Talk:List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones/archive 1

Please stop adding to Elvis totals

To the people who constantly add to Elvis Presley totals: the scope of this article is Hot 100 achievements. Presley had a number of hits before the Hot 100 started.

If people insist on showing 17 number ones for Elvis, several things would have to be researched in order to present an accurate article!

• Should it be named to "Rock Era" achievements? If so, when should the Rock Era stats begin? The start of 1955? The week "Rock Around the Clock" hit number one? The first week Elvis hit number one?
• Which pre-Hot 100 chart should be used for the stats? Billboard published four of them before the Hot 100 started. Which is most important? How would multiple-chart number ones be shown?
• Lots of artists had chart feats before the Hot 100, not just Elvis. If we include pre-Hot 100 data, all artists need to be researched too. There are several artists who had multiple-chart toppers from 1955-1958, on all four singles charts. Are the people who repeatedly alter Elvis' stats willing to do this additional research? Do you have access to that information?

The Hot 100 has a definitive starting week, which makes most sense for the contents in this article - it's a clean beginning week with no asterisks or footnotes. Adding in pre-Hot 100 stuff starts to get confusing and messy and up for debate. Throwing in a "17" next to Elvis' name is not thorough nor accurate! Anyone going to Elvis' singles discography page can see the hits he had from 1954-1958.

If people want to expand this article or change the title or contents, I'll be happy to work with them, but to change one artist (Elvis) and one stat (#1's) compromises the accuracy of the page and is not encyclopedic. -- eo 23:50, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Check out Billboard.com's Chart Beat Chat section. There they talk about how Elvis has had 17 #1's on the Hot 100, etc. I think if Billboard themselves acknowledge this, then Elvis should be readded to this page.

Some Billboard journalists such as Fred Bronson mention 17 #1's, but he is careful to point out that it is "rock era" number-ones, not Hot 100 number-ones. As this article's scope is the Hot 100, then Presley's total is 7, not 17. And if the page is expanded to include all of his 17 (pre-Hot-100), then other stats (not just Elvis) need to be updated too (explained above). -- eo 17:26, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Additional Achievements section

It is posted that Amy Grant is the first Contemporary Christian act to reach number one with Baby Baby in 1991. Wouldn't she have been given this achievement in 1986's "The Next Time I Fall," which was a duet with Peter Cetera?

Good catch - I'll change it. - eo 22:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I think there ahould be a section put in for "most consecutive weeks in the top 10" i realized that big girls don't cry has been in the top 10 for 20 weeks so i wanted to see who has the record —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.251.116.73 (talk) 10:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Zac Efron and Andrew Seely

Zac Efron is given credit for having two of his debut singles chart at the same time, but isn't Andrew Seely also credited on those singles (giving him the same achievement)?

You're exactly right - Billboard modified the artist listing on the songs' 2nd or 3rd week (adding Seely). Article should be updated to reflect this. Hey, I'll do it right now! -- eo 15:38, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Expanded article

To put to rest (hopefully) Elvis totals arguments, I expended the article back to January 1 1955 and researched various achievements (not just Presley) that occurred before the Hot 100 began. These have been added to the article, hopefully this presents a more accurate picture. -- eo 16:29, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Mariah Carey

It has been said that Mariah Carey is the only artist to have a number one hit in every single year of any decade, the 1990's. How about in 1994? There is no data given about Carey's #1 Hot 100 song in 1994. Please clarify. Epzy 00:47, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Hero topped the Billboard Hot 100 from December 1993 to January 1994. katz 01:01, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It's obvious. Just look At The Data and Common sense would show. 7:01, 27 January 2006 (GMT)

Hero in 94 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.251.116.73 (talk) 10:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Wooly Bully

24.239.177.167 04:19, 28 November 2006 (UTC)EricOrbit wrote: (rv, there have been more besides them to accomplish this)

This is incorrect; "Wooly Bully" is the only single recognized by Billboard as the year's overall #1 despite never having topped the chart in any given week.

What's the source? What you're adding is not correct. I've removed it again. - eo 04:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

24.239.177.167 07:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)You're right; I missed two recent acts. Sorry!

Longest #1 single

24.239.177.6 22:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)I've added two length items, but ignored the longest #1 single in terms of time because I've seen "Hey Jude," "I'd Do Anything for Love," and "American Pie" each credited. The "American Pie" discrepancy is particularly absurd, because the 45 single was broken into halves, but absolutely no radio station played just "Part One" or "Part Two," and the song's #1 status was also determined by airplay. The criteria for this are messy.

Longest run on the chart

This fact is in the article: "The artist with the longest run on the Hot 100 is Frankie Valli. His first chart placement was as a member of the Four Lovers, whose "You're the Apple of My Eye" reached number sixty-two in 1956. In 1994, a remix of the Four Seasons' "December 1963 (Oh What a Night)" peaked at number fourteen, and finished its chart run the following year-- 38 years, 8 months and 2 weeks after the Four Lovers' single had debuted." However, this seems inaccurate in several ways. For one thing, the Hot 100 did not exist in 1956. For another, even if we ignore that, wouldn't Elvis Presley still have longer on the chart? He was on the Hot 100 in 1958 with "One Night" and his last appearance came in 2002 with the Junkie XL remix of "A Little Less Conversation." I'm not saying this is the longest span between first and last hit (I don't know that it is for a fact), but it would still be longer than Valli's, unless I'm missing something? GassyGuy 16:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

If there is any question we should remove it or hold off on posting it. That trivia section is getting way too long already.... I created this article to begin with cuz all of this crap was in the main Hot 100 article and the list was enormous. Some of the stuff in there is questionable in terms of notability in my opinion. - eo 16:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

64.131.199.179 20:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)If we're pruning, wouldn't the longest-lasting run in Billboard history be more notable than an LL Cool J song that had a big digital hiccup, or a "Contemporary Christian" achievement for a non-Contemporary Christian release? GassyGuy is right about Elvis, even in his robo-JXL version. I've also restored the double-#100 bit for its oddity, albeit in sharply edited form. Hope it works for everyone.

What you've done works for me. I actually added the Lopez/Cool J item because it was mentioned in Fred Bronson's column the week it occurred. The Amy Grant item I've removed before but it was re-added by someone so I figured it was best to keep it... may as well have a Christian music mention in the list for good measure. Overall I say it's fine now. - eo 20:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I still find it problematic to include pre-Hot 100 charts in this total. Are we sure, for example, that Nat "King" Cole doesn't have a longer chart span if we use his first pre-Hot 100 hit and take it through "Unforgettable?" If there's no source for this record, it should just be removed. This may be an entire article of trivia/worthlessness, but it still should conform to the policy on original research. GassyGuy 02:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

• On a side note, the factoid about "Unchained Melody" also claims to be about the Hot 100 and includes pre-Hot 100 data. GassyGuy 02:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I totally see your point. The only reason I even moved the start date of this article from 1958 to 1955 was because there was a constant back-and-forth with the Elvis-Presley-17-number-ones total (see discussions above). As far as longest chart span goes, I personally don't know this and the sources I own only go back to 1955. Soooo.... unless someone else has a verifiable answer, maybe this should be removed. - eo 02:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

64.131.199.179 17:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)Nat King Cole's first charting hit was November 1943's "All For You" (with the King Cole Trio). His chart run goes through 1966, and then the "Unforgettable" single, making 48 years. Because just about all "records" and "achievements" on the Billboard charts are entirely contextual, it's best just to add the extra info.

As for 1955 vs. 1958, Billboard includes all the earlier data in its record-keeping, finding the imprecision (multiple #1 hits in a given week) to be the superior historical record than an arbitrary division that leads to odd discrepancies (Buddy Holly's first Top 40 hit was released posthumously).

The thing is, keeping track of just the Hot 100 from its inception isn't arbitrary, but starting from 1955 is completely arbitrary. A lot of these records could also do with sourcing. Even though some of this data is being mined from various books, if it is being synthesized for the purpose of determining a record, that would make this article the first place to report said record, which is against policy. I think this should be kept to records which can be easily sourced elsewhere. GassyGuy 17:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

"Artists with the most consecutive number-one hits"

What exactly does this mean? Evil Monkey - Hello 09:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't understand the question. You don't understand "consecutive" or... what? - eo 00:56, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, the article leaves it pretty ambiguous. "Consecutive number-one hits" would actually imply that one hit came after the other with respect to the chart, not the artists' singles chronology (e.g., multiple instances of self-replacement at number one). It also leaves unclear if this is singles they released consecutively hitting number one or charted singles doing so (i.e., if the single releases for an artist went #1 hit, #1 hit, #1 hit, single failed to chart, #1 hit, #1 hit, #1 hit, #1 hit, would that artist's longest streak be four number one hits or seven?). It could do with some sort of explanation. GassyGuy 01:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

As GassyGuy says, the article is rather ambiguous as to what this record means. I guess it means most number ones hits for consecutively released singles by the same artist, which is what I was getting at with my renaming, which was reverted. Evil Monkey - Hello 02:09, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Other charts

Could all the references to other charts please be deleted? This article is about Billboard Hot 100 (!) achievements, not "most played in jukeboxes" (and other) achievements. Or rename the article, or remove all the references to artists who had "achievements" on other charts. – (empoor) 00:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

If anything I would suggest a renaming. The article started out strictly from the first week of the Hot 100 but then edit headaches ensued for months because of Elvis Presley's stats being split between pre-and-post Hot 100. The other charts mentioned are Hot 100 forerunners so I think it is beneficial to leave them in. Not sure what the new article title could be, tho. Suggestions? - eo 00:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion proposal tag

• Keep - Although many "list" articles in WP are cruft, I do think many can remain, if notable enough. The original reason this article was created was because these items (plus a lot more, which have been thrown out) were originally cluttering up the main Hot 100 article. If the general consensus is to remove all lists from Wikipedia then so be it, but in my opinion I'd like to see this one stay. - eo 19:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

64.131.199.179 21:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)* Keep - The existence of a singles chart necessarily leads to an interest in historical perspective and statistical summary. Like a list of baseball players with 500 home runs, or Academy Award-winning Best Pictures, among many others, this is basic and pertinent information within the topic.

• Keep. Official Billboard chart data, as compiled and listed by Billboard transcend this fuzzy non-concept called "cruft." I fail to see what criterion for deletion the proposer wishes to apply here. Since any editor is permitted to deprod, consider it done here. If the person who posted the prod tag wants this deleted, it will have to go through the AfD process, which I predict will not result in a deletion. 147.70.242.40 00:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Carrie Underwood

Is Carrie Underwood's new record of the longest time spent before hitting the top ten relevant enough to be added? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.178.246.107 (talk • contribs) 14:40, 24 May 2007

Songs that reached No. 1 on both the country and pop charts

I've removed this section; it does not belong with the rest of the article. Hitting #1 on the country chart is not a Hot 100 achievement. And why a country section when there could also be a R&B chart section? or a dance chart section? or modern rock chart section? etc., etc., etc. Doesn't fit. - eo 23:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

eo — No, but hitting No. 1 on both charts — as the section title clearly states — is an accomplishment. That said, perhaps as a compromise, would you support a separate article listing songs that hit the top of both charts (since it is referenced). Also, note that only No. 1 songs are listed; yes, there could have been all crossover hits, but such a list would be endless. And, if someone wanted to list songs that hit the top of the chart on both the Hot 100 and R&B/Soul/Urban Contemporary (or whatever it was called during its history) charts, the references are available. That's probably as far as I'd go, since most of the main components of music are contained within those three charts and then it would become too lengthy. [[Briguy52748 02:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)]]

A separate article sounds like a much better idea to me - giving focus in a section to one specific genre (or one specific chart) in this article could definitely lead to it becoming way too long. I can just imagine a huge R&B section, then a Latin chart section... I know that there are quite a number of Pop & Dance chart #1s too. - eo 11:43, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

eo — One of us should go ahead and get it started, man! [[Briguy52748 13:19, 15 August 2007 (UTC)]]

Most #1's in the US: What about Janet Jackson and Stevie Wonder????

Look, i added Janet Jackson and Stevie Wonder in the list of most US #1's. They have both scored 10 #1's in the US Hot 100 therefore they deserve to be in the list... But somebody keeps removing them......... WHY? please, whoever's doing this must stop ok.?

--Mysterious Spy 09:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

These two are already shown in List of artists by total number of U.S. number-one singles. They've been removed from here in the past for the sake of keeping the lists somewhat reasonable in length. - eo 11:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Article name

Can we get rid of that ugly parenthetical in the title? Couldn't this be at either List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and trivia or List of U.S. Hot 100 chart achievements and trivia? Either of those would look a lot better, I think. 138.69.160.1 19:00, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

I like "List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and trivia"... or better yet just get rid of "and trivia". Anyone else have an opinion? - eo 19:03, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Most versions

"The song with the most versions on the Hot 100 is "Unchained Melody," which charted with nine different performers: Les Baxter (whose version topped the chart); Al Hibbler; the Righteous Brothers, who recorded two separate versions that charted 25 years apart; Roy Hamilton; June Valli; Vito & the Salutations; the Sweet Inspirations; and Heart. ("Best Sellers in Stores" and "Most Played in Jukeboxes" charts)"

• Interesting fact, but since it uses other charts, it's not actually true. For example, "Some Enchanted Evening" also placed nine versions on various charts. "Star Dust" charted in at least thirteen different versions. Either using only the Hot 100 or using pre-Hot 100 charts, this is wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.59.53.61 (talk) 00:27, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• This article is about the Hot 100, and its four related 1955-58 charts. "Some Enchanted Evening" has only charted twice since 1955. "Stardust" has charted four times.

Once you go pre-'55, you'll find 10 charting versions of "After You've Gone," 11 of "Alexander's Ragtime Band," 12 of "It Had to Be You," 15 of "St. Louis Blues"... the charts (and the music industry) worked very differently then.208.120.6.144 (talk) 12:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Christmas Number Ones

"It has been suggested that Billboard Hot 100 Christmas Number One Single be merged into this article or section." Don't see any point to this. There's absolutely no cache or status to having "the Christmas #1" in America, as there is in Britain. There may as well be a "Billboard Hot 100 St. Patrick's Day Number One Singles" page. The page also begins in 1985 for no particular reason. But forget making it comprehensive or merging it here; the entire topic should be dumped.208.120.6.144 (talk) 12:43, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, I've nominated that article for deletion. - eo (talk) 12:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I just saw the page on Special:Newpages and this seemed a possible target for it, but if it's not interesting in the US, then dumping it is probably the best idea. Cheers --Pak21 (talk) 13:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Mariah Carey Didn't Thank God I Found You hit #1 in 2000. It should be put in the #1song by two different artists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.183.19.120 (talk) 02:26, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Please respect constructive edits

I respect that some work hard on these pages, but I came to this page looking for information that wasn't there... I added it in a constructive manner and my entire edit was reverted. Please discuss if you have problems with it. Manyanswer (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The lists are long enough and kept to a top-five unless there is a tie. These have been trimmed several times already as the article has gotten longer. There are other articles which show number-one totals beyond what is listed here. Additionally, some of the info you added was wrong, such as Prince's total and the combination of George Michael's solo work with Wham!. - eo (talk) 17:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Great, please edit the incorrect information and maintain the rest. I submit that having a top ten (at least) for such an important category is valid. There's no clear mandate for brevity and it's not difficult to skip past a few more lines. I came to this page seeking that information and it wasn't there. Let's add it. I also propose that having something saying "(tie)" is not necessary when the bullets aren't even numbered. Manyanswer (talk) 17:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Why should this one section be longer than all of the others? We can't put everything here, especially when there is already List of artists by total number of U.S. number-one singles and List of artists who reached number one on the Hot 100 (United States). - eo (talk) 17:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

This section is clearly more important than many of the others. A top ten is very reasonable. My case is perfect - I personally came here looking for the top ten of this category. I request that you show more etiquette: do not erase the edit without completing the discussion, correct any info that is wrong, and do not accuse me of vandalism on my talk page. "Assume good intentions" please.Manyanswer (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The cut-off has to be placed somewhere. Elongating these lists becomes ridiculous after a while, as editors keep extending them to the point where they can namecheck their favorite artist and the more names that get added, the more "ties" there are, so they get even longer. The sub-sections need to have some kind of conformity or the article becomes a mess. - eo (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Agreed... but right now there's not consistency since the first category has like 15 things in it. Is there any way to link directly to the longer list when someone gets to the list here? Having the link in the see also section is OK, but someone might not drop down there. Also, can we make the longer list a top ten or fifteen on the other page? I'll take a stab at it if you agree and then you can polish it. Manyanswer (talk) 18:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Let's do this. One of us can copy all of this on a subpage and work on it there. We can elongate some of the more important sections and keep others as they are. As it is now, I have been meaning to (again) prune the final section anyway because it is at comical proportions at this point. - eo (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

---

Per discussion above, sandbox page used to rework the article, below is discussion from the sandbox talk page

I've removed the following bulletpoints from the final section. If you believe any of these should stay, let me know:

• Many songs have topped the charts, dropped down, and then returned to number one. The only number one song to climb to the top spot three separate times during its chart run is "Le Freak" by Chic. The single was a number one hit for one week before being replaced, became number one again for two weeks, was supplanted for two weeks, and then returned for an additional three weeks, making six weeks in all.
• Elton John had at least one top forty hit every calendar year from 1970 (beginning with "Your Song") until 1999 (with "Written in the Stars", a duet with LeAnn Rimes). (However, this methodology credits one late 1995 hit that extended into the January 1996 chart, and another single whose chart run covered both 1997 and 1998.) Whether John's streak lasted 26 or 30 consecutive years depends on which criteria are considered; either figure would be the longest in chart history.
• Michael and Janet Jackson are the most successful siblings in Billboard Hot 100 history, with 23 solo number one singles (Michael with 13 and Janet with 10).
• Elvis Presley ("Heartbreak Hotel [1956] and "All Shook Up" [1957]), The Beatles ("I Want To Hold Your Hand" [1964] and "Hey Jude" [1968]), and George Michael ("Careless Whisper" [1985] (as Wham feat. George Michael) and "Faith" [1988]) are the only artists with two year-end number one songs. Paul McCartney participated in three year-end number one-songs (the above two Beatles singles, and Wings' "Silly Love Songs" [1976]).
• The chart week of October 10, 2003 marked the first time since its inception that the entire Top 10 was exclusively occupied by black individuals or groups with a majority of black members (Beyonce, Sean Paul, Nelly, P. Diddy, Murphy Lee, Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz, Ying Yang Twins, Chingy, Pharrell, Jay-Z, YoungbloodZ, 50 Cent, Fabolous, Tamia, Ashanti, Ludacris, Shawnna and The Black Eyed Peas).
• The 1997 album Come on Over by Shania Twain generated the most Hot 100 entries by a solo artist (8).
• The number one hit with the shortest running time is Maurice Williams and the Zodiacs' "Stay." Its running time is one minute, 37 seconds.
• "November Rain" by Guns N' Roses (1992) stands as the longest-running song to reach the top twenty of the Billboard Hot 100, at a length of eight minutes, fifty-seven seconds. The shortest charting record of the rock era was "Little Boxes" by the Womenfolk, which was exactly one minute long. The 1964 single reached number eighty-three.

My list

I was making my suggestions of what to edit from there at the same time! Here's my list, I'll comment again shortly.

• Michael Jackson's Thriller (1982-1984), Bruce Springsteen's Born in the USA (1984-1985) and Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814 (1989-1991) are the only three albums to produce seven top-ten singles.

See my comment on this below. - eo (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• The first number-one song on the Hot 100 was "Poor Little Fool" by Ricky Nelson (August 4 1958). The number-one song on the first week Billboard incorporated sales and airplay data from Nielsen SoundScan and Nielsen Broadcast Data Systems was "Set Adrift on Memory Bliss" by P.M. Dawn (November 30 1991). The first "airplay-only" song to reach number one (no points from a commercial single release) was "Try Again" by Aaliyah (June 17 2000).

