Jump to content

Talk:Stock Aitken Waterman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Renamed

[edit]

I renamed this article as appear to have been more commonly known as Stock Aitken Waterman than Stock/Aitken/Waterman. -- Popsracer 01:58 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Removed

[edit]

Removed from the article:

They were considered by many to be the most successful UK songwriting partnership of all time, scoring over 200 top 40 UK hits in the mid 80s to early 90s. Mike Stock was the main songwriter, with the assistance of Matt Aitken. Pete Waterman is now accepted as having had no musical or lyrical contribution whatsoever to any of the songs, but for many years tried to take credit for writing the hits for Kylie Minogue, Rick Astley, etc

This sentence looks a bit POV to me, can anyone confirm if theres any truth to it or not G-Man 17:26 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Contradiction

[edit]

"Kylie" highest selling album of 1988, but also say "Ten Good Reasons" is in the next paragraph. I'm guessing the years are mixed up. Ultimate Star Wars Freak 18:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You guess correctly. I've fixed the date. Rossrs 22:12, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Back together

[edit]

Am I imagining things or have I heard recently that SAW are planning to get back together (god help us) G-Man 00:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

→You're not imagining things. The Sheilas - Annihilatenow 11:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of House music

[edit]

I have replaced the two mentions of SAW making or being influenced by House music with references to Hi-NRG instead. They were not connected to the House music scene at all. SAW popularised the mid 80s Hi-NRG sound to a mainstream audience.Vauxhall1964 19:45, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

[edit]

List of hits written or produced by SAW should be clarified. Very few of their productions were written by them. Jatrius (talk) 23:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chord Progressions

[edit]

This section seems incredibly cumbersome and doesn't seem to fit with the rest of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.65.24.36 (talk) 02:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, agreed. The whole section could be summed up by 1 sentence somwhere else in the article. Jh39 (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]