 http://www.expo2005.or.jp/en/event/sarah.html Here is a picture of Sarah receiving the award: http://www.flickr.com/photos/33303496@N05/6330562992/

In the case of Taiwan, Actually yeah it's the RIT who grant the awards, but only after that an entertainment music company as Gold Typhoon applies for them! Here in the website of the RIT itself you can see that the most recent awards are given by this organization but clearly specifies that they were applied by companies as Gold Typhoon http://www.rit.org.tw/record/about/I_dol/INTLCOLD.htm

I think it's a loss to omit the Taiwanese certifications in Brightman albums as that country represented in the late 90s and early 00s a huge market for her.

I hope to reach an understanding

Best regards MK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.69.144.116 (talk) 00:16, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

I do not own any article. However, I watch these articles since there is a lot of nonconstructive activity, mainly introduction of unsourced (and in many cases erroneous) material. The Japanese certification is just one example. Yes, the album may have sold 300,000. But no, it isn't "obvious" that it was certified Platinum, unless RIAJ says so. RIAJ is very accurate in these things, so if their database includes no certification, none was granted. I don't know why, and you are welcome to send them an email and ask, they are known to actually answer (sometimes). I don't know what that photograph is, but surely it is not a reliable source.

Regarding Taiwan, the situation is similar. As you said, "it's the RIT who grant the awards, but only after that an entertainment music company as Gold Typhoon applies for them". Do you have a reliable source showing that Gold Typhoon applied, and was granted, a certification from RIT? If not, then this is an unofficial certification and should not be listed. --Muhandes (talk) 10:39, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Classics (Sarah Brightman album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151018041200/http://www.sarah-brightman.com/htm_news/2.php?ID=51 to http://www.sarah-brightman.com/htm_news/2.php?ID=51
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090331100454/http://www.a-m-a.jp/sarah/index.html to http://www.a-m-a.jp/sarah/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:39, 9 August 2017 (UTC)