![]() | Love (Beatles album) was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here's a track listing from this article [1]:
'Because' 'Get Back' 'Glass Onion' 'Eleanor Rigby'/'Julia' (Transistion) 'I Am The Walrus' 'I Want To Hold Your Hand' 'Drive My Car'/' The Word'/'What You're Doing' 'Gnik Nus' 'Something'/'Blue Jay Way' (Transition) 'Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite!'/'I Want You (She's So Heavy)'/ 'Helter Skelter' 'Help!' 'Blackbird'/'Yesterday' 'Strawberry Fields Forever' 'Within You Without You'/'Tomorrow Never Knows' 'Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds' 'Octopus's Garden' 'Lady Madonna' 'Here Comes The Sun'/'The Inner Light' (Transition) 'Come Together'/'Dear Prudence'/'Cry Baby Cry' (Transition) 'Revolution' 'Back In The USSR' 'While My Guitar Gently Weeps' 'A Day In The Life' 'Hey Jude' 'Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (Reprise)' 'All You Need Is Love'
Can anyone determine if either one is correct or incorrect? Thanks. -- luckymustard 15:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The article " LOVE (album)" is vacant so there is no need to use the extra "The Beatles" in the title. —☆ CieloEstrellado 02:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm for it - the reasons make sense to me. Jason 03:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I thought the link to the songs would have entries on the LOVE versions of each song, but to my surprise the link lead me to the song page of the original recording. I was hoping to see a analyst of the song including which bits come from what song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.177.155 ( talk • contribs)
While the Miami Herald is right with the information used and cited in this article (i.e. the song titles), it should be noted that there are errors in the sentence that contains that information. The newspaper article says:
“ | Ringo's drum solo from Abbey Road and the feedback intro from A Hard Day's Night meld to launch the driving Get Back. | ” |
There are two things wrong with that sentence. For one, the drum solo is from "The End"; The Beatles never recorded a song called "Abbey Road". And secondly, there is no feedback involved in the first chord of "A Hard Day's Night". Nevertheless, as an outside source, it's useful as a confirmation of what we already know, but can't write because of WP:NOR. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 04:05, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Drum Track” at the end of Take 7 of Strawberry Fields Forever, included on Anthology II. (this is Bernsteinp, but i can't log in right now -- i forgot my password.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.151.54 ( talk) 22:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Originally, "Gnik Nus" was linked to Sun King (song). Then, someone (anonymous, I think) came by and added the note about it being played in reverse. I fixed it up so that it matched the formatting of the list, and unlinked the list entry because it was the only one not the same as the original song. It was then relinked and the note was expanded to say that it "included elements of" Sun King played in reverse. Then all of this was removed, reverting it back to where it started. I'm just wondering, what is the reasoning behind this? — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 16:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I think how exactly needs to be explained. 213.254.90.177 01:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC) I agree. What is the additional three minutes?
Who erased my addition about "Good Night" being incorporated into "Octopus's Garden"? It's described in the Pitchfork review and obvious to anyone who listens to it. Additionally, while the review doesn't explicitly say it's also incorporated in "All You Need Is Love," it's clearly the same sample. Personally I think Wikipedia: No original research should be allowed to be bended a bit in a case like this, as something like what song is incorporated into what song is 100% verifiable if you just listen to them. Anyone have any thoughts? -- DanyaRomulus 00:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Is it just me, or is this track listing going to get out of hand if people keep extending these lists? Given that the Martins have said they've sampled bits of hundreds of songs, I'm sure eventually almost everything in the Beatles' catalogue could be added. And I don't think a track listing is the place for a detailed analysis of the samples and mash-ups. -- KJBracey 21:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I am interested in knowing as many of the songs that are included in each track like most fans, why can't we all agree on what is included and add it, after all the real track listing won't be touched, everyone has that as a basis, it isn't any different adding the story of the wood pigeon to 'Because' than it is to add the drums of 'Why Don't We Do It In The Road?' to 'Lady Madonna'. We should go to town on adding everything we possibly can, obviously by agreeing it first hand, what do you all think? 11:14am 27th March 2008 Paul McMarkney ( talk) 11:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I recently changed the rating of the article to "A", but it was then changed to "B". I'm curious as to the reasoning behind this. It seemed to fit into the "A" class, especially because we've been good and have included references since the beginning. One or all of us should also probably duplicate this information into Talk:Love (The Beatles album)/Comments. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 01:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm a little bemused to why my addition of "Sgt Pepper" to the track elements of "Strawberry Fields FOrever" was deleted. It is very obvious to anyone who has actually listened to this album. Solipsist3 00:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Many new bits of information are presented in interviews on The Beatles' Love Listen page. One such new bit was the recently reverted "Yesterday"/"Blackbird" information. How do we go about citing an audio recording contained fully within a Flash animation? And why don't we go about extracting the new information for the article? — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 19:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Under "Track Elements" I have added some material on "Get Back." This info was found in Reference #13. This means that "Get Back" should have references to #9 and #13. I can't figure how to make that work. Can someone else? KXL 14:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
"Can you take me back where I came from", where is this from? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.87.184.150 ( talk) 20:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
Can the person who nominated it for GA add a "Reception" section? I named five different sources for a "Reception" section on this talk page awhile back. LuciferMorgan 22:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
The article is well sourced, but it isn't well organized. There should be some sort of Reception section and the Track elements section should be prosified. Keep trying and I'm sure this article will soon reach GA status. -- Scorpion 17:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The beginning part: could this possibly be "Why Don't We Do It In The Road?". 67.87.184.150 00:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Any official word on why the track is credited as "Drive My Car / The Word / What You're Doing", rather than "Drive My Car / What You're Doing / The Word"? — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 05:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Information on a claim that Iamaphoney found the Love "code" has been removed from the article. The rationale for the removal is that the claim is not substantiated by a verifiable source. If you wish to discuss the change, please do so in this topic. Just64helpin 13:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
The iamaphoney issue rears its ugly head again. The article should not contain anything about his claim whether there is evidence or not. It's not notable. John Cardinal 20:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
What about the highly sophisticated, original music videos for the Love tracks provided by user CapitolRecords that keep popping up on YouTube lately (a few have been deleted already)? Have they ever been officially released for sale? -- Tlatosmd 17:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
There's a wee parody of the album going about called Hate... doesn't seem you can download from the website anymore, but it's pretty popular on torrent sites. I don't suppose it might be worth a little mention here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.11.130 ( talk) 16:07, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
Brilliant and inspired. The downloads worked for me. 71.205.136.119 ( talk) 15:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The piece starts with the assertion that Love is an album by the Beatles. I think this needs to be considered. It is an album consisting of a collage of their music, but is it really "by" them? If I took a load of shakespeare lines and assembled a stream of quotations for artistic effect, would the resulting work be "by Shakespeare"? MegdalePlace 20:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure, but I think that the transition between Somthing and Being for the Benefit... has a part of Carnival of Light in it. I think I read it in the booklet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchachos ( talk • contribs) 18:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I fixed the infobox. For some reason, the template said "Template:infobox album" instead of "Template:Single infobox" mrfunnyd 17:49, November 30, 2007 (UTC)
Love won two Grammies last night - not bad for a group that stopped recording together (with a couple of exceptions) 38 years ago... 147.70.242.40 ( talk) 19:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
At the end of All You Need Is Love, we hear snatches of Baby You're a Rich Man, Rain, and Sgt. Pepper. But like 2 or 4 counts before Baby You're a Rich Man, there is a guitar part that comes in that was not part of the original All You Need Is Love. I have tried to listen to it and figure out where it is form, but it is buried too far beneath the rest of the soing for me to hear it clearly. Does anyone know what song it's from?
In clarification, I'm not asking to put this on the actual page, I know it's original research. Just wondering if anybody knows, that's all - just leave a reply here if you do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mellophonius ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I Think its the ending to a Hard Days Night in a different tempo and it ends with The Beatles Third Christmas Record 1965 -- Muchacholoco ( talk) 17:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchacholoco ( talk • contribs) 17:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I listened to Hard Day's Night and I think you're right about that guitar part. I don't have any of the Beatles Christmas stuff so I can't listen to it :(. -Mellophonius —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.223.219 ( talk) 04:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Someone edited the All You Need Is Love page and said it was the guitar riff from Ticket to Ride. I still think it's Hard Day's night. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.117.212 ( talk) 03:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I strongly believe my self its Ticket to Ride now, because when i lightly plug my headphones into my 4g ipod i am able to hear background noises louder and foreground noises lower i will try to upload a clip of the sound. I've also discovered a strange cartoony Xylophone section in strawberry fields 3:05 into the song, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchacholoco ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Son of George Martin and producer of Love, Giles Martin speaks in this interview and touches upon the process, selection, and mixing of songs. 2008 (Full disclosure, I am an editor at Crawaddy!, but I am not posting this link on the page to avoid COI concerns.) Please use the review and cite it if you feel so inclined. Best,Asst. Editor, Crawdaddy! FenderRhodesScholar | Talk 23:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
this article has one major flaw:there were two albums that were promo only that were associated with "LOVE" they were very important in the promotion of "LOVE" so I feel as though they should definitely worth adding to the article along with photos.
has there been any follow up as to what the code was or if anyone found it? MaJic ( talk) 09:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no move. JPG-GR ( talk) 07:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Love (The Beatles album) → LOVE (The Beatles album) — caps — Eiduringi 21:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.Support - LOVE (4 Track Sampler) should not be a separate article; the contents should be merged here. It's a limited release that isn't notable on its own. The current version of LOVE (4 Track Sampler) is unreferenced and is likely to stay that way. It's unlikely to grow as an article and the contents can be moved here without disrupting this article in the slightest. — John Cardinal ( talk) 02:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Support per John Cardinal's reasoning. AtticusX ( talk) 06:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Support, but sources should be found first. Deserted Cities ( talk) 06:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Support The articles suggested to be merged are unsupported and have no meaning to be a separate article. --
Colonel Valh ala-112
03:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: rather than simply digging up the old dispute, I've done that and proposed a way to reduce tensions if it isn't resolved. Read to the end for the latter. /Note
Wikipedia articles do not consist solely of sentences cited by secondary sources. The article for Hammer starts with an unsourced summary describing the object in question. The article for Electric Guitar describes its subject in much more specific detail. That's because policy and precedent alike say that citations are primarily needed for non-trivial analysis and potentially contentious statements.
The point is that many (not all!) of the identifications we'd like to make are as trivial and non-contentious as saying the top part of a guitar is called the headstock. You might have to refresh your memory of the original song, but when anyone hears it in the mixed version it's clear as day. That's just the obvious ones, yes. Anything speculative can just stay out.
We won't even make definitive statements that X is the source of Y if we phrase it "elements of X song can be heard at 1:34." That simply describes what the album sounds like. It describes the subject of the article in uncontroversial ways, just as they did in Hammer and Electric Guitar.
Oh, and if these small steps remain unapproved how about we reduce tensions by providing an outlet for the people wanting to add observations?
This is the LOVE article on The
Wikia Beatles Wiki. They would love to have this information, and that way a reference will be built somewhere on the web.
P.S. A lot of good info can be found on this other Beatles wiki. It's not collated but on the pages for each remixed song there's usually a section like this. -- Qwerty0 ( talk) 10:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
The album's just been announced as being released on iTunes on February 8th, 2011. It will include two exclusive extra tracks: " The Fool on the Hill" and " Girl" (both Love remixes, obviously) -- BrowndRemastered ( talk) 13:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
I have Love, on Vinyl and it does not have any catalog number of any kind. -- Yeepsi ( Talk to me!) 18:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I was surprised to see that the duration for the iTunes version was erased from the infobox. It appears that it had not its place in the infobox according to Radiopathy as it's not part of the original release. But on this page [ [3]] it appears to me that this restriction only applies to date and label.
I personally believe this duration is a relevant information and that it has its place in the infobox, next to the CD and DVD-A length. After all are we really talking about a re-issue per se, or a new format available? But I cannot argue much than that: English is not my native tongue and I'm no Wiki-Guru...
It's also true that in these times of countless reissues it could give endless listings (imagine 'Live at Leeds', 'Smile'…)
At least it should appear somewhere else in the body of the article, no?
But if you all believe it's no relevant information, well, let's drop it :)
Thank you for reading,
Megatof ( talk) 09:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
P.S. : the iTunes version has a duration of 86 minutes and 41 secondes.
I think they should have combined "I'll Be Back" with "Wait". The reason why I thought of this is because before I'd learned both songs well, my mind imagined bits from both of the songs and stuck them together. And for a little while I actually thought that those lyrics I remembered came from the same song. C.Syde ( talk | contribs) 23:52, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Pretty much the only difference between this version of Help! and the original is that the instruments are more distinguishable on the LOVE version.
