Talk:The Beatles (album): Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 04:53, 20 October 2006 editWaveformDelta (talk \| contribs)4 edits →Preceeding album ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 10:32, 10 July 2024 edit undoQwerfjkl (bot) (talk \| contribs)Bots, Mass message senders4,012,262 editsm Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)Tag: paws [2.2]
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header\|search=yes}}
	{{WPBeatles
			{{Notice\|Consensus per and is to use "the Beatles" mid-sentence.}}
	\|class=B
			{{British English}}
	\|importance=Top
			{{Article history
	\|apple =yes
			\|action1=PR
	\|martin =yes
			\|action1date=23 May 2008
	\|also-beatles =yes
			\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/The Beatles (album)/archive1
	\|display=Beatles
			\|action1result=reviewed
	\|album =yes
	\|album-importance =Top
	\|attention =
	\|needs-infobox=
	}}
	<!--{{Album}} removed, {{WPBeatles}} contains same functionality-->

			\|action2=GAN
	== Double LP???? ==
			\|action2date=18 July 2014
	I didnt think RIAA counted it as 2 seperate sales unless the total time was over 100 minutes??(])
			\|action2link=/GA1
	I think this album doesn't count as a double cd.--] 04:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
			\|action2result=passed
			\|action2oldid=617496334

			\|dykdate=7 September 2014
	==Cassette Track Listing Slightly Different==
			\|dykentry=... that ''''']''''' sold for over £19,000?
	I have a cassette version of the White Album, and the track listing is slightly different. Does this interest anyone?

			\|otddate=22 November 2018
	==Preceeding album==
			\|otdoldid=870163079
	I believe, if I am not mistaken, that "Magical Mystery Tour" was release between "Sgt. Pepper" and the White Album. While it is true that one side of "Magical Mystery Tour" was just a collection of singles, the other side was new material. If some further clarification of what constitutes a "followup album" is needed, perhaps it would make sense to change the text back to refering "Sgt. Pepper".

			\|currentstatus=GA
	Also, I don't have time to research this at this moment, but I think there should be some discussion about how this album showed the growing individualism of the members of the group, and the dissension of the group members that presaged the breakup of the album (I think that some tracks were recorded with only a couple of the members present, for example, but the details are fuzzy on this and I would need to research it). Also, why did Eric Clapton play the guitar on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"? My memory tells me (and maybe this is wrong) that George, having played the sitar more than the guitar, was rusty on his guitar playing. But perhaps I am wrong on this.
			\|topic=music

			\|action3=PR
	I think this article gives a lot of praise to the album, but I always felt this album was a little more mixed in its quality than the earlier ones were.
			\|action3date=20:57:46 03 April 2016 (UTC)
	:You are wrong about the Eric Clapton bit. George had Clapton play guitar because the tension was high in the group and the other three were not taking his song seriously; he invited Clapton to solo because they'd have to be professional with an outsider around (Clapton did the same thing for "Badge" when Cream was falling apart). ]
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/The Beatles (album)/archive2

			\|action3result=reviewed
	:Yeah, I'm probably not the one to add better balance here--if you ask me what the greatest artistic achievements of humankind are, I'd probably say Michaelangelo's Sistene Chapel ceiling, the white album, and GCC. --LDC
			\|action3oldid=938902072

			\|otd2date=2023-11-22\|otd2oldid=1185643199
	----
			}}

			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=GA\|vital=yes\|listas=Beatles, The\|1=
	The question of whether "Magical Mystery Tour" was an album released between "The Beatles" and "Sgt. Pepper" depends on which country's discography we are talking about. In the United Kingdom, "Magical Mystery Tour" was a rather elaborate double EP package: two 7" extended-play singles containing six songs, released in a gatefold sleeve with booklet. The Beatles' American label, Capitol, felt that EPs did not sell in the US, so they cobbled together a full size 12" LP, with the six songs from the British double EP on the front and the remainder of the Beatles' 1967 non-Pepper output on the back, and called the whole thing "Magical Mystery Tour". Thus in the UK there was no true LP release between "Sgt. Pepper" and the White Album, while US fans got another LP for Christmas. Just to confuse things further, the 11 song Capitol package was released elsewhere in the world, and eventually in Britan in the early 70's (as an actual EMI release, not an import), and ultimately formed the basis for the current CD package. ]
			{{WikiProject The Beatles\|importance=Top\|apple=yes\|martin=yes\|display=Beatles\|album=yes}}

