Misplaced Pages

Talk:The Beatles (album)

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nicholas0 (talk | contribs) at 14:40, 9 February 2020 (→Survey: A). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 14:40, 9 February 2020 by Nicholas0 (talk | contribs) (→Survey: A)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days 

Template:Vital article

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.
Good articleThe 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.
Did You Know Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 23, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
July 18, 2014Good article nomineeListed
April 3, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
Did You Know 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?
Current status: Good article
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconThe Beatles Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
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:

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?
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconAlbums
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum
This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.

Discussions:

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.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days 

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on November 22, 2018.

Chris Thomas

Every week, it seems somebody deems it vitally important to add Chris Thomas to the infobox. The article covers his role, but officially only George Martin gets the producer credit. (After all, who really thinks "Revolution #9" was all his work?) So consensus is we leave it at Martin. Ritchie333 23:37, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Question: why is Chris Thomas listed as "Producer" in the Personnel section, but not in the infobox up top? And where is the consensus you mentioned? (Not pushing for a particular approach — I'm sincerely asking.)

To be completely fair, no one is "officially" credited as "Producer" on the original album credits, not even George Martin, who's sole mention is the first acknowledgment in their list of "Thanks to", which also includes Chris Thomas (listed second), as well as the engineers, photographers, and other in the immediate support team during the making of the album.

Mark Lewison relates a detailed account of Martin's walking out on the sessions upon Thomas' arrival, effectively leaving the album's completion in the latter's hands. Roughly one-third to one-half of the songs were recorded under his supervision.

Indeed, the article on the album at https://www.beatlesbible.com/albums/the-beatles-white-album/ lists Martin and Thomas, along with Lennon and McCartney, all as producers.

Again, not lobbying for one approach or another; merely seeking to shed light on the subject. Cheers! Key of Now (talk) 09:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Evolution of album title

A Doll's House wasn't the first working title for the album. Before it was called that, Paul came up with the title Umbrella to account for its wide variety of different styles and genres that it incoporates, as according to Mark Osteen (ed.), The Beatles through a Glass Onion: Reconsidering the White Album, University of Michigan Press, 2019, page 1 (of the introduction). I remember reading a few times before that George remarked in passing that the title of Umbrella was already around while they were still in Rishikesh, though it seems he considered that title more of a (lame?) joke, and Osteen also emphasizes that Umbrella already had been adopted as a working title for the album "before the LP had been recorded".

And I think somewhere in-between, the band even considered naming the album "Mother Nature's Sons" or "Children of Nature", hence the discarded cover drawing of all four Beatles sitting in the grass that later turned up in The Beatles Illustrated Lyrics credited to "Patrick, Portal Gallery, London" (aka John Byrne) and as the cover to 1980's The Beatles Ballads. After all, the "organic", "unplugged", down-to-earth nature (also referred to as supposedly "lo-fi" by Giles Martin in his promotion of the new 2018 stereo mix) of the White Album after the flights of psychedelic fancy is widely known, so that "The Beatles as Nature Intended", the slogan later used for promotion of the Let it Be album, would've been even more appropriate for the White Album, all of which gels well with the discarded Byrne cover and a temporary working title of either "Mother Nature's Sons" or "Children of Nature". --2003:EF:13DB:3B62:A9AE:5B61:2530:3F3D (talk) 20:52, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Why is the "Lady Madonna" single scrubbed from the article?

Any explanation at all? ilil (talk) 12:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Because it's not on the album nor recorded at the sessions for it. Ritchie333 20:03, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: Can we remove the details about Pepper and MMT then? After all, they weren't the White Album, so we shouldn't mention them on this article. ilil (talk) 06:19, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

I believe the single (and the two other songs recorded in February 1968) should be mentioned simply because it's the normal, encyclopedic thing to note what a band worked on in the interim between major projects like an LP record (this is why we mention Pepper and the MMT film). The songs are associated with the White Album, as in, they appear on the 50th anniversary edition, and were recorded so that the band would be free from recording obligations during their India trip (according to what I read from Lewisohn). It makes no difference whether the songs were recorded during the album's sessions — that's not the point. ilil (talk) 08:44, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

The current prose reached agreement after the GA review and elsewhere; you’re best off discussing with JG66 Ritchie333 08:49, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
What does the article's GA classification have to do with anything? ilil (talk) 09:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
WP:OAS (part of the "Ownership of articles" policy) : "All editors are welcome to make changes and improve the article, but some discussion of significant changes is recommended, and the editors participating in the review may be able to offer advice and work with you on improving the article further." Ritchie333 12:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
I'm not sure that adding two sentences to an 8500-word article constitutes "significant change". ilil (talk) 15:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

(addendum) If you still wish to argue that the songs shouldn't be mentioned because they weren't part of the album sessions, that's just another point favoring the information's inclusion. People who aren't familiar with the subject would (rightfully) assume that the songs are related to the White Album unless there's a statement in the article that explicitly states something like they weren't "part of the White Album project". ilil (talk) 09:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Mention of the single wasn't "scrubbed from the article"; you tried to add the point and it was reverted. And while I've become used to logic and common sense being in short supply whenever you attempt to edit a Beatles article, your statement here that "If you still wish to argue that the songs shouldn't be mentioned because they weren't part of the album sessions, that's just another point favoring the information's inclusion" is just baffling ...
It's not a case of plugging a perceived hole in the band's CV, as you imply. If that were the case, the "All You Need Is Love" and "Hello Goodbye" non-album singles would appear to be missing also. Your claim that "Lady Madonna" is "the non-album single that everyone associates with the White Album" is utter rubbish. The songs were included on the 50th anniversary box set, but that is the first time that they've been associated with the White Album. From countless sources I've read, particularly when working on the relevant song articles, the March 1968 single represents a line in the sand – the situation couldn't be more different between those February sessions and starting work on the album in late May. That doesn't mean "Lady Madonna" has no place at all in this article: as a deliberate back-to-basics recording, it could easily be mentioned when discussing the album's musical styles or its relative lack of studio artifice; it could just as well be mentioned for the first time in text discussing the 50th anniversary box set. But it's not a single "associated" with the White Album (apart from the full, six?-CD edition issued in November 2018) and nor is it an important part of the album's pre-story.
The Background section needs to establish some key points about the Beatles' position and activities before they made the album. Their standing after Sgt. Pepper, the impact of which was still very much felt in early '68, and the perceived goof of Magical Mystery Tour are two obvious points. For a while, I've thought we could probably improve this section. Unlike you, though, I have some respect for the fact that an article has achieved GA or FA and has been well maintained since then. So I'll outline my suggestions here on the talk page (sometime soon). Because, if I just charge in like the proverbial bull in a china shop, especially by seeking to add some questionable detail or apply a flawed interpretation of WP:TERSE or whatever, I'd fully expect to get other editors' backs up and be made to feel very unwelcome. JG66 (talk) 11:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
You don't realize it, but you've further bolstered my argument — if March 1968 "represents a line in the sand", shouldn't we note this so-called line? If the LM single signalled a new "back-to-basics" approach that the band developed on the White Album, why isn't it relevant to the "pre-story"? When the White Album was anticipated by the Hey Jude single in August, had everyone forgotten that the last Beatles release occurred in March, and that a major feature-length Beatles film premiered in July? Why, when it comes to the-White-Album-story-as-according-to-JG66, does Beatles history start at May 1967 and drop out between January and February 1968? Why do you think Hello Goodbye, a song universally associated with MMT, is contextually comparable to LM, a song the band worked on in much closer thematic and chronological proximity to the White Album sessions?
What if, instead, the paragraph ended something like this:
fan reaction was nevertheless positive. In early 1968, the group commenced sessions for a new single in order to free their schedules for the coming months. From these sessions, "Lady Madonna" was issued with the B-side "The Inner Light" in March. (possible footnote: The two other songs they recorded in early 1968, "Hey Bulldog" and "Across the Universe", were submitted for consideration in the upcoming Yellow Submarine film.) The band signalled a return to simpler rock 'n' roll traditions with the former, a development that extended to much of the writing for their next LP project, along with the song's lesser reliance on studio artifice.
Or is that enough to destroy the article's pace? ilil (talk) 15:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

RfC on syntax

Please consider joining the feedback request service.
An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list: When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

For the article's "Background" section, which wording is preferable?

  • A: In May 1967, the Beatles album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was released to commercial and critical success. It sold 250,000 copies in its first week and topped the UK charts for 27 weeks, through to the start of February 1968.
  • B: By 1968, the Beatles had achieved commercial and critical success. The group's mid-1967 release, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, was number one in the UK for 27 weeks, through to the start of February 1968, having sold 250,000 copies in the first week after release.

ilil (talk) 09:05, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Survey

Comments

Categories: