Talk:Wet Wet Wet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-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.

Contents

[edit] Love Is All Around

I have removed the assertion that 'only Pellow's insistence on its deletion prevented it from equalling and breaking Bryan Adams' record'. It is impossible to be certain of that. For a start, existing copies were not recalled; otherwise the song would have dropped out of the charts completely. In fact there were enough still in shops to keep the song in the charts for another three months. Also Whigfield released 'Saturday Night' that week and it went straight in at number one because it had built up a following in holiday resorts throughout the summer - that may have made a tiny contribution to Wet Wet Wet not breaking the record! 195.188.40.144 (talk) 11:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess you are right. Recently I read in a book (A Sweet Little Mystery, Wet Wet Wet, The Inside Story by Brian Beacom, 1995, p. 175) that their manager spread the rumour that they would take the single out of the shops. He obviously wanted to boost sales that way and thus help them break Bryan Adams' record. So I think it would be better to take the whole passage about this out of the article. - Sylvia Anna (talk) 20:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone added that the song would not have broken the record, which was quickly removed by another editor. The fact that the song "remained in the top 40 for the remainder of the year" due to copies that were "still in the shops" is evidence of this. There were still plenty of copies left, meaning the song would have remained at #1 if it was going to anyway. The deletion had nothing to do with it falling off the top and any hint that it did is false. 74.65.39.59 (talk) 23:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I can only repeat myself: there is evidence - see above - that the whole deletion thing was just a rumour. I would delete the whole section about this alleged deletion. Or I might add something about this evidence.--Sylvia Anna (talk) 19:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Angus Cameron

Angus Cameron is not a former member of Wet Wet Wet.

[edit] Genre

I think it is a pity that this band is only categorised in pop music. They should also be in soul music. If there is no category like soul pop or pop soul, couldn't they just be put into two categories? -- Sylvia

[edit] Little Help From My Friends

Are you guys sure that they did a cover? None of their albums have it listed and the 80's version I am familiar with is by the Canadian band Kick Axe. cdscottie

None of their albums? Even End of Part One: Their Greatest Hits? - Dudesleeper · Talk 09:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

It was a UK number one for heaven's sake - are you suggesting everyone else imagined it because you don't remember? 195.188.40.144 (talk) 11:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Change of title

Isn't the band called WetWetWet instead of Wet Wet Wet? Should probably change name of page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.170.197.189 (talk) 11:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

They are called "Wet Wet Wet". -- 84.164.157.49 21:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Popped In Souled Out.jpg

Image:Popped In Souled Out.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)