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 Teflon Peter Christ (talk | contribs) at 22:18, 28 March 2015 (→Genres, yet again). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 22:18, 28 March 2015 by Teflon Peter Christ (talk | contribs) (→Genres, yet again)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 23, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
July 18, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Did You KnowA 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 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 
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.
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 

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Chris Thomas

Was he officially credited as the album's producer? Co-producing or assistant producing is not the same thing.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:43, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

No, he was not officially credited. Ritchie333 17:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

missing link

I discovered that there is a missing link on the "Beatles Discography" but don't know how to fix it. When viewing the albums there is a previous and next link. They go from "Sgt. Pepper" to "The Beatles" skipping "Magical Mystery Tour"

That's because in the UK MMT was released a double EP so it's not shown as an album in the UK discography. Richerman (talk) 15:13, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

Shorter version

The infobox length says 1:33:35. Perhaps a little nb note could denote that the mono version is a minute shorter? Like with Brothers in Arms (Dire Straits album) for its LP version?--TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 21:40, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Album's stay at number 1 in UK

Just thinking about this change – is anyone able to check the Everett citation? I wonder if the number of weeks might be wrong, because we give 22 weeks at Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band#Release. And if it is 22, then I believe it was indeed an unbroken period at number 1. On Melody Maker's album chart, at least, Sgt. Pepper was number 1 for 22 consecutive weeks, from 3 June through to 28 October. JG66 (talk) 22:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

  • I think GabeMc did that cite, although I took the article to GA I think that was a source I just AGFed on. If Sgt Pepper says it's 22, it's probably from the same gamut of sources and GabeMc was generally spot on with his research. I'll assume 22 was right and revert. Ritchie333 23:09, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Hadn't seen your reply here. Just realised it might be an idea to check with List of UK Albums Chart number ones of the 1960s. There, we give 27 weeks total, with the first 23 an unbroken run. I have a feeling Everett might've been referring to the Melody Maker chart – I've found that several US authors treat MM as if they published the official UK chart (which they did until early in the '60s). JG66 (talk) 12:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
The Official Charts Company shows 23 consecutive weeks at number one, 27 weeks total (see ). Piriczki (talk) 13:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Genres, yet again

It seems we're disagreeing what to put in the "genre" section of the infobox yet again. My !vote is for "rock, pop" per the existing consensus - what does anyone else think? Ritchie333 12:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Banish the genre field from the infobox. Seriously. It's nothing for trouble for us and it's antithetical to how real artists operate. I mean, really, the White Album has every genre under the sun in it somewhere. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:49, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I'll second that. Banish it. Piriczki (talk) 14:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Was this so difficult to do? Dan56 (talk) 21:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
When the inevitable heavy-handed admins arrive because of edit-warring, it will help to have a talk page discussion to point to when they ask "where is the consensus for this?" And I agree with rock and pop as well. Tarc (talk) 22:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Check the archives, but both genres are cited in the article. Dan56 (talk) 22:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Categories: