This   level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Biography: Musicians This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as High-importance). London Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Pop music High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Rock music High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers. This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist. [[Dreams (Fleetwood Mac song)#Nathan Apodaca TikTok|viral video]] The anchor (Nathan Apodaca TikTok) has been deleted. Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

This issue impacts a number of articles around popular music. Why are the current members so prominently featured? This is just one example of many bands whose current incarnation is certainly not the one that should be featured in an encyclopedia. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame provides a good third-party source for who the most prominent members of a band are. For Fleetwood Mac, they are Mick Fleetwood, John McVie, Peter Green, Jeremy Spencer, Danny Kirwan, ,Christine McVie, Stevie Nicks and Lindsey Buckingham.

I feel those should be listed as members of the band. I am not making this edit because all the articles seem to be written in this style. Perhaps this issue has been discussed and resolved on another page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcusa ( talk • contribs) 16:28, 24 June 2020 (UTC) reply

This newly written section is very biased towards one version of events, and basically uses one source, the not-terribly-reliable Brunning book. Needs a complete rewrite. Bretonbanquet ( talk) 13:23, 25 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Bretonbanquet: your comments are noted. I will reply soon. Please explain what you mean by "you are not listening as usual" in the edit summary. 194.81.226.131 ( talk) 15:36, 28 January 2020 (UTC) reply

Because I tagged the section as suffering from one-sidedness due to excessive use of a single source, and you promptly added more references solely using the same source at Clifford Davis (music manager). Brunning's books are only one, rather questionable source on what is a very complicated story. He wasn't remotely involved in the situation anyway. I've tried to talk to you before about making hundreds and hundreds of minor edits using different IPs. For example, in rewriting the Danny Kirwan article, you made roughly 1500 minor edits to that one article over a period of more than 18 months. That makes it almost impossible for anyone else to follow and monitor what you're doing. Bretonbanquet ( talk) 20:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC) reply

BB: I hadn't seen your 'single source' tag at that point. Brunning's two chapters on the subject quote six of the people involved, who appear to confirm each other's versions of events. But yes, it's a complicated story. He is writing a history; it doesn't matter if he wasn't involved. Continuous editing is how I work. Apologies if it causes problems. The library system I use seems to operate on two consecutively numbered IPs. 194.81.226.131 ( talk) 10:35, 1 February 2020 (UTC) reply

Consider registering a Wikipedia account to make it easier for other editors to see which edits you make. It's free and easy! Popcornduff ( talk) 10:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC) reply

Brunning was only interested in the side of the story that favoured the band, so only spoke to those people. Using only once source is never a good way to go, no matter what it is. Popcornduff is right, please register so people can see who is doing what. Also, taking 18 months to work on an article makes it very hard for others to assess the whole picture of what you're doing. Consider working on something in a sandbox and making an edit when you're happy with what you've done. Bretonbanquet ( talk) 12:53, 1 February 2020 (UTC) reply

Is there a reason the 1997 Live album The dance is not included? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.116.1.24 ( talk) 10:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC) reply

The list of "Studio albums" does not include the live album because it is not a studio album. - SummerPhD ^v2.0 16:54, 10 February 2020 (UTC) reply

Under the history section for 1969 the article states:

"On tour in the US in January 1969, the band recorded an album at the soon-to-close Chess Records Studio with some of the blues legends of Chicago, including Willie Dixon, Buddy Guy and Otis Spann."

There is no reference for this. Was the album or any of these recordings ever released please? John a s ( talk) 20:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Fleetwood Mac in Chicago. Bretonbanquet ( talk) 20:59, 27 July 2020 (UTC) reply

Thanks, article updated. John a s ( talk) 22:29, 27 July 2020 (UTC) reply

There is a conflict in dates within the Fleetwood Mac article for which year the album Rumours was awarded the Grammy Album of the Year. In the introductory section it is stated that it won the award "in 1978", while in the section about the period of 1975-1987 it is stated that it won the award "in 1977". It's possible that the conflict is caused by the award for the 1977 Album of the Year being awarded in 1978, but the phraseology is nearly identical in both cases so I don't think this is the reason for the discrepancy. Hopefully someone can clear this issue up! 75.168.97.246 ( talk) 19:09, 16 November 2020 (UTC) reply

There is way too much unsourced material in this article. Amandil21 ( talk) 17:27, 26 August 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Amandil21: You're free to fix them at your leisure. Cheers, - FlightTime ( open channel) 17:47, 26 August 2021 (UTC) reply

I know. I only mentioned this to explain why I tagged the article. But I tend to think that the editors who inserted the unsourced text should be the ones to provide the missing sources. Amandil21 ( talk) 18:26, 26 August 2021 (UTC) reply

Someone forgot to list her as a band member. Way not cool! 2600:6C55:6A00:1EDB:14EE:DBFA:7A87:478F ( talk) 07:46, 2 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Um... She is all over the article. Not sure what article you are reading, but I find her name everywhere in the article. -- Jayron 32 13:35, 2 December 2022 (UTC) reply

She died, so she is no longer a member. I hope that's simple enough Mr "Way not cool." Sellpink ( talk) 23:01, 19 May 2023 (UTC) reply

I believe that it might be a good idea to add more to the hidden text in the first sentence of the article -- more specifically, we should explicitly let editors know NOT to change "Fleetwood Mac are" to "Fleetwood Mac were," until/unless a credible source has been found that confirms the band has broken up. JeffSpaceman ( talk) 13:17, 8 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Meh. It will have zero effect on the matter; it's not like people who add this information are likely to read such a comment. It'll either blow over in a few days or get confirmed. Either way, it's not a big deal. Revert as needed, because there's not much you can do to stop people. -- Jayron 32 17:17, 8 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Mick has called it quits, it's official. Just because he couched it in hopeful language like "I think" and "never say never" does not mean the group exists. Let's just put them in the past, put the Rumours five in bold at the bottom and keep it that way except in the unlikely event of Mick announcing an album and/or tour. Bostart ( talk) 14:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Fleetwood's comment was clearly not definitive. These are still very early days (especially by Fleetwood Mac standards), and no harm is done by leaving it as "are" for now. DuncanHill ( talk) 15:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Your inference from Fleetwood's statements may be correct, but it's still inference. The article doesn't make any pronouncement on this until it's unequivocally said. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, it doesn't have to reflect every recent passing suggestion made on the media. -- Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 16:41, 9 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Your opinion isn't a substitute for fact. When it's stated unequivocally, then change it. Sellpink ( talk) 23:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC) reply

This statement is contradicted by members of the fake band, and Fleetwood has said that Davis told the real Mac in advance what he intended to do. The facts are difficult to untangle and we are not aiming to fuel controversy. I think the paragraph is best left as it is. 194.81.226.132 ( talk) 14:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC) reply

Given statements by Fleetwood and Nicks, at what point do we declare the band inactive and close off the timeline bars? It feels like at the moment it's being 99% confirmed but holding off from certainty.... (but we've often declared bands retired then reopened them before, like Pink Floyd). TSP ( talk) 18:02, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply

Usually, we wait for definitive statements before declaring a band to be inactive, although they haven't toured since 2019. Fleetwood said that "I'd say we're done, but then we've all said that before", while Nicks stated "When she [Christine McVie] died, I figured we really can’t go any further with this. There’s no reason to." These comments don't necessarily state that the band has officially broken up, but rather that they are unlikely to continue any further under any lineup. Dobbyelf62 ( talk) 21:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC) reply