The main difference I've noticed between this version of A Day in the Life and the original is that the progressive orchestration is seemingly more restrained during the first of the two orchestrated parts. And I think the song has been polished, giving it a higher quality sound.
It doesn't say that Blackbird/Yesterday is a medley "transition", yet, I can't hear any guitar work from Blackbird once Yesterday begins - how is it not a transition if the two tracks seemingly don't cross over? -- C.Syde ( talk | contribs) 10:52, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Love (Beatles album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I found some samples listed in the "Track Elements" section are not audible to me. Can anybody kindly point them out for me? 1. Drum roll from "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!" in "Lucy in the Sky with Diamond" 2. Harmonium from "Cry Baby Cry" in "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!/I Want You (She's So Heavy)/Helter Skelter" 3. Piano from "Dear Prudence" in "The Fool on the Hill" Kenny Saxton ( talk) 3:22, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Kenny Saxton: " Trust ears, not rules" is not a valid approach on Wikipedia. Our goal isn't to say everything that is true but everything that is verifiable. Are your only sources in Chinese? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm resurrecting the section which I started back in December 2014, because no one has responded to it, and it's been over three years, so time to start a new section about the same subject so that I can hopefully get some answers this time.
― C.Syde ( talk | contribs) 06:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding your question on "Octopus's Garden", I think the spoken part is from the movie of "Yellow Submarine". Kenny Saxton ( talk) 07:38, 24 March, 2018 (UTC)
When I was listening to the album again this morning, I noticed some samples not in the list here. Can anybody help me confirm whether it is true? [All the samples I mentioned can be heard clearer on 5.1 surround sound versions]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenny Saxton ( talk • contribs) 05:29, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
And some samples in the list are audible to me. Can someone point the out?
Kenny Saxton ( talk) 07:56, 24 March, 2018 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Love (Beatles album)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "wwsales":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
![]() | Love (Beatles album) was a Music good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||
|
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
Here's a track listing from this article [1]:
'Because' 'Get Back' 'Glass Onion' 'Eleanor Rigby'/'Julia' (Transistion) 'I Am The Walrus' 'I Want To Hold Your Hand' 'Drive My Car'/' The Word'/'What You're Doing' 'Gnik Nus' 'Something'/'Blue Jay Way' (Transition) 'Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite!'/'I Want You (She's So Heavy)'/ 'Helter Skelter' 'Help!' 'Blackbird'/'Yesterday' 'Strawberry Fields Forever' 'Within You Without You'/'Tomorrow Never Knows' 'Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds' 'Octopus's Garden' 'Lady Madonna' 'Here Comes The Sun'/'The Inner Light' (Transition) 'Come Together'/'Dear Prudence'/'Cry Baby Cry' (Transition) 'Revolution' 'Back In The USSR' 'While My Guitar Gently Weeps' 'A Day In The Life' 'Hey Jude' 'Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (Reprise)' 'All You Need Is Love'
Can anyone determine if either one is correct or incorrect? Thanks. -- luckymustard 15:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
The article " LOVE (album)" is vacant so there is no need to use the extra "The Beatles" in the title. —☆ CieloEstrellado 02:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I'm for it - the reasons make sense to me. Jason 03:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
I thought the link to the songs would have entries on the LOVE versions of each song, but to my surprise the link lead me to the song page of the original recording. I was hoping to see a analyst of the song including which bits come from what song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.237.177.155 ( talk • contribs)
While the Miami Herald is right with the information used and cited in this article (i.e. the song titles), it should be noted that there are errors in the sentence that contains that information. The newspaper article says:
“ | Ringo's drum solo from Abbey Road and the feedback intro from A Hard Day's Night meld to launch the driving Get Back. | ” |
There are two things wrong with that sentence. For one, the drum solo is from "The End"; The Beatles never recorded a song called "Abbey Road". And secondly, there is no feedback involved in the first chord of "A Hard Day's Night". Nevertheless, as an outside source, it's useful as a confirmation of what we already know, but can't write because of WP:NOR. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 04:05, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Drum Track” at the end of Take 7 of Strawberry Fields Forever, included on Anthology II. (this is Bernsteinp, but i can't log in right now -- i forgot my password.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.151.54 ( talk) 22:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Originally, "Gnik Nus" was linked to Sun King (song). Then, someone (anonymous, I think) came by and added the note about it being played in reverse. I fixed it up so that it matched the formatting of the list, and unlinked the list entry because it was the only one not the same as the original song. It was then relinked and the note was expanded to say that it "included elements of" Sun King played in reverse. Then all of this was removed, reverting it back to where it started. I'm just wondering, what is the reasoning behind this? — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 16:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
I think how exactly needs to be explained. 213.254.90.177 01:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC) I agree. What is the additional three minutes?
Who erased my addition about "Good Night" being incorporated into "Octopus's Garden"? It's described in the Pitchfork review and obvious to anyone who listens to it. Additionally, while the review doesn't explicitly say it's also incorporated in "All You Need Is Love," it's clearly the same sample. Personally I think Wikipedia: No original research should be allowed to be bended a bit in a case like this, as something like what song is incorporated into what song is 100% verifiable if you just listen to them. Anyone have any thoughts? -- DanyaRomulus 00:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Is it just me, or is this track listing going to get out of hand if people keep extending these lists? Given that the Martins have said they've sampled bits of hundreds of songs, I'm sure eventually almost everything in the Beatles' catalogue could be added. And I don't think a track listing is the place for a detailed analysis of the samples and mash-ups. -- KJBracey 21:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
I am interested in knowing as many of the songs that are included in each track like most fans, why can't we all agree on what is included and add it, after all the real track listing won't be touched, everyone has that as a basis, it isn't any different adding the story of the wood pigeon to 'Because' than it is to add the drums of 'Why Don't We Do It In The Road?' to 'Lady Madonna'. We should go to town on adding everything we possibly can, obviously by agreeing it first hand, what do you all think? 11:14am 27th March 2008 Paul McMarkney ( talk) 11:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I recently changed the rating of the article to "A", but it was then changed to "B". I'm curious as to the reasoning behind this. It seemed to fit into the "A" class, especially because we've been good and have included references since the beginning. One or all of us should also probably duplicate this information into Talk:Love (The Beatles album)/Comments. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 01:21, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm a little bemused to why my addition of "Sgt Pepper" to the track elements of "Strawberry Fields FOrever" was deleted. It is very obvious to anyone who has actually listened to this album. Solipsist3 00:44, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Many new bits of information are presented in interviews on The Beatles' Love Listen page. One such new bit was the recently reverted "Yesterday"/"Blackbird" information. How do we go about citing an audio recording contained fully within a Flash animation? And why don't we go about extracting the new information for the article? — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 19:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
Under "Track Elements" I have added some material on "Get Back." This info was found in Reference #13. This means that "Get Back" should have references to #9 and #13. I can't figure how to make that work. Can someone else? KXL 14:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
"Can you take me back where I came from", where is this from? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.87.184.150 ( talk) 20:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC).
Can the person who nominated it for GA add a "Reception" section? I named five different sources for a "Reception" section on this talk page awhile back. LuciferMorgan 22:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
The article is well sourced, but it isn't well organized. There should be some sort of Reception section and the Track elements section should be prosified. Keep trying and I'm sure this article will soon reach GA status. -- Scorpion 17:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The beginning part: could this possibly be "Why Don't We Do It In The Road?". 67.87.184.150 00:31, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Any official word on why the track is credited as "Drive My Car / The Word / What You're Doing", rather than "Drive My Car / What You're Doing / The Word"? — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 05:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Information on a claim that Iamaphoney found the Love "code" has been removed from the article. The rationale for the removal is that the claim is not substantiated by a verifiable source. If you wish to discuss the change, please do so in this topic. Just64helpin 13:35, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
The iamaphoney issue rears its ugly head again. The article should not contain anything about his claim whether there is evidence or not. It's not notable. John Cardinal 20:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
What about the highly sophisticated, original music videos for the Love tracks provided by user CapitolRecords that keep popping up on YouTube lately (a few have been deleted already)? Have they ever been officially released for sale? -- Tlatosmd 17:12, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
There's a wee parody of the album going about called Hate... doesn't seem you can download from the website anymore, but it's pretty popular on torrent sites. I don't suppose it might be worth a little mention here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.11.130 ( talk) 16:07, August 30, 2007 (UTC)
Brilliant and inspired. The downloads worked for me. 71.205.136.119 ( talk) 15:45, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The piece starts with the assertion that Love is an album by the Beatles. I think this needs to be considered. It is an album consisting of a collage of their music, but is it really "by" them? If I took a load of shakespeare lines and assembled a stream of quotations for artistic effect, would the resulting work be "by Shakespeare"? MegdalePlace 20:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure, but I think that the transition between Somthing and Being for the Benefit... has a part of Carnival of Light in it. I think I read it in the booklet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchachos ( talk • contribs) 18:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I fixed the infobox. For some reason, the template said "Template:infobox album" instead of "Template:Single infobox" mrfunnyd 17:49, November 30, 2007 (UTC)
Love won two Grammies last night - not bad for a group that stopped recording together (with a couple of exceptions) 38 years ago... 147.70.242.40 ( talk) 19:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
At the end of All You Need Is Love, we hear snatches of Baby You're a Rich Man, Rain, and Sgt. Pepper. But like 2 or 4 counts before Baby You're a Rich Man, there is a guitar part that comes in that was not part of the original All You Need Is Love. I have tried to listen to it and figure out where it is form, but it is buried too far beneath the rest of the soing for me to hear it clearly. Does anyone know what song it's from?
In clarification, I'm not asking to put this on the actual page, I know it's original research. Just wondering if anybody knows, that's all - just leave a reply here if you do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mellophonius ( talk • contribs) 05:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I Think its the ending to a Hard Days Night in a different tempo and it ends with The Beatles Third Christmas Record 1965 -- Muchacholoco ( talk) 17:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchacholoco ( talk • contribs) 17:40, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I listened to Hard Day's Night and I think you're right about that guitar part. I don't have any of the Beatles Christmas stuff so I can't listen to it :(. -Mellophonius —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.223.219 ( talk) 04:01, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Someone edited the All You Need Is Love page and said it was the guitar riff from Ticket to Ride. I still think it's Hard Day's night. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.213.117.212 ( talk) 03:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
I strongly believe my self its Ticket to Ride now, because when i lightly plug my headphones into my 4g ipod i am able to hear background noises louder and foreground noises lower i will try to upload a clip of the sound. I've also discovered a strange cartoony Xylophone section in strawberry fields 3:05 into the song, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchacholoco ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Son of George Martin and producer of Love, Giles Martin speaks in this interview and touches upon the process, selection, and mixing of songs. 2008 (Full disclosure, I am an editor at Crawaddy!, but I am not posting this link on the page to avoid COI concerns.) Please use the review and cite it if you feel so inclined. Best,Asst. Editor, Crawdaddy! FenderRhodesScholar | Talk 23:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
this article has one major flaw:there were two albums that were promo only that were associated with "LOVE" they were very important in the promotion of "LOVE" so I feel as though they should definitely worth adding to the article along with photos.
has there been any follow up as to what the code was or if anyone found it? MaJic ( talk) 09:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was no move. JPG-GR ( talk) 07:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Love (The Beatles album) → LOVE (The Beatles album) — caps — Eiduringi 21:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
*'''Support'''
or *'''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~
. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.Support - LOVE (4 Track Sampler) should not be a separate article; the contents should be merged here. It's a limited release that isn't notable on its own. The current version of LOVE (4 Track Sampler) is unreferenced and is likely to stay that way. It's unlikely to grow as an article and the contents can be moved here without disrupting this article in the slightest. — John Cardinal ( talk) 02:32, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Support per John Cardinal's reasoning. AtticusX ( talk) 06:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Support, but sources should be found first. Deserted Cities ( talk) 06:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Support The articles suggested to be merged are unsupported and have no meaning to be a separate article. --
Colonel Valh ala-112
03:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Note: rather than simply digging up the old dispute, I've done that and proposed a way to reduce tensions if it isn't resolved. Read to the end for the latter. /Note
Wikipedia articles do not consist solely of sentences cited by secondary sources. The article for Hammer starts with an unsourced summary describing the object in question. The article for Electric Guitar describes its subject in much more specific detail. That's because policy and precedent alike say that citations are primarily needed for non-trivial analysis and potentially contentious statements.
The point is that many (not all!) of the identifications we'd like to make are as trivial and non-contentious as saying the top part of a guitar is called the headstock. You might have to refresh your memory of the original song, but when anyone hears it in the mixed version it's clear as day. That's just the obvious ones, yes. Anything speculative can just stay out.
We won't even make definitive statements that X is the source of Y if we phrase it "elements of X song can be heard at 1:34." That simply describes what the album sounds like. It describes the subject of the article in uncontroversial ways, just as they did in Hammer and Electric Guitar.
Oh, and if these small steps remain unapproved how about we reduce tensions by providing an outlet for the people wanting to add observations?
This is the LOVE article on The
Wikia Beatles Wiki. They would love to have this information, and that way a reference will be built somewhere on the web.
P.S. A lot of good info can be found on this other Beatles wiki. It's not collated but on the pages for each remixed song there's usually a section like this. -- Qwerty0 ( talk) 10:49, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
The album's just been announced as being released on iTunes on February 8th, 2011. It will include two exclusive extra tracks: " The Fool on the Hill" and " Girl" (both Love remixes, obviously) -- BrowndRemastered ( talk) 13:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
I have Love, on Vinyl and it does not have any catalog number of any kind. -- Yeepsi ( Talk to me!) 18:52, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
I was surprised to see that the duration for the iTunes version was erased from the infobox. It appears that it had not its place in the infobox according to Radiopathy as it's not part of the original release. But on this page [ [3]] it appears to me that this restriction only applies to date and label.
I personally believe this duration is a relevant information and that it has its place in the infobox, next to the CD and DVD-A length. After all are we really talking about a re-issue per se, or a new format available? But I cannot argue much than that: English is not my native tongue and I'm no Wiki-Guru...
It's also true that in these times of countless reissues it could give endless listings (imagine 'Live at Leeds', 'Smile'…)
At least it should appear somewhere else in the body of the article, no?
But if you all believe it's no relevant information, well, let's drop it :)
Thank you for reading,
Megatof ( talk) 09:47, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
P.S. : the iTunes version has a duration of 86 minutes and 41 secondes.
I think they should have combined "I'll Be Back" with "Wait". The reason why I thought of this is because before I'd learned both songs well, my mind imagined bits from both of the songs and stuck them together. And for a little while I actually thought that those lyrics I remembered came from the same song. C.Syde ( talk | contribs) 23:52, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Pretty much the only difference between this version of Help! and the original is that the instruments are more distinguishable on the LOVE version.
The main difference I've noticed between this version of A Day in the Life and the original is that the progressive orchestration is seemingly more restrained during the first of the two orchestrated parts. And I think the song has been polished, giving it a higher quality sound.
It doesn't say that Blackbird/Yesterday is a medley "transition", yet, I can't hear any guitar work from Blackbird once Yesterday begins - how is it not a transition if the two tracks seemingly don't cross over? -- C.Syde ( talk | contribs) 10:52, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Love (Beatles album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
I found some samples listed in the "Track Elements" section are not audible to me. Can anybody kindly point them out for me? 1. Drum roll from "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!" in "Lucy in the Sky with Diamond" 2. Harmonium from "Cry Baby Cry" in "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite!/I Want You (She's So Heavy)/Helter Skelter" 3. Piano from "Dear Prudence" in "The Fool on the Hill" Kenny Saxton ( talk) 3:22, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Kenny Saxton: " Trust ears, not rules" is not a valid approach on Wikipedia. Our goal isn't to say everything that is true but everything that is verifiable. Are your only sources in Chinese? ― Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 08:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm resurrecting the section which I started back in December 2014, because no one has responded to it, and it's been over three years, so time to start a new section about the same subject so that I can hopefully get some answers this time.
― C.Syde ( talk | contribs) 06:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi. Regarding your question on "Octopus's Garden", I think the spoken part is from the movie of "Yellow Submarine". Kenny Saxton ( talk) 07:38, 24 March, 2018 (UTC)
When I was listening to the album again this morning, I noticed some samples not in the list here. Can anybody help me confirm whether it is true? [All the samples I mentioned can be heard clearer on 5.1 surround sound versions]
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenny Saxton ( talk • contribs) 05:29, 29 March 2018 (UTC)
And some samples in the list are audible to me. Can someone point the out?
Kenny Saxton ( talk) 07:56, 24 March, 2018 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Love (Beatles album)'s orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "wwsales":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)