Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Rumours/archive1

Fleetwood Mac's Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham in 2003

Rumours is the 11th studio album by the British-American rock band Fleetwood Mac. Released in 1977 by Warner Bros. Records, it was produced by the band with Ken Caillat and Richard Dashut. Expanding on the band's self-titled 1975 album, the music includes a mix of electric and acoustic instrumentation, accented rhythms, guitars, and keyboards. The lyrics, written in the aftermath of several breakups among the band members, concern personal and often troubled relationships. Rumours became the band's first number-one album on the UK Albums Chart and topped the US Billboard 200, supported by the singles "Go Your Own Way", "Dreams", "Don't Stop", and "You Make Loving Fun". It became the ninth-best-selling album of all time, with more than 40 million copies worldwide. It garnered widespread acclaim from critics, with praise centred on its production quality and vocal harmonies. In 2020, Rumours was ranked seventh in Rolling Stone's list of the "500 Greatest Albums of All Time". (Full article...)

Comments and edits are welcome. - Dank (push to talk) 03:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• "In July 1975, Fleetwood Mac's self-titled album was released to great commercial success" - Maybe I'm being daft, but some people might presume that self-titled meant they named their previous album themselves, and not that the title was eponymous.
  • If I was the lowest-common denominator, I'd get more confused by eponymous, but done.
• "The hit single "Rhiannon" gave the band radio exposure. The members" - hit single from what, and the members of what?
  • Added record and line-up. Line-up logically follows band mention, so it's clear. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Following six months of non-stop touring, the McVies finalised their divorce proceedings after almost eight years of marriage" - they toured for six months, got married for almost eight years, and then finalised their divorce?
  • That ended the marriage. Worded more nicely. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "who had joined the band before Fleetwood Mac after guitarist Bob Welch left" - this makes no sense.
  • It's the album, not the band, hence the italics. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could it benefit from "before Fleetwood Mac, and after guitarist Bob Welch left"? Parrot of Doom 23:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Used "after the departure of Bob Welch". RB88 (T) 23:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • It still needs clarifying - right now, some people might assume that "joined the band before" meant they joined another band altogether. Parrot of Doom 00:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Used your initial suggestion. RB88 (T) 00:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "were having an on/off relationship that led them to fight often, an aspect neutralised only when they worked on songs together." - did they fight because their relationship was on/off, or was their relationship on/off because they fought?
  • Exactly what the sentence says. Because of the relationship. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok, could you clarify in the prose exactly what the "aspect" is though? Parrot of Doom 23:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, it's the fighting which immediately precedes it. I thought it was clear and logical. RB88 (T) 23:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • "an aspect" is just left dangling though, I'd normally expect to read "an aspect of 'x'" Parrot of Doom 00:25, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Split the sentence and explained. RB88 (T) 00:36, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
            • Much better Parrot of Doom 00:43, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Press intrusion into the band members' lives led to inaccurate and sometimes libellous stories" - an example or two would be nice.
  • Added three just for you. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Despite the hostile environment," - but previously, the article says that the couple were able to work together on musical matters?
  • The Press. It followed the intrusion bit so I assumed it was logical, but added the word. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Possibly lose "environment" now, or reword to "despite the hostile environment created by such press intrusion" (or similar)? Parrot of Doom 23:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done. RB88 (T) 23:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "all parties remained in Fleetwood Mac, but had no time to come to terms with their new reality before recording for a new album started" - what was their new reality?
  • Separations and gossip. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is done btw. RB88 (T) 23:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "At the start of 1976, some new tracks were hastily crafted in Florida after the Fleetwood Mac tours." - by whom?
  • A passive I must have missed when combing through. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Founding members Fleetwood and John McVie formed Seedy Management to represent the band and decided against working with their previous producer Keith Olsen, who had a different opinion about the rhythm section's emphasis in songs" - what was different about his opinion?
  • He wanted lower. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "In February 1976, Fleetwood Mac convened at the Record Plant in Sausalito, California with engineers Ken Caillat and Richard Dashut" - staff engineers?
