Talk:The Supremes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This article is undergoing a featured article review to ensure that it meets the standards of a featured article. Please add a comment to assist the process and/or be bold and improve the article directly. If the article has been moved from its initial review period to the Featured Article Removal Candidate (FARC) section, you may support or contest its removal. When the review is complete, a bot will update the article talk page.
Featured article star The Supremes is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 29, 2005.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-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.
This article is part of WikiProject R&B and Soul Music, an ongoing effort to improve articles related to rhythm and blues, soul music, and their related cultures. The goal of the project is to bring this article, along with all others to featured status. If you have any questions, concerns or wish to participate you can visit the main project page here.
Featured article FA This article has been rated as FA-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
The Supremes is chosen to become one of the random selected biographies on the R&B and Soul Music Portal. A selected biography should be R&B and Soul Music-related, well-written and interesting. Featured, A-class and GA class are considered well-written. If you can update or improve The Supremes, please do. If you support or oppose this nomination, please leave comments
A particular revision of this article has been selected as a candidate for inclusion in the Wikipedia OmniMusica.
Peer review This Arts article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).

Contents

[edit] Expletive included

Someone has put two expletives into this article in the section "The New Supremes". I'm sure they don't belong there.

I read the section; I don't see janything. Perhaps it was already removed? --FuriousFreddy 18:23, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OOPs, sorry. Yeah I removed the expletives but neglected to read this page until today. The strange thing about it was that on the edit page the expletives didn't show up at all but they did appear on the article. The words appeared to have been encoded in the chart position in parentheses after the song title up a ldder to the roof. I'm not sure what the encoding might have been but I just copied the phrase to a plain text editor and copied it back and it deleted the expletives. 12:37 pm 29 March 2005

[edit] "Let Me Go the Right Way"

Florence Ballard sings lead on the studio version of "Let Me Go the Right Way." Ross|Diane Ross]]-led version is a live recording from a Motortown Revue performance; the single mix of "Let Me Go The Right Way" was recorded before the Motown artists left for the tour.

See review of song at allmusic.com [1]:

I have copies of both versions; the studio version is the one that was released as the single.

--User:B Touch 19:06, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wait. Maybe this IS Diane Ross singing this. According to Motown, "Buttered Popcorn" is the only single to feature Ballard, so I'll just take the attribtuion out for now. --b. Touch 06:08, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Supremes/Primettes name

The Supremes only recorded one single as The Primettes: "Tears of Sorrow" (with its b-side being "Pretty Baby."). This record was recorded for Lupine in 1960; the four girls signed with Motown on January 15, 1961 as the Supremes. The name change occured a few days before their signing (at Berry Gordy's behest) and before any of their records were released. The first Motown single the girls put out, "I Want a Guy" (recorded in late 1960 when they were still the Primettes, but not released under that name) bills them as the Supremes. All singles and albums thereafter follow the same. In fact, their first album was issued in 1962, and was called Meet the Supremes.

As a primary reference, please see both Dreamgirl by Mary Wilson. --b. Touch 05:40, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] June 28, 1967

Page 267 of Mary Wilson's Dreamgirl: My Life as a Supreme book lists the date of the Flamingo Hotel engagement as having occured from June 28, 1967 - July 19, 1967. Both this text and Gerald Posner's Motown book mention that Ballard was fired after the first show. Page 203 of the Wilson book lists an inprecise July as the general date; Since a paragraph on page 204 also sets up a time period of "That July", it is probably a simple mistake. The June 28 date corrabates with the date given on this article [2], as Ballard was actually fired during the early-morning hours of June 29. Please do not change this, July 23 is incorrect. --b. Touch 06:45, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ballard's final appearance on a Supremes single

As per Mary Wilson and page 208 of Dreamgirl: My Life As a Supreme, "Reflections" is the last Supremes A-side single (and the only "Diana Ross & the Supremes" era single) to feature Florence Ballard. This is incorrect, as "In And Out Of Love" was recorded with Ballard.

2. IN AND OUT OF LOVE Produced by Brian Holland and Lamont Dozier Track recorded in L.A. April 20, additional overdubs in Detroit June 12 and 13 and July 7, 1967 Working Title: SUMMER GOOD, SUMMER BAD Released as a single October 25, 1967 Included on the album REFLECTIONS (March 1968)


Please note: Ballard sings on "Reflections," and "In And Out Of Love." Barry White was quoted as saying that he was in the recording studio--sneaked in--while "Forever Came Today" was being recorded.