			}}
	==Photos and copyright==
			{{Old move
	Do we have the legal right to include the set of four photos? An entire artwork probably doesn't fall under "fair use"? ]
			\|from1=The Beatles (album) \|destination1=The White Album\|result1=No consensus\|date1=18 August 2011\|link1=Talk:The Beatles (album)/Archive 1#Requested move

			\|from2=The Beatles (album) \|destination2=The Beatles (White Album)\|result2=Withdrawn\|date2=28 March 2014\|link2=Talk:The Beatles (album)/Archive 1#Requested move 2
	:This one's a tricky case, but I think these small images can be seen as references to the originals, not as reproductions (like a small photo of a painting in a museum), and "educational use" gets you a lot of leeway. Also, one could argue that the ''album'' is the entire work, and we're just noting that these photographs came with it. I was emboldened by the uploads of our resident lawyer, Isis, and I think she's pretty up to date on this stuff.
			\|from3=The Beatles (album) \|destination3=White Album\|result3=No consensus\|date3=31 March 2014\|link3=Talk:The Beatles (album)/Archive 2#Requested move 31 March 2014

			}}
	It was pointed out to me by a lawyer here that in 1968, the law ''required''
			{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
	specific notice of copyright, unlike today, where things are automatically
			\|target=Talk:The Beatles (album)/Archive index
	copyrighted unless specifically disclaimed. My copy of the white album shows
			\|mask=Talk:The Beatles (album)/Archive <#>
	a copyright notice on the recordings, and another on the lyrics,
			\|leading_zeros=0
	''but no such notice for the pictures''. This makes any claim of copyright
			\|indexhere=yes}}
	on them unlikely to hold water. Indeed, the album itself doesn't even
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
	mention wo took them--I had to look that up elsewhere. --LDC
			\|archiveheader = {{aan}}

			\|maxarchivesize = 200K
	----
			\|counter = 3
	From the main article:
			\|minthreadsleft = 4
	:Along with such standard rockers as the opening "Back in the USSR", it
			\|algo = old(30d)
	contains classic ballads like "I Will" and "Julia" (the latter written
			\|archive = Talk:The Beatles (album)/Archive %(counter)d
	by John--one of his few),
			}}

			{{Annual readership}}
	"one of John's few" what? ballads? songs on the album? ] 10:45 Aug 24, 2002 (PDT)
			{{Broken anchors\|links=

			* <nowiki>]</nowiki> The anchor (#Tributes, tribute albums and cover albums) is no longer available because it was ] before. <!-- {"title":"Tributes, tribute albums and cover albums","appear":{"revid":26223672,"parentid":26220775,"timestamp":"2005-10-22T23:01:58Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":},"disappear":{"revid":693361034,"parentid":693360697,"timestamp":"2015-12-02T01:50:12Z","removed_section_titles":,"added_section_titles":}} -->
	Sorry--I meant one of the few ballads written by John; normally Paul writes the ballads. --LDC
			}}

	----
	As well as the photos, are we absolutely certain about the legal status of those sound clips? I know they ''ought to'' fall under fair use, but sadly, ''ought to'' doesn't always mean ''does''. There have been a number of cases brought recently where people have been sued for using uncleared samples shorter than these - I know that the fact these samples were on profit making record labels, and that the plaintiffs could therefore expect a hefty dollop of cash if they won may have made them more willing to bring an action, but the ] and similar organisations have been bringing (or threatening) the strangest cases lately, and I wouldn't put anything past them. Certainly there have been cases brought against people who were never going to make any money at all from their allegedly illegal activities.

	I'm sorry to even bring this up, but it seems to me that the wikipedia is eager to appear whiter than white on copyright issues (I'm thinking of the message on recent changes), and these samples seem to represent a risk that isn't worth taking. --]

	:I should probably add: I wrote this before I'd noticed the response to Vicki's concerns about the pictures. I'm not a legal expert, and am more than happy to defer to somebody who is and is sure we're in the clear. It's just that I worry... ]

	::I worry too, but Lee usually has his ducks in a row. Still, I don't know if I'd be so bold. :-) ]

	----
	Yeah, the pictures are a bit bold; if Mr. Kelley complains, I'll certainly remove them. Or even if someone gives me a good legal argument. But the sound clips are really no problem. Yes, the RIAA is a bit insane these days, but I doubt even they would go after samples that small and low-quality and in this context. Given the mood of the courts recently, such a suit would not only lose, it would likely get them sanctioned. I will also admit that pushing the envelope here a bit with the pictures should encourage Jimbo to work on the non-profit foundation, because if we get that settled, we'll ''really'' be in the clear on fair use. I also reduced the images a bit; the don't interfere with the article as much that way, and it's even clearer that we aren't trying to reproduce them. --LDC

	----
	For the record, is a helter-skelter

	:Well, cool. At least I had a better idea than Manson. It sounds like you go on it over and over.

	::When I get to the bottom I go back to the top of the slide
	::Where I stop and I turn and I go for a ride
	::Get to the bottom and I see you again

	:The ] says the original name was "helter skelter lighthouse" and you slid down on a mat.
	:: ''You still do (or at least you did 15-20 years ago, when I last went on one'' -- ]
	:The first use of the phrase was ], followed closely by ] in Henry IV. This is almost an article now. ]
	-------
	Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is almost always referred to as ]. Shouldn't it be moved? ]

	: Just my 2 cents.. everyone knows it as "the white album", but the correct title is "The Beatles". I don't personally really care one way or the other, but it seems more appropriate to me for the article to be named after the actual title, with a redirect from ]. -Jazz77

	::Throughout the article, the album with a white cover is referred to as ''The White Album'' as if it’s the official title. In light of the above, shouldn’t the article refer to it by its actual title (''The Beatles'') or its description (“the white album”, as opposed to ''The White Album'')? —] 02:55, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
	----
	The original vinyl albums had "The Beatles" on the front cover in raised lettering (no ink), something which wasn't preserved on the CD releases. Also, they had a serial number stamped on the front, which eventually went over a million, I believe, before later pressings dropped it. I've heard that the first presses of the CD also had the serial number, although I've never seen one. ] 00:32, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

	My (well, my parents' :)) copy of the White Album LP doesn't have a serial number, although my CD copy does (it is the 30th anniversary version though, a scale replica of the original LP case with smaller pictures inside and all that, which is irritating because it doesn't fit in a CD slot...but I digress). Also, my parents' copy of the Sgt. Pepper LP doesn't have that bizarre repeating stuff at the very end of the groove, although a bit of it is on my CD version. ] 00:37, 17 Sep 2003 (UTC)

	I have an original CD with the serial number... but for some reason the number is 72961.... Is that just of numbered CD's or numbered CD's and Vinyls?? Maybe someone knows?--] 04:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


	Not really sure where this goes, but "Honey Pie" is not Sinatraesque. It's in the same, early-twentieth century jazzy, vaudevillian style like "When I'm Sixty-four" from Sgt. Pepper's is. Sinatraesque is way off the mark.

	== George ==

	Can anyone explain why the photo of George Harrisson from the White Album sleeve has been omitted? It even says under the photos that Harrison's photo is there but is clearly not.
	] 07:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

	== reply to problem with LPs and CDs/length of White Album ==

	To the person that said that Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club didn't have the bizarre noise on the LP, you're getting taught.

	On the US copies of Sgt. Pepper's, the bizarre noise (Paul is a comic book character?) isn't on there. It just ends with the crashing chord of "A Day In The Life". On the CDs, released in 1987 by Parlophone/Apple in the US and UK, have the bizarre noise. Your parents, talking about the White Album, don't have the serial number copy. You do, because it's a remastered version.

