posted by estudioso
Alright I just went through the Rolling Stone's liste of the 100 Greatest artists of all time and Paul wasn't in there. That is appalling. Statistically he should be in the haut, retour au début five. It is an outrage. Why would Rolling Stone do something like that. John Lennon made it and he only did a few albums. My theory is that the panel Rolling Stone assembled to make the liste is incompetent, which is shown par that mistake as well as many numerous other wrong and weird rankings. Also, I have heard that Rolling Stone magazine never really liked Paul McCartney and never took his musique history, but still he should have been on that list.