There is strong evidence that "Forever Came Today" was Ballard's last song? It was noted in "All That Glittered" that Wilson's voice was not considered suitable for the above song, so, Ballard's voice was used and multi-tracked. However, Ballard's voice can also be heard on "Aquarius/Let The Sunshine In" album on "Let The Music Play." The immediately above is stated in the Public Domain.



I agree but I heard that on "Forever Came Today" that it was Mary and Cindy but the mixed their voices with the Andantes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Biased?

I'm not really in full support of the idea that this article is that good. While, historically it is a good presentation of the facts about the group, I feel that it does nothing to give credit to Diana Ross's talents or accomplishments and again, as most pieces do, paints Mary Wilson and Florence Ballard as poor victims as those with the real talent who were sadly stepped on and made inconsequential by Ross via Gordy's ambition and their affair. Anyone agree?

I don't agree, at all. There is no bias for or against Ross, Ballard, or Wilson; the article simply states verifiable fact. The article doesn't intentionally paint either Wilson nor Ballard as a victim. What happened to Ballard is accurately retold here. It is true Ballard felt pushed aside; whether she actually was or not is uncertain and therefore not mentioned. Also, at no time does the article discuss Wilson's personal feelings about the Supremes). The article acknowledges that Ross' presence upfront was an important element of its success, which is very true. As far as Ross' accomplishments, this article focuses on The Supremes as a group, as it should (aolthough there probably should be some mention of Ross' solo career). To add several paragraphs of gushing praise for Diana Ross would actually add a bias that the article currently lacks. --FuriousFreddy 04:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] someday we will be together?

is that song based on the classical music Canon in D major? i heard a song that is based on that tune. i am not sure though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.3.237.194 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Floy-joy.jpg

Image:Floy-joy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:37, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Floy-joy.jpg

Image:Floy-joy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 17:15, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Floy-joy.jpg

Image:Floy-joy.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Supremesmss.jpg

Image:Supremesmss.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Featured status questioned

I have two major issues with this article, that, if not resolved, will force me to nominate it for removal from featured status. The first is that it lacks inline citations (there's only 25 in this article, even though it's so long). The second issue is that none of the images have fair use rationale. Orane (talk) 23:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The citations will be done, but will take time to properly complete. And several of the images actually _do_ have fair use rationales, and the others will get them. --FuriousFreddy 03:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
You know what, screw it. Delist the article. Make my life easier. --FuriousFreddy 03:42, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
No, it's o.k. Take your time with it. And I didn't mean to sound so bossy. Orane (talk) 05:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm just saying. People could help out, because I'm more than likely to be doing this myself. --FuriousFreddy 01:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I'll help when I have time. I'm working all weekend (damn it!), and classes begin on Monday for me. Orane (talk) 03:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Legacy section

I do wish whoever is deleting this section would stop doing so or at least discus it first. It's a perfectly reasonable contribution.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 09:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not reasonable, as it's unreferenced speculation. "Probably still the most successful girl group of all time in terms of actual records sold?" That's not encyclopedic. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I don't see why the word 'probably' is inappropriate. It's a well known fact that far more records were sold in the 1960s than now so it is an intelligent, reasonable thought.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 06:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
No, it's not a well-known fact. That section shouldn't be put in without a reference and better, more solid language. Encylcopedias don't deal with "probables" and "maybes". They deal with factual information. Unless you have sales records to directly compare Supremes record sales with Destiny's Child or whoever records sales (and trust me, you don't - no one has those both the people at Universal Music, because Motown didn't release them to the RIAA or anyone else) you don't have facts. You're making presumptions based upon your perception that more records were sold in the 1960s than today, and the word "probably" is always dangerous to use in an encyclopedia, unless it comes from someone being quoted about a subject. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 06:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
Well I can't help it if you are ignorant FuriousFreddy.  SmokeyTheCat  •TALK• 12:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
...and I can't help it if my "ignorance" causes me to keep that mess off the article. Have a nice day! --FuriousFreddy (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Is there an image for use on the R&B and Soul Music Portal which is not a fair use image and is a copyright free or public domain image? SriMesh | talk 22:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

No free-use images of The Supremes. There's one of Diana Ross by herself, however: Image:DianaRoss.jpg --FuriousFreddy (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disco Success

Well I noticed that it does not include the chart postions for the 70's line-ups fro 74-77 on Disco so I added them( look a discography). It shows they had 3 disco #1's and rest top 5 which is never talk about anywahere. The thing is this artcale saids basically the 70's line-up was struggling. Yes in terms of R&B and Pop in 1973 and onward but in Disco they had great success and should be noted on this artcle that they were succelful in Disco and had 3 #1 Disco hits. Also that the 2 line-ups found new success in Disco and had and that that they regained some of their fame in the form of the Disco hits. I am also edditing the top samples things and including the songs in the 70's that wer top 10 Disco and will provide a sample of them soon, Thank you, Saimaroimaru_2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Well I perceive to think that the reason why it was taken out because there's too much chart info. You can mention the songs hitting the top ten/number-one spot on the now-vacant Billboard disco singles chart. If you wanna put all the chart information from all Supremes songs from various charts, it'll be better to post it on their discography page than on the main article, just saying, you know? BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 10:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, not every one of the disco singles they put out came out in '75. LMAO! BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 10:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I undertsand the Disco charts are gone but its apart of their legacy wether we like it or not. Its a crime to not tell poeple the whole truth when its there to put up, part of remembering them and honoring these great singers is to put up all of their history not just one era of their music. I understand its a lot of info to add but The Supremes had a lot of top 10 hits and the chances of a consertive supremes fans going to the discography is 3 of 7 and they mainly just look at the 60's part of it.Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 20:24, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
LOL, well, it's there anyway, I had to correct a few things since you probably was the one who put "1975" at the end of every track, lol. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 00:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
Let me see. Oops guess I rushed when I was typing it. Thanks for putting the right year lol. I agree its their decision but they won't even have the choice if they don't know its there, thus a reason to include the 70's top10 and plus I added in some 60's top 10 that you forgot on singles and albums as you see.

Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 21:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How do I add samples?

How do I add samples to wikipedia so I can add them to the approaite song? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nvm

Nvm Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Let Me Go the Right Way" correction

"Let Me Go the Right Way" was orginally done by Florence Ballard and it was released at the time with her voice(studio versio).When they gave the lead to Diana to sing at Apollo they rerecorded it with her vocals.It should be noted that Flo did the orginal version while Diana did the second version and the second version is more availble than the first always appearing on greatest hits albums that inclede it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

You sure about that? Because I heard the song on YouTube and the versions I heard were led by DIANA. You can hear Flo's background from the back so unless it's some rare collectible, I'm gonna need better source than that. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 10:05, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Best in terms of...

They are the best felmale group interms of Number of #1's yet they never won a grammy, how sad. The songs are great anyone yet isn't it sad they aren't recongnised by whoever is in control of who gets a grammy? Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Sadly, I don't think they'll get any honor from the Grammys unless another original member suddenly passes away. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 02:56, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


I know right they were nominated twice yet never won and their vocally best songs didn't even get nominated at all how sad.I feel that this is the most underpreciated group in music history. Think about it.Never won any awards, the only recongize history is the 1964-1969 era. They are called Diana Ross and The Supremes yet they only went by that for 3 years at most of their 19 year existence( I am counting the two years as the primettes, 1959, and 1960), they hade numerous top ten albums, singles, and were invited to then racially dived places, they made music a lot easier for felmales to be succesful in, despite being the most famous motown group, they haven't had a proper movie about them and Dreamgirls was inspired from them at best, their 70's legacy is completely destroyed despite only haveing 2 bad years(1973 and 1974) in terms of singles versuses the 60's era where they had 4 years of singles bad luck(1959-1962), they had members with great work history like Susanye who also had the same range and control as Mariah Carey,the geatest hit albums are misleading when it saids the Number #1's I expect all not just the sixties and stoned love as a bonus , I want all the pop, Disco and R&B numbers one unless it said on the title pop number 1#'s in which they don't and among ther things.Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I guess it's partially because no one in Motown really paid attention to the Supremes during that period, plus Diana's career pretty much overshadowed anything they accomplish after that. That and Florence Ballard's tragic story. Maybe they'll get the recognition...we can all hope. BrothaTimothy (talk · contribs) 02:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FA

Im sorry guys and gals, im going to have to but this article for reassessment, its no longer up to FA standards, sorry. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 03:34, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


Why is that?

Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 19:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)