	Talking about the length:

	The length of the White Album is about 94 minutes long. Up! by Shania Twain is almost 100 minutes long. Why in the world do they have Up! on 1 CD, but not the White Album? I know why:

	In 1987, the average length of a CD was 45 minutes. Nowadays, it's 101 minutes. So, if Capitol rereleases the "White Album", it would be on 1 CD, not 2, but they would put it on 2 CDs because it would be really hard to find "Birthday", "Helter Skelter" or "Revolution 9", so there.

	: 74 minutes is the maximum recommended playing time for a CD - anything longer is non-standard. While it's physically possible to master CDs of up to 99 minutes in length, an awful lot of CD players (especially older models) would have severe problems playing them; I doubt whether any CD player manufactured in 1987 would be able to play a 94 minute CD. ] 15:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

	== Helter Skelter and Charles Manson ==

	The mention of Charles Manson's connection to the song Helter Skelter was not accurate based on the info contained in the Misplaced Pages articles about the song itself and on Charles Manson, as well as other stuff I've read about Manson.. While it may be true the Susan Atkins saw prophecy in the song, that idea originated from Charles Manson. The whole bit about her spreading false publicity about Manson seemed to somehow suggest the whole Helter Skelter equals race war prophecy was a solely product of her mind. I change the reference to reflect the similar mentions of the connection in other Misplaced Pages articles. --] 14:31, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

	== The beginning of the end for The Beatles? ==

	I think not... ] 10:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

	==Rejected tracks==
	Please don't include rehashed hearsay in this encyclopedia. A bootleg of a song with varient lyrics doesn't constitute a rejected recording!

			== Musical breaks while recording "I Will" ==
	''F**k a duck" for example was a one off rant by Lennon at the Maharishi during the recording of 'Sexy Sadie'.

			"In between numerous takes, the three Beatles broke off to busk some other songs." That's not busking. Jamming, perhaps. Relaxing, maybe. Goofing off, even. But it's not busking. "Bounce around," perhaps? ] (]) 04:24, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
	Including a list of every twang The Beatles committed to tape with made up song titles doesn't make for a good article and won't remain on the page for long. Most of Abbey Road and Get Back/Let It Be was floating around in early forms not yet ready for recording during these sessions. This kind of obsessive inclusionism is pointless and is misleading for those who are interested in facts.
			:What is your source of information? ] ] ] 12:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

			== Genre: psychedelia should be added ==
	'''If you want to add further alledged "rejected tracks" then please include a verifyable reference.'''

			Multiple songs fit this category, and according to source 56: "The Beatles' White Album release marked the coming death of the 60s, but it was also The Beatles' most psychedelic and surreal record."
	] 01:20, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

			I had edited this but realized I should've added a source and someone had removed it by then. It's true in any case that quite a few songs use the same experimental studio techniques as previous albums or are simply psychedelic songs. It says psychedelic music right under genres and length, too. ] (]) 19:44, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
	:Lady Madonna was not a rejected track! It was not even done during the same sessions as the rest of the album. It was done before the beatles went to Rishikesh for the Maharishi camp; the single was released during thier absence. Same applies for The Inner Light and Hey Bulldog (passed up for the single by Lady Madonna). {{unsigned\|Beatlesfan1234567890}}
			:Infoboxes by necessity have limited information. For an album, especially one with very diverse genres that are in the White album, we can't always include every genre of every song. The three genres currently in the infobox capture the majority of the album. Most of the songs are not psychedelic. As for the one source you mention, it's one opinion from one website; in fact, that source appears to have disappeared from the link (although it might be rescued if we look hard enough) so currently we don't have any details about what the writer meant. I personally don't support adding psychedelia, but thanks for bringing this to the talk page. If there is enough support here to form a ], it might be possible to add another genre. ] (]) 20:05, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
			:I found the article for the citation and corrected the citation. Except for the title, the article has virtually nothing about psychedelic genre. In fact, in my opinion, the title makes no sense after reading the article. "Psychedelic music" is in ] cited to the source. I think that's sufficient. ] (]) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

			== Cultural references ==
	::It's no good including tracks without specific references. For example just because ] was recorded and unreleased doesn't mean it was considered for the white album. If you are going to make this kind of statement then state your source and include page numbers etc. so the information can be verified! If not be prepared to see your entries swiftly removed!!!!
	::] 07:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

			Seems there is a over this section. While I don't like edit-warring, I'm actually fairly ambivalent about whether the article should include this. So can somebody briefly summarise the pros and the cons for it? ] ] ] 12:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
	== Auto peer review ==

			:Also ambivalent. If the sources (and then the paragraph) connected these issues up with the album itself rather than just being contemporaneous, it would make more sense to include them here. And a different section: usually "cultural references" mean culture referencing the subject, not "impressions of the authors from around that time." --John (]/]) 16:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
	The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic ], and might not be applicable for the article in question.
	*Per ], avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. {{#if:previous \|For example, ''previous ''}}{{#if:{{{2\|}}}\|{{#if:{{{3\|}}}\| ,\| and}} ''{{{2}}}''}}{{#if:{{{3\|}}}\|{{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|,\|, and}} ''{{{3}}}''}}{{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|{{#if:{{{5\|}}}\|,\|, and}} ''{{{4}}}''}}{{#if:{{{5\|}}}\|{{#if:{{{6\|}}}\|,\|, and}} ''{{{5}}}''}}{{#if:{{{6\|}}}\|, and ''{{{6}}}''}} {{#if:previous \|might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.}}<ref name="time">See footnote</ref>
	*Per ], ] should have concise captions.<ref name="caption">See footnote</ref>
	*Per ], there should be a non-breaking space - <code>&nbsp;</code> between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of ''18mm'', use ''18 mm'', which when you are editing the page, should look like: <tt>18&nbsp;mm</tt>.<ref name="nbsp">See footnote</ref>
	*Per ], headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ''<nowiki>==The Biography==</nowiki>'' would be changed to ''<nowiki>==Biography==</nowiki>''.
	*Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at ]. {{{1\|}}}
	*Please alphabetize the {{{1\|]}}}.<ref name="alpha">See footnote</ref>
	*There are a few occurrences of ]s in this article- please observe ]. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. {{#if:''allege''\|For example,
	''allege''}}{{#if:{{{2\|}}}\|{{{2}}}}}{{#if:{{{3\|}}}\|{{{3}}}}}{{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|{{{4}}}}}{{#if:{{{5\|}}}\|{{{5}}}}}{{#if:{{{6\|}}}\|{{{6}}}}} {{#if:''allege''\|**might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper ] (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please <strike>strike</strike> this comment).}}<ref name="awt">See footnote</ref> <!--This javascript cannot determine if a citation is provided; if all weasel terms are covered by citations, please strike this-->
	*Watch for ] that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's ].)
	**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “<font color='red'><s>All</s></font> pigs are pink, so we thought of <font color='red'><s>a number of</s></font> ways to turn them green.”
	*Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of ]. See also ]. {{#if:{{{1\|}}}\|For example,
	{{{1}}}}}{{#if:{{{2\|}}}\|{{{2}}}}}{{#if:{{{3\|}}}\|{{{3}}}}}{{#if:{{{4\|}}}\|{{{4}}}}}{{#if:{{{5\|}}}\|{{{5}}}}}{{#if:{{{6\|}}}\|{{{6}}}}}{{#if:{{{1\|}}}\|**and perhaps other copyediting fixes for grammar/spelling are needed.}}<ref name="copyedit">See footnote</ref>
	You may wish to browse through ] for further ideas. Thanks, ] 10:27, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

			== Arrival dates ==
	== When did Abbey Road get eight-track? ==

			There is mention of the differing departure dates, so wouldn’t it be appropriate to mention the arrival dates? There are two, 15 February and 19 February, so can I suggest "mid-February"? ] ] 19:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
	The article for the "White Album" makes the following statement (emphasis mine):

			== Certification ==
	"While the Abbey Road studios had yet to install an 8-track machine that had supposedly been sitting in a storage room unpacked for months (''evidently because EMI could not afford its power cord''), the Beatles decided to out-source to the more updated Trident Studios."