I'd keep this one, I think it's pretty notable. - eo (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• When Lisa Loeb hit number one with "Stay (I Missed You)" in 1994, she became the only artist to top the Hot 100 before being signed to any record label.
• The largest act to chart in the Hot 100 is the 375-person Mormon Tabernacle Choir, whose version of "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" reached number thirteen in 1959.
• The longest title for a song to chart in the Hot 100 was "Medley: Intro "Venus"/Sugar Sugar/No Reply/I'll Be Back/Drive My Car/Do You Want to Know a Secret/We Can Work It Out/I Should Have Known Better/Nowhere Man/You're Going to Lose That Girl/Stars on 45" (41 words) by Stars on 45. It went to number one in 1981.
• The instrumental artist with the most Hot 100 hits is Herb Alpert. Thirty of his thirty-five charting singles are without vocals. He is also the only artist to reach number one with both a vocal ("This Guy's In Love With You" in 1968) and an instrumental ("Rise" in 1979).
• "November Rain" by Guns N' Roses (1992) stands as the longest-running song to reach the top twenty of the Billboard Hot 100, at a length of eight minutes, fifty-seven seconds. The shortest charting record of the rock era was "Little Boxes" by the Womenfolk, which was exactly one minute long. The 1964 single reached number eighty-three.
• The number one hit with the shortest running time is Maurice Williams and the Zodiacs' "Stay." Its running time is one minute, 37 seconds.
• Studio drummer Hal Blaine appeared on the most number one hits, thirty-nine in all, between 1961 and 1976.
• The only artist to have two separate singles chart for a single week in the number one hundred position is Jimmy Beaumont. He had a solo placement with 1961's "Ev'rybody's Cryin'," and another in 1975, with "Where Have They Gone" (the latter by Jimmy Beaumont and the Skyliners).
• In 1973, George Harrison's "Give Me Love (Give Me Peace on Earth)"' replaced Paul McCartney's "'My Love"; the two had been bandmates in the Beatles. In 1978, Andy Gibb's number one "(Love Is) Thicker Than Water" replaced "Stayin' Alive" by his brothers, the Bee Gees; the Bee Gees then did the same to his single with their "Night Fever"'. In 1986, Genesis' "Invisible Touch" was replaced in the top spot by the band's original lead singer Peter Gabriel and "Sledgehammer".
• Mariah Carey is the only artist to have a number one hit in every single year of the 1990's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manyanswer (talk • contribs) 18:58, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Ugh, I hate this one, you have no idea how many times it has been removed and readded. - eo (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• The largest act to chart in the Hot 100 is the 375-person Mormon Tabernacle Choir, whose version of "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" reached number thirteen in 1959.
• Steve Alaimo has had the most singles to chart on the Hot 100 (nine) without ever having reached the Top 40.
• The only artist to have two separate singles chart for a single week in the number one hundred position is Jimmy Beaumont. He had a solo placement with 1961's "Ev'rybody's Cryin'," and another in 1975, with "Where Have They Gone" (the latter by Jimmy Beaumont and the Skyliners).
• Mariah Carey is the only artist to have a number one hit in every single year of the 1990's.

Oops here it is again. Blah. - eo (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• Elvis Presley had the most double-sided hits, in which both the A-side and the B-side were charting singles (52). Presley also had the most consecutive top-ten hits, with thirty. ("Best Sellers in Stores" and "Most Played in Jukeboxes" charts)

I think that the first bullet can be pulled maybe into a small section on singles from the same album... that fits with the body of the article. I'll write that in and you can see if you agree. The Shania Twain point could be woven into that too.

My suggestions are just if you're trying to trim... we have a lot of agreement and it's entirely subjective but overall I just felt that the ones I suggest feel more like things that are less likely to be sought out or repeated by people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manyanswer (talk • contribs) 19:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Album section

Tell me if you think that's useful. I think it's brief and reads quickly so hopefully you agree. I have to go now but can check back in tomorrow for your comments. Thx for proposing the collaboration. Manyanswer (talk) 19:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, personally, I like the format you did. However, based on past experience, I see this being changed by other editors. One option is to type it out in a bulletpoint, like it was before. I like the sub-headings, however each one only has a couple of titles below it. So do we add more? The problem with some of these categories (including several that are already in the article) is that there may be one clear front runner (like the Shania Twain thing), but then second place will be, like, 10 albums all tied with the same amount. So then do you extend the list that long? The three albums with 7 top-10 hits could potentially be added underneath Shania Twain, then god only knows how many albums had 6 top 40 hits, or 5. I can do some research and see how many there really are. I don't think we should leave your format, then have only one album listed. - eo (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I definitely see your points. I'm personally OK with having just one thing under a heading. But it does invite people to add more and that's not the goal. I think these categories are such that people want to know the all time leader or tie, but the next ones down don't add value. I'm going to make a change now.Manyanswer (talk) 01:57, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Additional changes

I've cut the Most cumulative weeks at number one section to a top-five. Also, I've cut Most consecutive number-one hits, as there are just too many artists tied with 5 in a row and Most number-two hits has several artists tied with 4. In exchange, I'd like to go with Manyanswer's original suggestion to expand Most number-one hits to a top-10. - eo (talk) 14:09, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Looking good

I took a solid look and don't see anything crying for change... I think it's ready for prime time. Thanks! Manyanswer (talk) 02:52, 19 March 2008 (UTC)