Alright I just went through the Rolling Stone's lista of the 100 Greatest artists of all time and Paul wasn't in there. That is appalling. Statistically he should be in the superiore, in alto 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 lista is incompetent, which is shown da 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 Musica history, but still he should have been on that list.