			Should say double diamond ] (]) 01:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
	What basis is there for the assertion that Abbey Road had no power cord for their 8-track machine? The footnote references Mark Lewisohn's "The Complete Beatles Recording Sessions", but Lewisohn never makes any such claim. On the contrary, his entry for Wednesday 31 July (pg. 146) discusses the state of Abbey Road's first 8-track machine in some detail; by his account the delay in installation had to do with dissatisfaction with its operation by the staff (he mentions problems with its overdub facility and vari-speed control), which implies that they were quite capable of powering the machine up. He also mentions they were waiting for construction of an 8-track mixing console to accompany the recorder.

Latest revision as of 10:32, 10 July 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Beatles (album) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Consensus per this RfC closure and this RfM closure is to use "the Beatles" mid-sentence.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

The Beatles (album) has been listed as one of the Music good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 23, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
July 18, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
April 3, 2016	Peer review	Reviewed
A fact from this article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on September 7, 2014.The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that The Beatles sold for over £19,000?
Facts from this article were featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 22, 2018, and November 22, 2023.
Current status: Good article

This level-5 vital article is rated GA-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

The Beatles Top‑importance

This Beatles-related article is within the scope of WikiProject The Beatles, which focuses on improving coverage of English rock band The Beatles and related topics on Misplaced Pages. Users who are willing to participate in the project should visit the project page, where they can join and see a list of open tasks.The BeatlesWikipedia:WikiProject The BeatlesTemplate:WikiProject The BeatlesThe Beatles

Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to albums on Misplaced Pages.

To-do list:

For WikiProject The Beatles

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles.
Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article
Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs
Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood.
Verify : Beatle wives
Other : Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here.

This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

No consensus, 18 August 2011, from The Beatles (album) to The White Album, see discussion.
Withdrawn, 28 March 2014, from The Beatles (album) to The Beatles (White Album), see discussion.
No consensus, 31 March 2014, from The Beatles (album) to White Album, see discussion.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

] The anchor (#Tributes, tribute albums and cover albums) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Musical breaks while recording "I Will"

"In between numerous takes, the three Beatles broke off to busk some other songs." That's not busking. Jamming, perhaps. Relaxing, maybe. Goofing off, even. But it's not busking. "Bounce around," perhaps? Huw Powell (talk) 04:24, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

What is your source of information? Ritchie333 12:30, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Genre: psychedelia should be added

Multiple songs fit this category, and according to source 56: "The Beatles' White Album release marked the coming death of the 60s, but it was also The Beatles' most psychedelic and surreal record."

I had edited this but realized I should've added a source and someone had removed it by then. It's true in any case that quite a few songs use the same experimental studio techniques as previous albums or are simply psychedelic songs. It says psychedelic music right under genres and length, too. BrianVL (talk) 19:44, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Infoboxes by necessity have limited information. For an album, especially one with very diverse genres that are in the White album, we can't always include every genre of every song. The three genres currently in the infobox capture the majority of the album. Most of the songs are not psychedelic. As for the one source you mention, it's one opinion from one website; in fact, that source appears to have disappeared from the link (although it might be rescued if we look hard enough) so currently we don't have any details about what the writer meant. I personally don't support adding psychedelia, but thanks for bringing this to the talk page. If there is enough support here to form a WP:CONSENSUS, it might be possible to add another genre. Sundayclose (talk) 20:05, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

I found the article for the citation and corrected the citation. Except for the title, the article has virtually nothing about psychedelic genre. In fact, in my opinion, the title makes no sense after reading the article. "Psychedelic music" is in The Beatles (album) cited to the source. I think that's sufficient. Sundayclose (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Cultural references

Seems there is a bit of a dispute over this section. While I don't like edit-warring, I'm actually fairly ambivalent about whether the article should include this. So can somebody briefly summarise the pros and the cons for it? Ritchie333 12:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Also ambivalent. If the sources (and then the paragraph) connected these issues up with the album itself rather than just being contemporaneous, it would make more sense to include them here. And a different section: usually "cultural references" mean culture referencing the subject, not "impressions of the authors from around that time." --John (User:Jwy/talk) 16:14, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Arrival dates

There is mention of the differing departure dates, so wouldn’t it be appropriate to mention the arrival dates? There are two, 15 February and 19 February, so can I suggest "mid-February"? Boscaswell talk 19:59, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Certification

Should say double diamond Wolf O'Donnel (talk) 01:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Categories: