Talk:Cream (band)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

1st sentence of article

I don't know who made the claim regarding Cream "was" as being "grammatically incorrect".

Please, please, please.

Cream is, not Cream are. Cream was, not were. "When a noun names the title of something or is a word being used as a word, it is singular whether the word takes a singular form or not." ( http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/plurals.htm ) "A collective noun, or group noun, is a noun which designates a group of people or animals. Crew, committee, gang, government, audience, family, and herd are all collective nouns. When such a group is considered as a single unit, its collective noun is used with a singular verb and singular pronouns: The committee has reached its decision." ( http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/dictionaries/english/data/d0081767.html )

Anyone else out there? Vytal 17:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but it is "were". Cream were a British band and so British English applies. See American and British English differences. --Bruce1ee 05:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

So, the British usage should apply because Cream was/were from England? That's reasonable, but it still might be better to say "Cream was...." Quoting from American and British English differences (and thanks for linking to that by the way), "In BrE, collective nouns can take either singular (formal agreement) or plural (notional agreement) verb forms, according to whether the emphasis is, respectively, on the body as a whole or on the individual members; compare 'a committee was appointed...' with 'the committee were unable to agree...'". By that line of reasoning, we might say that "Cream was a classic 1960s rock band," and we might also say that "Cream were heavily influenced by American blues music". — Mudwater 11:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

If you look a little further down in American and British English differences it says:

"The difference occurs for all nouns of multitude, both general terms such as team and company and proper nouns (for example, where a place name is used to refer to a sports team). For instance,

BrE: The Clash are a well-known band; AmE: The Clash is a well known band."

See also (for example) Blind Faith and Yes. Cream might have been influenced by American blues music but they were still a British band. --Bruce1ee 11:56, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Cream was/were a British band. Yes, it's reasonable to use British usage in the Cream article. But by the guidelines we are quoting, it could still be "Cream was", depending on whether the emphasis is on the band as a whole or on the individual members. (As it additionally says, "Compare also Elvis Costello's song, 'Oliver's Army are on their way / Oliver's Army is here to stay.'") — Mudwater 12:25, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right, it does depend on whether we are referring to the band as a whole or the individuals comprising the band. But while I haven't found any Wikipedia policy on this matter, the prominent British bands here that I've looked at (Blind Faith, Yes, The Who, Queen, Led Zeppelin, The Yardbirds, etc) all use "are/were". But consensus rules and if the majority want to "buck the trend", I'll accept the decision, so long as it is applied consistently throughout the article. --Bruce1ee 06:29, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

To other editors, I would encourage you to post your opinion on this subject. You can state your preference between "were" and "was", but I think it would be a lot better if you give reasons to support your views and try to persuade others, as I believe Bruce1ee, Vytal, and myself have done. This is a discussion, not a vote. Thanks. — Mudwater 11:44, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

To me, "was" is correct. Since the word itself is singular (there is no "s" at the end), then the verb should be, as well. 70.137.206.229 22:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe that the name of any band is considered a collective noun, and therefore neither plural nor singular. For example, "The Beatles" and "The Clash" as band names would both be collective nouns, even though one is plural in form and one is singular. On top of that, "cream" is a collective noun anyway. So, we're back to what it says in American and British English differences#Formal and notional agreement. With British usage, it's a question of whether the emphasis is on the body as a whole or on the individual members. — Mudwater 01:06, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of what British English says, why should it matter where they're from? Daft Punk is from France, should their article be in French? Well sure, there is a French article on them, but on the French Wikipedia, not the English one. The majority of English speakers speak American English. If British English speakers make their own British Wikipedia that writes in British English, then they can conjugate their verbs however they like. But let's not mix and match two different languages based on where the subject is from. - John "This is/are debate has been bugging me from the start" Lawson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.200.52 (talk) 05:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Wheels of Fire

"Wheels of Fire ... was also the first record album to go "Platinum.")" Is that supposed to mean the first record album to go platinum, or their first record to go platinum? If it's their's, then maybe it should be changed to read "their first record" and if it's first ever, then maybe it should read "first record ever" to make it less ambiguous. A quick google search turned up a few saying Cream were the 'first' to receive a platinum record, but I couldn't find anything definitive or anything that said in no uncertain terms that this was the case. --AA, 21:00 UTC, 9 Jan 2004

I question whether Wheels of Fire was originally released as a double. In Australia at least, it was two single albums (which I bought as soon as I could afford them and still have). Andrewa 05:53, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I can find no evidence of a double Wheels of Fire being released before the single albums, I think it may be an urban myth as I remember that people have always wrongly assumed that they were a double. So I'm removing the claim. Happy to discuss it further. Andrewa 19:04, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Of course Wheels of Fire was originally released as a double

USA:

• ATCO SD 2-700 2LP (gatefold cover)

UK:

• Polydor 582 031/2 (mono) 2LP (gatefold cover)
• Polydor 583 031/2 (stereo) 2LP (gatefold cover)

• Polydor 582 033 (mono) In The Studio (gold cover)
• Polydor 583 033 (stereo) In The Studio (gold cover)

• Polydor 582 040 (mono) Live At The Fillmore
• Polydor 583 040 (stereo) Live At The Fillmore

• but only as separate albums in Australia and some other countries

Thomas279 04:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

An LSD influenced rock and roll power trio from the 60s with Jack Bruce on bass, Eric Clapton on guitar, and Ginger Baker on the drums. Cream produced albums like Wheels Of Fire featuring trippy cry baby enhanced guitar leads and sometimes political lyrics.

The "Goodbye" album is in no way a documentation of Cream's farewell performance. 3 studio songs, 3 live, and I don't believe any of the live tracks are from the Farewell performance.

Goodbye was simply the last studio album they recorded; it's not supposed to represent their farewell concert. -- Cubs Fan ^(Talk) 18:25, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

New Template

I've just made a new Cream template, lovely and pink for Disraeli Gears. Let me know what you think/what needs changing/whether I should scrap the whole thing before I start incorporating it into the various Cream pages. - MightyMoose22 06:37, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

If you're really going to make it pink, it should match the album cover more (which is red and a very dark pink). nondescript 04:36, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I've only just noticed this. I'd completely forgotten about that template. Well, it's not pink anymore, anyway. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 23:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism on this article

Yesterday user 172.184.49.68 vandalised this article three times. I managed to revert two of them but missed the third. Unfortunately, users 82.47.3.103 and 172.191.120.37 then went and did some edits on top of the vandalism. Because the new edits I believe did not contribute to the article (172.191.120.37 just deleted text), I've reverted back to the last clean version. If anyone has any objections to my action, they are welcome to revert it. --Bruce1ee 05:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

photo

as the necessary copyright info was added, the original (better) image was restored. Joeyramoney 06:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Neturality Issues

Wow, this article has thrown any hope of neturality out of the Window huh? It reads like it was written by a fan club president. This defintely earns a NPOV stub.
Charles M. Reed 19:38, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

If you look at the edit history, this article was completely re-written over two hours by user:Ctenid, only fourteen hours before you posted this comment. So it probably was written by a fan club president. It's just that nobody's had the chance to fix it yet. :) MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 22:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Ha, yeah... It hadn't been a terribly long time since I last visited this page, and it was far better than the incarnation I found today. Cream deserves a better encyclopedic entry than that mess.
Charles M. Reed 23:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Most of it seems to be about Clapton, anyway. It really needs someone who's willing to spend a couple of hours going through it and tweaking things. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 23:39, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

This article not only suffers from Clapton fanboyism, but it rather poorly written, and almost completely ignores Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker. I don't feel that I am enough of a Cream scholar to rewrite the article in it's entirety, but drastic editing is needed. User:Trentmorris03:06 (GMT), 19 June 2006

Okay, I've reverted back to when it was (hopefully) a nice npov article, and I'm now going to redo everybody's recent edits for them. This could take a while, so please don't try to edit the page whilst I'm working, as it'll cause an annoying and disruptive edit conflict. Thanks. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 15:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, it turns out that there wasn't much to redo that wasn't in reference to what I deleted. Oh well. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 16:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Great, you have just reverted the article back to the banal, insipid, sound byte it was, with nothing more than a tedious, error ridden, white wash of their history even retaining the erroneous claim that the Lulu video of Hendrix doing "Sunshine of Your Love" was never filmed when it fact, it is readily available on both a Hendrix Bio VHS, DVD and on the "Tube" videos websties. Pathetic, dumbed down version of Creams music, contributions, technical info, influence and over all history. Thanks for maintaining mediocrity as the standard. The revisoin attempted to bring some visceral, and extremely cogent definition and analysis of the band and especially Clapton who was, lets face it, the vortex of the groups success and sonic signature. You have reduced it back to a quick, vanilla wrapped USA today style critic. This is unfortunate especially since the revision attempted to correct history revisionism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctenid (talk • contribs)

I realise you put a lot of time and effort into your revision of the article, and I appreciate that. You have to keep in mind, though, that this is an encyclopaedia, and not an opinion article. I have corrected the bit about The Lulu Show, and please correct all other errors you see, but remember to keep it NPOV and about the band, not just Clapton. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 16:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Group photo

The current photo makes it look like the band had 12 members, perhaps over the course of several years. After a bit of scrutiny, it becomes evident that it is indeed a trio, but this is confusing to the casual user. Could it please be reverted to the photo a few months back which was just a plain trio? laddiebuck 22:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Expansion

The "Recording Years" section shouldn't be so small, in fact it should be the biggest, it is the whole reason they have an article. 75pickup (talk · contribs)

Steppin' Out

I took out the part in the trivia that stated "Toad" and "Steppin' Out" were the only Cream compositions that were instrumentals and left only "Toad". "Steppin' Out" was written by L.C. Frazier. Clapton had recorded it while in John Mayall's Bluesbreakers, on the famous Beano album. blues_maestro (talk · contribs)

Couldn't you consider cat's squirrel an instrumental, considering that the only lyrics are "alright alright alright"... etc.?

Revived Article

When trying to access this article, I was told that it didn't exist. I have therefore reverted to an earlier version. I recommend that someone who knows the band better than I double check the article. - Knight of Ashitaka 23:54, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Your "restore" looks correct. I posted a message to the editor who did the "blanking". Seems like a technical glitch as his edits only show some wording changes but the page did show as blank. *Spark* 00:14, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Best of Cream

I was doing my usual look-over of various articles that interest me (this one included), and looked over at my shelf at my record collection. I noticed that a particular record was not included on the compilations page of this article, and did not have an article of it's own. "Best of Cream", released in July of 1969. http://www.connollyco.com/discography/cream/best.html Adding it to the compilations section. 68.196.115.149 00:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, well Disraeli Gears doesn't get near enough credit either, Which I believe is the best Cream album ever.

External Links

Previous versions of this page contained a link the de-facto Cream fan web page by Graeme Pattingale: http://twtd.bluemountains.net.au/cream/contents.htm

For some reason this was removed - can this is added back in? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jas sl (talk • contribs) 18:58, 2 January 2007 UTC

I see no reason why it shouldn't be re-instated. It has a lot of useful information. --Bruce1ee 11:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I've reinstated the link.

Reunions

I'm not sure how many tickets were left following the American Express exclusive sales period. But I am absolutely sure that there were tickets remaining. My friends and I bought four tickets from Ticket Master at the opening of the open sale period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcarr218 (talk • contribs) 18:48, 19 April 2007 UTC

Bootleg?

A new album The Farewell Tour 1968 was recently added to the Discography, but looking at these forums here and here this appears to be a bootleg. Can anyone confirm this? --Bruce1ee 09:29, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Good question. I was assuming that it was legit because it's being sold by Amazon.co.uk, but according to the people on those forums, that's not necessarily true. If it's established that this *is* a bootleg, should it be removed from the discography? And what about the article about the album itself? Delete the article, or just add the information that it's a bootleg recording? — Mudwater 10:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

This appears to be an "official bootleg" (see here) and I've removed it from the Discography. If it can be established that this is not a bootleg, I'd be happy to put it back. Regarding what to do with the article, The Farewell Tour 1968, I'd say just note that it is an "official bootleg" and add it to Category:Bootleg albums (unless it can be shown it isn't a bootleg). --Bruce1ee 12:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. I've updated the article about the album accordingly. — Mudwater 21:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Origin

In the box, next to "Origin" is London, England and the Flag of England button. I believe this should be made a little more broad. Only 1 member of the band was born in London, and Bruce wasn't even born in England. Some might say the band was formed in London, but they were a working & touring band that recorded and performed more in the USA than anywhere else.

Perhaps make it read UK? Vytal 22:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

"Origin" in the infobox refers to the city where the group was founded (see Template:Infobox musical), and not where their career took them. --Bruce1ee 08:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Clapton is God

Why does it state in this article that the phrase "Clapton is God" only appeared on one London wall? I believe it is well established that it appeared many places in London at this time, including in tube stations and so on. In fact, the citation that is provided to verify this claim links to a Clapton fan website that indicates that the phrase *did* appear in numerous locations around London, not just one spot. This statement should be removed or corrected.--Drbauman (talk) 03:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes I agree with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Somearth (talk • contribs) 04:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Wheels of Fire was not certified platinum by the RIAA

It was a platinum-selling album but was certified gold by the RIAA (the sales figures were doubled because it was two records). [1] --Bruce1ee ^talk 07:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Citations & References

See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags Nhl4hamilton (talk) 05:28, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Cream2005.jpg

Image:Cream2005.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 ensure 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) 21:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I have added an appropriate fair use rationale to the image, which is therefore no longer subject to speedy deletion. — Mudwater 17:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Creamband.jpg

Image:Creamband.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 ensure 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) 21:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to 75pickup for adding a fair use rationale to this image. — Mudwater 17:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

West, Bruce and Laing

I noted Jack Bruce's 1972-74 band West, Bruce and Laing isn't included under "Associated Acts". Is there any reason why that is? 63.199.244.228 (talk) 09:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Proto-metal

Cream isn't an actual heavy metal band. Heavy metal should be removed and replaced by proto-metal. They were an influential band in the development of heavy metal, but were just a hard rock, proto-metal band of the late 1960's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.235.239 (talk) 03:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I adjusted the proto-metal redirect to point to the correct section in Heavy metal music. --Bruce1ee^talk 05:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it needs to say proto-metal in the info box instead of heavy metal. 68.102.235.239 (talk) 01:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

The reason your edits are being reverted is that you are not citing reliable published sources where they can be verified. I've found a number of web pages that label Cream as proto-metal, but many of them are blogs or fan reviews, which are not regarded as reliable sources. This one could be used, but I think we need something better than that. A Google on Cream +proto-metal returns over 5000 hits – there must be a few reliable sources amongst them. --Bruce1ee^talk 06:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Would this be a reliable source? [[2]] 68.102.235.239 (talk) 02:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

That looks good enough for me. What do others feel about this? --Bruce1ee^talk 05:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I edited "heavy metal" out of the list of genres, but someone's gone and put it back in. Frankly, I think it's BS to say that Cream played heavy metal. This isn't a list of which genres they indirectly helped to spawn years later. This is a list of genres that they PLAYED. It's like saying Robert Johnson should have Hard Rock listed as a genre because he influenced Led Zeppelin. It's just a nonsensical argument. Heavy Metal should not be in the list of Cream's genres. Just my two cents. -Hazuki (talk) 00:13, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

older group photo?

why does the page have a photo of the band from 2005? I know they did a reunion and all that, but that was like 40 years after they broke up. I think it should be replaced by a photo from their hayday, when they looked like they did during the time they were making all of their music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.243.15.147 (talk) 05:29, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Heavy Metal

Who keeps on adding heavy metal to the genres list? Creams music in itself in no way is heavy metal, surely they influenced several heavy metal bands (Led Zeppelin mainly) but none of Creams songs can be thought of as heavy metal. So for you that edit it: Don't add heavy metal there please, not even if you happen to like that genre and want people to think that Cream is heavy metal. Please. I and several other people have had to correct you too many times by editing it off already... —Preceding unsigned comment added by RoopeOK (talk • contribs) 09:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Cream certainly influenced later heavy metal groups, but I don't recall them ever being called heavy metal themselves. I think we should look at sources for this. Here's one:

"Even though Jimi Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, Cream, and Deep Purple had a profound influence on the emergence of hard rock and heavy metal music, Black Sabbath was the first true heavy metal band." [3]

Others say that Led Zeppelin and Iron Butterfly were the first heavy metal bands, but Cream was mainly a blues/rock fusion with psychedelic influences. Sunray (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah delete it if someone adds heavy metal to the genres list please, Creams influence on heavy metal is mentioned in the article anyways. Cream is blues based rock with a psychedelic twist mainly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.114.24.216 (talk) 12:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Band image in infobox

Recently File:Cream BCB.jpg was added to the infobox as a band image, then removed with the edit summary "album covers are not fair-use in musician infoboxes..." However, the image is not an album cover, it's a publicity photo, as indicated by the licensing on the image page. I believe this means that the image is fair use for the infobox. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 23:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

The file has two licenses, neither of which are accurate. It is also a duplicate of an image that was already uploaded... and eventually deleted... long ago from Wikipedia. It, and any image like it, can only be used with direct permission from the photographer. The FU rationale claim that the chance of a free image upload is unlikely is also false since it is entirely possible that at some time someone will upload an image. The band re-united just a couple of years ago. A strong possibility that an image from those reunion shows will eventually turn up on Wikipedia. Hope that helps. The Real Libs-speak politely 00:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, I see that the file has an album cover license, as well as a publicity photo license. If the image is not an album cover -- and I think it's not -- then that license would be inaccurate. But isn't it actually a publicity photo? What licensing should the image have, and why? — Mudwater ^(Talk) 00:26, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Desert Ride

Recently I've read in the article about an obscure song called "Desert Ride" which hasn't been released on any official Cream albums. However, I tried to look it up on Google, and I found the following sites which refer to it being a bonus track (along with three other tracks) on the 2008 vinyl edition of Wheels of Fire: [4], [5], [6]. On allmusic.com it is listed on a soundtrack album called The Savage Seven, but not on the newest edition of Wheels of Fire. What do you think about it? DJózsef (talk) 17:58, 6 April 2009 (UTC)