Talk:Rick Wakeman

Grumpy Old Luvvie
Is it fair to describe Wakeman as "an actor"? Yes, he has appeared on TV in Grumpy Old Men, but it's my impression that participants in that show are not really "acting". Martinevans123 (talk) 10:17, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it was added because of his role in Lizstomania, but it was merely a cameo! But I agree, we should remove actor. LowSelfEstidle (talk) 12:51, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

man city?
citation for this? I was fairly sure his allegiances were to brentford fc, & extended to some sort of official involvement.

duncanrmi (talk) 22:38, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

I see, after a bit of googling, that an online bio of RW was lifted directly from an older version of this very article, & these are the bits that have since been excised; anyone care to say why?

>>A passionate football fan, Wakeman has supported Brentford F.C. since he was a child, and later on he also became a director of the West London club. After a disagreement with the board, he moved on to Manchester City F.C. but never stopped loving the Bees. He was also involved in the ownership of the American soccer club Philadelphia Fury in the late ’70s, along with other rock celebrities such as Peter Frampton and Paul Simon.

He is a strong supporter of the UK’s Conservative Party, and performed a concert in September 2004 for the benefit of the party. The Arthur section of his King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table suite is used as the theme tune to the BBC’s Election Night Coverage since 1979 (with the exception of 2001). Wakeman’s album Fields of Green ‘97 featured the track “Election ‘97/Arthur”, which was used by the BBC for their coverage of the 1997 General Election. The music was further revamped for the BBC’s 2005 Election Night coverage.<<

duncanrmi (talk) 22:47, 2 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Without tracking back through the history, it's hard to say why all that material was removed. Were there explanatory edit summaries? One perfectly valid reason would have been if it was all unsupported by reliable sources, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

making it better?
I put in the introduction that Rick played the piano part on Cat Steven's song Morning has Broken. It's a very prominent part in a well-known song and people might not realize that it was Rick who played it so it should be mentioned in the introduction. But User:Joefromrandb has undone my insertion three times for no reason. The 1st time he said that it was unsourced, but it's explained later in the article with a good source. He did it again and said that it shouldn't be in the introduction because it's also said later in the article. That's stupid, because everything in the introduction is from the article, and he's just being difficult. And then he erased my work again and didn't give any reason at all. Isn't there a rule against undoing somebody's writing three times? User:Joefromrandb broke that rule just to be an ass. I only write a few things on Wikipedia when I know what I'm talking about. Erasing people's work is not cool. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.74.149 (talk) 11:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The short version is: Not everything in the article has to be included in the lede/introduction. Slightly longer version: The intro is intended to be a summary of the article's content, not a complete repeat. So while its perfectly fine to have that Wakeman played for Cat Stevens unsourced in the intro, because its sourced in the article, its entirely unnecessary to have exactly which song/s he played on. As that is something better explored in the article body proper where more detail can be devoted to it. If you get into a content dispute with someone, the correct thing to do is come to the talkpage to gain another opinion: Personally I think individual songs should not be mentioned in the lede, so Bowie's should also be removed. But if consensus indicates its ok to have the individual songs in the lede, there is no real argument to keep Bowie's and not Stevens. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:49, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The Masonic issue.
There may be a miscommunication here. You can be a previous master of the lodge/worshipful master, as its generally a rotating position (one of the criteria for which is being a master mason). However once you are a 'master mason' you are a master mason. As far as I am aware, absent expulsion its a for life title. Only in death does duty end (talk) 10:21, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

...television and radio presenter, and author
That's what it says in the lede, the article though focusses on his musical career. I saw him play with Yes in about 1972 (& agree his music is as far as I know the most interesting thing about him) but over the last quarter century I've only heard him on the radio & seen him on TV in contexts which seemed to have nothing at all to do with his music - or when he's mentioned his music it's only been a jokey passing reference. Just saying it's strange for the article to mention these things in the introduction without any expansion in the article..? 86.148.15.134 (talk) 15:50, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Marriage
The Nina Carter article mentions a marriage to him which is not listed in the infobox, worth adding if somebody deems it accurate. 2A00:23C4:508A:D100:AD88:2A9:3AB1:A629 (talk) 00:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

The Fusion Syndicate
Wakeman is featured in the CD version of Nik Turner's "Space Fusion Odyssey", 2015: https://music.apple.com/us/album/space-fusion-odyssey/1037425863

In the liner notes, Track 10 is notated "Random Acts [revisited] with The Fusion Syndicate"

Wakeman is featured in a 2017 project called The Fusion Syndicate: https://thefusionsyndicate.bandcamp.com/ 98.195.208.69 (talk) 01:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Year of birth
FreeBMD gives his year of birth as 1949 here. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:32, 22 January 2024 (UTC)