Talk:Fleetwood Mac

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

An excellent article, whoever you are who wrote it. Well done. John

---

Take a look at the spanish version (if you can understand it). It's more or less the same thing. I'm a contributor to that version.

Regards,.

---

Like any other celebrity ariticle, the use of superlative descriptions is appropriate for fan magazines and not encyclopedia aricles. Unless there is clear documentation accompanying a particular claim (such as album sales or concert attendance), they do not belong here. We can be appreciative of our favorite artists without arbitrarily ranking them and violating Wikepedia's NPOV policy. --Blainster 19:58, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Sure; my point is that it is not any less POV to call Fleetwood "one of the more creative and enduring rock bands in the world" than it is to call them "one of the most creative and enduring rock bands in the English-speaking world". Both assessments are subjective and POV. I agree the right way to describe Fleetweed's stature is by reference to, say, album sales, position on various billboards and top 50 lists, critical response, etc. Neilc 04:13, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 McVie 2 "Cult" 3 Reformatting? 4 smoothing out the read 5 NPOV Violation? 6 Express Train 7 Recent edits and revertions 8 Rock N'Roll Band? 9 Top Heavy! 10 Trivia section 11 Pictures of the Peter Green era 12 Opening Sentence 13 A Fleetwood Mac WikiProject 14 Citations Needed 15 Fleetwood Mac discography 16 Tension in the band link 17 The Chain writing credit 18 Wheres the pictures? 19 Citations & References 20 The Munich accident 21 1971-74 "success" 22 Photo 23 Christine McVie 24 Orientated / Oriented 25 Tusk

[edit] McVie

The article repeatedly refers to "McVie" without making it clear which of the two McVies it's referring to. I'm guessing Christine, but I don't know much about the band and for all I know it may not even be the same one each time! There are also POV problems as noted above but this is is a big, big problem that makes the article very confusing.

Yes, Christine McVie throughout - I checked.... in the course of which, I found that a couple of songs attributed to "McVie" were actually co-written, so I've edited accordingly. I haven't checked whether the songs attributed to the others were really co-written, though.... TheMadBaron 03:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Cult"

Regardless of my personal feelings about the The Children of God, to call them a "cult" does not conform to NPOV. Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Cult.--Sojambi Pinola 00:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Not sure "Quasi-religious" is NPOV either. They are a religious group, however strange their methods. Bretonbanquet 13:57, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reformatting?

At some recent point, the format of the article was reworked such that the first paragraph is no longer an intro/summary preceding the table of contents. Hence, some of the information may feel a bit redundant. How do others feel about this change? I'm on the fence, myself. Perhaps simply retitling it "summary" or some similar word would take away some confusion. --Sojambi Pinola 00:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Eh. I was being picky. Actually, I think that's pretty cool as is. --Sojambi Pinola 00:21, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Before the marriage the group briefly considered renaming themselves 'Fleetwood Perfect'. Really??? I never heard that before. What's your source? --Sojambi Pinola 20:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I very much doubt that, since it's well-documented that Christine McVie hated her maiden name, and it's hardly likely she'd allow the band to be named that. Anyway, before the McVies married, she wasn't even in the band. Bretonbanquet 17:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] smoothing out the read

The article was severely jumbled, jumping from one point in time to the next, then addressing the previous time period, and it did that a few times too many. It was hard to follow. so I've made some adjustments, by all means add to them, but let's keep it chronological so as to avoid making the same mistakes, most of my edits deal with the beginnings of the group, and the line up changes.Jonah Ayers

The article does seem a little "gushy" in some areas, which I can work on but overall I found it fair and well written.

they produced what is considered their penultimate album, Then Play On, though Spencer was for the most part absent from these recording sessions.

That's an incorrect use of the word "penultimate." Penultimate means "second to last," chronologically. What did you really mean to say? --Sojambi Pinola 06:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Jonah/Walter, I'd agree that "nonpareil" is on the right track, if perhaps a tad highfallutin'. --Sojambi Pinola 00:02, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Penultimate / nonpareil / whatever you want to call it, there is precious little blues on "Then Play On". Apart from 'Show-Biz Blues' and a few bits of Jeremy's on 'Kiln House', Mac had moved on from the Blues as far as their recorded output is concerned. Bretonbanquet 13:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV Violation?

Maybe I'm not a nitpicker like others, but what's the POV issue here?--DodgerOfZion 07:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Dunno about NPOV but it needs some cleanup for encyclopedic tone. "The Mac carries on" and "as long as both shall live" sounds like fan-wording to me, not an encyclopedia article. There may be other examples I didn't spot. This is, of course, a recurring problem in articles on bands, and the Fleetwood Mac article is by far not amongst the worst offenders I've seen! --kingboyk 01:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Express Train

I removed the sentence about their name evoking an express train. It struck me as suspicious, though if you can cite it, feel free to put it back. --Sojambi Pinola 16:28, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits and revertions

What's the story with all these identical edits and subsequent reversions? Am I missing something, or is there a point to repeated edits which add nothing except the odd error? Bretonbanquet 23:42, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

There's a blocked editor, generally known as user:Jonah Ayers, who probably followed user:Sojambi Pinola to here from another article Biff Rose. He edits with sock puppet acounts, which often spoof other usernames, and from IPs. We've had to protect that article and so this has become another outlet for mischief. Sorry for the collateral damage. -Will Beback 00:02, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I was just a bit puzzled. Thanks for the update. It's a shame that some people can't find anything useful to do. Bretonbanquet 01:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, you may notice repeat edits/reversions by usernames that look a lot like mine. (different capitalization, one letter changed, etc.) Those aren't me, but a guy with an axe to grind and too much time on his hands. Yes, it's a shame. --Sojambi Pinola 19:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rock N'Roll Band?

Is Fleetwood Mac still a Rock N' Roll Band? Most of their modern music is pop.The Johnian 19:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

they don't have any modern music, and their old music was entirely pop, the usual chart stuff, songs like Everywhere and Diane. Why people think they are Rock is beyond me. AlfredG 4 June 06

That's because prior to being a pop band they were a blues band then a rock band. Bretonbanquet 19:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Fleetwood Mac is classified as a rock/light rock/pop group by it's album publishers. I would say they still are. Reinhardtzundorf

They're definatly a rock band..just softer on the sounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.31.229 (talk) 03:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Top Heavy!

With all the recent expansion of this article regarding the 1967-74 era, the later era looks really thin. Does anyone fancy balancing this out a bit? This was the big commercially successful era after all, and it needs filling out a lot. Bretonbanquet 20:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll have a shot sometime later this month, if no-one else does. --FleetfootMike 14:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia section

Anyone else think this part of the article should be scrapped? It provides barely any new information the rest of the article does not already provide. HK51 21:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the trivia comment about Bill Clintons election campaign should be deleted, it is adequately covered in the main article. Deckchair 15:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC) I have deleted the trivia comment about playing for Bill Clinton as it is contained within the main articl and does not need repeating. Deckchair 09:45, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pictures of the Peter Green era

Hey if anyone can obtain the copyright, I think some pictures of '67-70 era of Mac would help readers see how the band changed. Just suggesting. It seems only focused on the successful era. 19:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)~~

[edit] Opening Sentence

I think the opening sentence of Fleetwood Mac (formed in 1967) is an influential and commercially successful Anglo-American band that has had a revolving door of personnel, and varied levels of success. would read better with ...a high turn-over of personnel... or similar instead. While the meaning is obvious I'm not sure about the personnel being a revolving door... surely they passed through a revolving door? Anyways, I'm posting here cos it is the first sentence, I don't want to step on any toes and wonder what you think. Cheers. Monkey Tennis 09:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I think ...a high turn-over of personnel... reads far better than what's currently in the article, sounds more formal. HK51 09:35, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

OK I'll change it.Monkey Tennis 10:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Fleetwood Mac WikiProject

Does anyone feel that a Wiki Project should be started on Fleetwood Mac. What needs expanding upon is information about each album, and member, especially Mick Fleetwood. At the moment, most articles are just the plain facts, and not much trivia and information one could find just by typing Fleetwood Mac in Google.

Just a suggestion, any volunteers? 18:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Well that was me, and I've created The Very Best of Fleetwood Mac and Live (Fleetwood Mac album) album pages, and edited some others. Please could people help out, like with the 25 years: The Chain, and expanding on all topics...Woody1003, 15:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not writing here to disagree with anything above, but just to say thank you. It's a great article. Had some MP3s of Fleetwood Mac passed to me; didn't know them too well; looked up here and found out all the information I could want. You've done well, people, thank you. 193.203.149.107 22:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citations Needed

Can anyone find a way to rewrite "The two most successful periods for the band were:" so "most successful periods" is either quantitized or cited? Alvis 05:22, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fleetwood Mac discography

Would anyone object to breaking out the discography section into a separate article, Fleetwood Mac discography? --Mwalimu59 03:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Also made a minor revision to {{Template:Fleetwood Mac}}. Finally, for consistency with how articles about other bands are organized, I'd like to recommend that Fleetwood Mac single chart positions be merged into it. --Mwalimu59 17:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

When I created Fleetwood Mac single chart positions I had it in mind to make some kind of discography article and put it all together, so I'd agree with the above proposal - seems logical. Bretonbanquet 19:43, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I’ve done it. The table at Fleetwood Mac discography was cut and pasted from Fleetwood Mac single chart positions. I checked to make sure that all the data from the list being replaced was in the table – it was. I’ve also changed the reference at Template:Fleetwood Mac. Jaksmata 21:25, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tension in the band link

This link was added into the article: http://wc6w.50webs.com/wc6wvint/index.html?fr43.html I am unsure whether this link qualifies for encyclopedic inclusion. Though the link has what appears to be newspaper coverage, the sources are not stated. As well, the remainder of the site appears to be commercial. I think it should be deleted, but perhaps the news stories could be introduced. SteinAlive | ☎ | ☉ 07:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Chain writing credit

I undid a revision by Pittworship claiming that although all five band members were credited with writing "The Chain" from Rumours, Stevie Nicks wrote the lyrics herself. Without a specific citation, I'm not comfortable leaving something like that up there that conflicts with known sources. Henrymrx 15:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Nicks did write the lyrics, but the rest of the band wrote the music after piecing together various things each had written. So it's definitely a five-way writing credit, as widely sourced. If there's a specific, reliable source for Nicks having written the lyrics (not a message board, for instance), it could be included, but not at the expense of the full credit given to all five members. Anyway, it's probably an issue to be cleared up at the song's own article. Bretonbanquet 15:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wheres the pictures?

Article looks too plain needs pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Blizzard King (talk • contribs) 00:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Add some then. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Citations & References

See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags Nhl4hamilton (talk) 09:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Munich accident

Rainer Langhans, former member of a well known German commune, mentions in an article and in his autobiography (February 2008) that he and his former girl-friend Uschi Obermaier met Peter Green in Munich, where they invited him to their (then well known) "High-Fish-Commune".

Langhans and Obermaier were not really interested in Peter Green. They just wanted to get in contact with Mick Taylor.

Langhans and Obermaier wished to organize a "Bavarian Woodstock". They wanted Jimi Hendrix and "The Rolling Stones" to be the leading acts of their Bavarian open air festival. They needed the "Green God" just to get in contact with "The Rolling Stones" via Mick Taylor.

Read more about it, in the "Rolling Stone"-Forum (in German): Greens Trauma-Nacht mit deutschen Kommunarden 1970.

By the way: Rainer Langhans' girl-friend Christa Ritter tells she's gonna make a movie about Peter Green's Munich accident: Peter Green’s (Ex-Fleetwood Mac) Trauma-Nacht mit deutschen Kommunarden 1970. --Popmuseum (talk) 08:06, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 1971-74 "success"

The paragraph in the intro that compares the 1971-74 period with the preceding and succeeding periods in terms of success is thoroughly misleading and should be changed. No charting singles? Albums that barely charted. How does this compare with Rumours or the singles from the Green era? Also, why on earth does it say "Jazz rock"? Bare Trees - Jazz rock? I'd like to see a cite for that... Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Album sales is unrelated to billboard chart.

Ok, first, sign your comments. Second, a large proportion of the album sales for the 1971-74 albums took place after the success of Rumours, so you're going to have to do better than "album sales", and by that I mean a cite, or it will be removed as unsourced.

How about the Jazz Rock thing? Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:52, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The Bob Welch-era Fleetwood Mac albums sold moderately well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crstsk (talk • contribs) 23:15, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Exactly, only moderately well. So it's misleading to compare that period with the zillion-selling late 70s or the chart-topping singles of the late 60s. Which was my original point. It needs to be made clear that, comparitively speaking, 1971-74 was not a success. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I see your thought process. The Peter Green-era Fleetwood Mac albums did not sell well, good for singles though. Crstsk (talk) 23:58, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they had high chart hits all over Europe and were a highly successful live act in the late 60s, which can't be said for 71-74. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:06, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Photo

There is currently a photo of Nicks and Buckingham, where there ought to be a picture of Fleetwood Mac. I accept that this is better than nothing, but a band photo is needed. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

free image please.

I can see you're a person of many words, do you care to elaborate on that? Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Fleetwood Mac members are living persons and it is possible to obtain a free image per Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria # 1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crstsk (talk • contribs) 23:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I realise that, I've been here a while now. So it shouldn't be hard for someone to find one, right? My point is that the picture should be of the whole band, not two members. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Christine McVie

She is not listed as a band member.. is this official? I know Buckingham famously left but they all still tour no? Did in 1997.. was she on the last tour - 2003? Buckingham is still listed as a member. - maxrspct ping me 13:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

She left in 1998, and hasn't toured or been an official member since then. Buckingham has been a full member since his return in 1997. Bretonbanquet (talk) 16:45, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh no surely not! The best voice.. Oh Christine go lend your skillz again! --maxrspct ping me 13:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orientated / Oriented

With regard to the recent insistence of some anonymous editors to insert "oriented" in place of "orientated" in the lead paragraph of this article, this situation has now been evaded by a rewording edit from another user. However, the article is written in British English, as per WP:ENGVAR, and "orientated" (from "orientation") is the correct term in that context. "Oriented" is an Americanism. Bretonbanquet (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tusk

I changed "limited commercial success" to "lesser....." because, to my knowledge Tusk, had sold by the early 80's, 4 million copies worldwide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.220.184.48 (talk) 22:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)