  • I don't think it matters in the grand scheme of things, but added hired. Record Plants are just buildings for use with no personnel. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Its often the minor details that make it more engaging, and more impressive :) Parrot of Doom 23:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "All members, apart from Fleetwood, initially complained about the environment, but the drummer stood firm and did not allow them to record from their homes" - nobody has yet mentioned they wanted to record from their homes. Was this something they wanted to do?
  • Reworded and put the homes bit before the drummer. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not quite happy with the grammar but I'll look at it later. Parrot of Doom 23:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "He and Christine McVie started crafting songs by first jamming with guitar and piano." - what did they do after "first" jamming? A second stage is implied.
  • Explained it was the formative stages and took out first. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "The working title used in Sausalito was Yesterday's Dreams" - working title of what, album or track?
  • The record. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "The open budget by Warner Bros. Records allowed for self-indulgence" open-ended budget? Did it specifically allow for self-indulgence, or were the band members self-indulgent?
  • Done. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Dashut has noted the sleepless nights and the extensive use of cocaine throughout the recording process." - again, a date would be nice if available, and it might be better to write "album's production", as recording process could be confused with the recording of an instrument.
  • I simplified it more. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Chris Stone, one of the Record Plant's owners, has indicated that Fleetwood Mac brought "excess at its most excessive" by taking over the studio for long and extremely expensive sessions; he stated, "The band would come in at 7 at night, have a big feast, party till 1 or 2 in the morning, and then when they were so whacked-out they couldn't do anything, they'd start recording" - that really needs a date.
  • Yeah, ok. I'll compromise on this one. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Buckingham has pointed out that Fleetwood Mac created the best music when in the worst shape; he indicated that, in the end, the tensions between band members informed the recording process and led to "the whole being more than the sum of the parts"" - pointed out - that's an opinion that appears to be a statement of fact. Maybe "buckingham has opined..."?
  • Opined always sounded off to me, I don't know why. Used suggested. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "John McVie tended to clash with Buckingham about the make-up of tracks, but both admit to achieving good outcomes." - by make-up, do you mean the production of each track, or the order in which they appear on the album? And would 'songs' be better than 'tracks'?
  • Done.
• "The harmonies between the duo and Christine McVie worked well " - does a harmony exist between instruments, or is it a harmony of instruments? I'm uncertain, thought I'd ask.
  • The link was vocal harmonies, so I extended it. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "of the recording room" - "studio" is the correct terminology for that room, "control room" is where the actual recording occurs (ie - where the desk is)
  • Yeah, studio is better. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Buckingham performed close to the rhythm section, while Christine McVie's keyboards were "somewhat isolated" from the drums." - is this a physical separation, or a musical one?
  • Explained better about distance. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "Different combinations of microphones and amplifiers were used for each instrument. Caillat and Dashut took around nine days to perfect the capture of Fleetwood Mac's sound" - using combinations of microphones and amps is perfectly ordinary in a studio environment, but you only really use a combination of microphones for a drumkit and an acoustic piano, so "different" may be redundant. It's probably better to switch the two sentences around, and join them.
  • Done. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok, but did they experiment for nine days, or did it take nine days to record the instruments? Parrot of Doom 14:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • It took nine days to perfect the methods of recording Fleetwood Mac , e.g. setup. Nothing was recorded the first nine days. RB88 (T) 18:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Happy with this? RB88 (T) 19:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "As the studio sessions progressed, personal challenges started to affect the band. " - you might want to lose this. Stick to explaining what the band members did and maybe mention the pressurised environment. The reader will figure it out.
  • I did think about it, but in the end it seems a nice joiner and helps the flow. My reasoning is that it's a sacrifice for the prose's quality. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "while the men slept at the studio's lodge in the adjacent hills" - don't suppose you have a name for those hills, do you?
  • Well, Sausalito's. It follows logically from all the mentions of the city and its culture. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes but the hills may have a name that locals might recognise. Not a biggie. Parrot of Doom 14:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • None of sources give a name, and I wouldn't like to speculate. RB88 (T) 18:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "using microphones least susceptible to sound loss and interference." - that's a bit vague, as the two terms can apply to a microphone both electrically, and acoustically.
  • Simplified it, but the source says "leakage", hence sound loss. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmmm. The source probably isn't technically knowledgeable. I suggest generalising to "most suitable microphones", or "best microphones to hand", or something similar. Leakage and sound loss could mean all manner of things that would lead a reader to speculate. Parrot of Doom 14:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • The source is Sound on Sound, one of the most technical magazines out there, devoted entirely to recording. It's pretty much all terminology, it's that knowledgeable. Leakage always refers to sound loss when recording, i.e. not the complete capture of what's being performed. RB88 (T) 18:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Hmmm, there are all kinds of terms used. I'm an audio technician myself, and there are significant differences between, for instance, US and UK terminology. The author might be referring to improper polar patterns leading to incorrect capture or acoustic inteference, high electrical noise, poor shielding through to the control room, poor quality amplification, etc. If we can't link to the precise terminology, I'd just generalise. Parrot of Doom 19:04, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Used: "The vocal harmonies between the duo and Christine McVie worked well and were recorded using the best microphones available to capture a complete sound", i.e. no leakage but with no reader ambiguity. RB88 (T) 19:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Caillat and Dashut then experimented with the audio track mixes of the demos recorded" - what happened to these experiments?
  • They follow the sentence, i.e. Nicks's more abstract instrumentals, and "Songbird". RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok could you just remind the reader of when, or where the demos were recorded? Parrot of Doom 14:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • There's no specific timeframe for each demo or song in the sources, only studio times. The demos essentially refers to all that had been recorded in Sausalito up to that point. I would guess after a month and a half considering they were there for over two, but again it'd be speculation. RB88 (T) 18:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Its just a "demos they'd already recorded" or something-type-thing. I was confused by mention of the demos, I'd forgotten about them. Just a little kick up the arse for the reader. Parrot of Doom 18:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Umm, does that mean it's fine now? I'm a bit confused. RB88 (T) 19:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Christine McVie's "Songbird", which needed a concert hall's ambience" - who thought it needed that?
  • Follows engineers experiments, but added a mention for them. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "Christine McVie and Nicks took a break, and returned to record the remaining vocals" - i copyedited this slightly, but should it be "however, christine mcvie..." - did they return to the studio with the others, or simply stay away after the tour? Parrot of Doom 22:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I sorted this out so it flowed better. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm still not clear, did they return to record and take a break shortly after, or did they just take a break starting immediately after the tour? Parrot of Doom 14:01, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I clarified that section. Immediately after. RB88 (T) 18:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • This is done btw. RB88 (T) 19:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• "In autumn 1976, while still recording, Fleetwood Mac showcased tracks at the Universal Amphitheatre in Los Angeles." - presumably album tracks?
• "Warner Bros. confirmed the album details in December and chose "Go Your Own Way" as the promotional single for release in January 1977" - confirmed to whom?
• "The advance order for Rumours of 800,000 copies became the largest in the label's history" - became, or simply was? Is it still?
• "The marketing success owed much to Warner Bros.' aggressive promotional campaign for Fleetwood Mac in 1975, in which links with dozens of FM and AM radio stations were formed across America and tactics such as free T-shirt giveaways were introduced." - I have a feeling that this and the previous sentence should be worked in together.
• "John McVie suggested the title to the band because he felt the members were writing "journals and diaries" about each other through music." - suggest mentioning this before the album release or pre-orders
• "The front cover features a stylised shot of Fleetwood and Nicks dressed in her "Rhiannon" stage persona, while the back has a montage of band portraits, all taken by photographer Herbert Worthington" - all shots on the album, or just the montage?
• "it began at the University of California, Berkeley where the band recorded part of the album" - I think there should be a 'had' in there Parrot of Doom 00:32, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • ALL DONE. Trimmed a bit of the fat as well. RB88 (T) 05:29, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Comments'leaning to support (later edit - moving resolved points to talk page, will strike and support when finished with the article) Parrot of Doom 22:16, 17 January 2010 (UTC) There's a lot of good information in here, but its somewhat lost in the prose, which is a little disconnected and unclear. I'd be happy to help out on this, but thought I'd ask first before wading in.[reply]

• There are many more examples. As I've said above, I don't think these obstacles are insurmountable and once the prose is sorted I'll probably support, but best to ask first before making a pig's ear of the facts. Parrot of Doom 13:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Parrot. Look forward to the next installment. If only others were as considerate as you. RB88 (T) 19:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok. I think I'll have to buy this album, I only have Tango in the Night (doesn't everybody?) More to come. Parrot of Doom 23:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Don't tell me you've never heard "The Chain"?? RB88 (T) 23:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have :) Have you ever heard of The Alan Parsons Project, Eye in the Sky, "Sirius"? Another famous tune by a 70s hippy :)
          • I like it. Sounds like Eno's high brothers. RB88 (T) 23:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• ""Dreams" includes sparser spaces and a recurring two note pattern on the bass guitar. " - sparser [fewer] spacings might need a bit of explaining. Rests, or note length?
• "Nicks wrote the song in five minutes using a guitar and led the vocals while the band played around her." - I presume she put pen to paper, not a guitar - or did she ad-lib it, and then write it down later?
• ""Never Going Back Again", was also created as a simple acoustic demo, titled "Brushes", which Fleetwood Mac then made more layered." - can you expand on "more layered"? More audio tracks, more instruments, more harmonies, etc?
• "hum choir" - I think I know what this is, could you explain in brackets?
  • Well, it's a choir of humming. Don't see what ambiguity there is or what additional explanation to write. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • It seems a little idiomatic. For instance, I can't find many references to this phrase with a quick search, which is what anyone unfamiliar with the term is likely to do. Parrot of Doom 13:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I ended up removing that sentence. It did seem a bit general and idiomatic. Brian had a problem with its meaning as well, so it's probably for the best. RB88 (T) 14:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "the song includes both acoustic and tack piano, in which external objects are present to change its sound output." - I don't understand this
• "The album's tempo slows down with "Songbird", conceived solely by Christine McVie using a nine foot Steinway piano.[7]" - I don't think tempo is the right word here - perhaps "pace"?
  • Change in tempo is what's mentioned. Anyway, tempo and pace are synonyms where it comes to musical composition. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tempo is however usually used with reference to the bpm of a particular song - "Relative speed or rate of movement; pace; time; spec. the proper or characteristic speed and rhythm of a dance or other tune (in phr. {trli}tempo di gavotta, tempo di marcia, tempo di minuetto, etc.). ", whereas pace is described by the OED as "In extended use: to move or develop (something) at a particular rate or speed." Better to use the generic term. Parrot of Doom 13:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done. RB88 (T) 14:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "while the rhythm section plays interlocking notes and beats." - what does interlocking mean in this context?
  • I.e. playing around and to each other's beat instead of the song's or the clavinet's. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would 'interwoven' perhaps be a better choice then? Parrot of Doom 13:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Interwoven reminds me of Manchester cotton mills. I checked synonyms and tbh can't find a better one. To me interlocking seems intuitive, especially in relation to drum and bass. RB88 (T) 14:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"Rumours was an overwhelming commercial success and became Fleetwood Mac's second US number one record, following the 1975 eponymous release" - who was overwhelmed?

• "It stayed at the top of the Billboard 200 for 31 weeks" - consecutive, or total?
• "In February, the band and co-producers Caillat and Dashut won the 1978 Grammy Award for Album of the Year" - I could be wrong but I believe that this is the first mention of these engineers being co-producers?
  • First sentence of Studio sessions. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • To be a producer however, and to participate in the production of an album, are often two different things. As a cameraman or soundman I'm involved in the production of television, but I'm not a producer or even co-producer. Parrot of Doom 13:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Isn't this enough "The production duties were shared by the three parties"? RB88 (T) 14:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • What does the album insert credit them as? I'm just saying, one can be involved in the production of something, but that doesn't automatically make one a producer. Parrot of Doom 17:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "By March, the album had sold over ten million copies worldwide, with over eight million in the US alone." - units or copies? Might be better to stick to one, although I believe that "units" is a US thing, and "copies" a UK thing. WP:ALBUM might be able to clarify that.
  • Again units and copies are synonyms worldwide (and it helps with non-repetition). Billboard and Music Week tend to use both. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well it isn't a big deal for me but I believe you'll have people changing those at will - I've had the same thing on the Floyd albums I've edited. Parrot of Doom 13:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Maybe your older clientele is not used to yout' speak like "units". ;) RB88 (T) 14:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "By the time of Fleetwood Mac's 1997 reunion tour, it had sold 25 million copies worldwide" - small point, but the tour didn't sell 25 million copies
• "Rumours is currently the fourteenth best-selling LP in UK history and is certified 10X platinum by the British Phonographic Industry, the equivalent of three million units shipped" - LP, or album? Remember, CDs came out in 1983-ish

• No professional reviews in the infobox? There should be. WP:ALBUM offers the choice of reviews in the infobox, or reviews in a separate template. See Wish You Were Here (Pink Floyd album) for instance.
  • Don't get me started on this. I was one of the main editors who discussed this and we got consensus, then they decided to remove the apparently POV "favourable", "mixed", "unfavourable" from the new template, which is NOT compulsory btw ("The bulk of the information should be in prose format, though the text may be supplemented with the {Album ratings} template"), thus creating bias and even more POV in favour of those who give shiny stars. I only use prose these days, call it a protest or common sense. Also, wait in anticipation till they come and mutilate your own articles. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh they've tried already with Animals. I'm not having some silly template mucking up the prose. I don't see anything wrong with reviews in the infobox, they can be very useful. I'll leave it up to you. Parrot of Doom 13:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm on a review ratings hiatus. As I said to them on WP:Albums, I'm not in a mood to give prominence to those who just happen to have nice graphic renderings. And anyway, this one would only have THREE out of ten reviews in the box. RB88 (T) 14:07, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "The album has earned acclaim from media outlets since its release. " - earned could be seen as POV - received would be better, or "critically acclaimed"
• "In less positive reviews..." - this might sound as though the writer is adding POV here. I'd suggest a "However, ...." or similar.
• "The album featured at number four in the The Village Voice's 1977 Pazz & Jop critics' poll, which aggregates the votes of hundreds of prominent reviewers.[34]" - Critical or Legacy? Your choice.
  • Critical. It's an aggregated list of all the critics' views in 1977, much like Metacritic these days for example. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• "In a retrospective piece, Allmusic's Stephen Thomas Erlewine noted that, regardless of the voyeuristic element, what made the album "an unparalleled blockbuster" was the quality of the music; he concluded," - I'm not sure about "what made the album", again, it could be viewed as POV. If he actually said that, just expand the quote.

• General comments. Its a great article and once the above points are addressed I'll be supporting. I might just add, has the album had any notable influence on other artists that might warrant mention? Also, is there a photograph of an instrument, or instruments, that might be used to illustrate the article? Something interesting they did, or perhaps the studio they worked in? Oh and another audio clip would be fine for me, this is an important album so nobody will complain about 2 or 3 clips. Parrot of Doom 01:12, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added a Sausalito photo and another sound clip. Instrument photos wouldn't add much. As for other artists, there were minor ones. I kept it summative and focused either on the tribute and genres. RB88 (T) 03:10, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• • • Ok I'm happy. There are one or two things I'm not yet clear on, and although I'd like to go through it two or three times making minor changes here and there, as it is now I'll give my Support. Oh, and you cost me a few quid doing this as I bought the album, so you owe me money. Parrot of Doom 17:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]