This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
I think we should add the instrument drums and trumpet Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 02:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
The trumpet was the first instrument Paul ever learned Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 04:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I didn't say it was his prime i just it's the first instrument he ever learned Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 13:07, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Paul did record two songs with Stevie Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 13:15, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
We can add Elvis too Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 21:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Some of the songs which are mentioned under musicianship such as "Lady Madonna" and "Back in the USSR" have their own pages but are not linked to where others mentioned there have been linked to. Could someone rectify this and put in the links? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.206.39 ( talk) 14:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I believe it is a bit misleading to state that Paul's main instruments were bass and vocals. I understand this has been discussed in the past, but I think it warrants further discussion. He plays a significant amount of guitar, piano, and drums during both his Beatles careers and solo albums. His guitar virtuosity is well documented in literature, as is his piano playing in the Beatles and drums on several albums (The White Album for multiple tracks, McCartney, McCartney II, Tug of War, Pipes of Peace, Flowers in the Dirt, Band on the Run just to name a few). Yes, that section should be reserved as what the artist is primarily known for, which is why I don't think adding every instrument like upright bass, ukulele, organ, harmonica, etc is necessary, even though he is rather adept at those instruments. But at least guitar should be added; he started as a guitarist and still remains a guitarist through and through to this day. There is some discussion about his guitar, keyboard, and drum work in musicianship - if those instruments warrant an entire section, it would follow that they should be added to the instrument section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awaizy ( talk • contribs) 06:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
This edit was rightly reverted, but all the same I'm surprised there's no mention at all of the Paul is dead controversy in the article. An FA should be comprehensive and this is definitely notable enough to get a brief mention. McCartney even referenced the affair in one of his album titles.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 03:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
As mentioned above, I think the article needs to say that McCartney's announcement that he was leaving the Beatles inadvertently led to the group's break-up; that he was subsequently blamed for the break-up; and that his early solo/Wings work was generally received unfavourably by music critics (partly as a result). When working on articles about the Beatles, I keep coming across these three points in sources I've got, so I'm confused about why we avoid the issue altogether here. And again as mentioned, there seems no reason for the omission when you consider the detail given in this article's Beatles section about things that just aren't McCartney-specific at all.
This is from Chris Hunt's introduction to NME Originals: Beatles – The Solo Years 1970–1980: "After the split it took Paul McCartney some while to win back the trust of the public and the critics. Believed at the time to be the Beatle who spoiled the party, his reputation wasn't helped by the Paul'n'Linda effort Ram and the offerings by his new group Wings, Wild Life and Red Rose Speedway, records that were perceived to be an infuriating mix of the slapdash and the glib. Band on the Run changed all that, drawing much praise that amounted to a critical cheer of relief."
That's the most succinct summary I've come across so far, in print. (In The Cambridge Companion to the Beatles, Michael Frontani's essay on McCartney comes close, although I find it confusing the way he separates "the mainstream press" from rock music critics, and even then, "rock critics" seems to consist solely of Rolling Stone album reviewers.) Schaffner, Doggett and Rodriguez each touch on the three points but not necessarily in a single, tidy discussion – they're spread throughout their books, if I remember correctly.
Looking online, this post-breakup scenario I'm proposing seems to have become a common theme in the Band on the Run legacy – eg The A.V. Club and International Business Times. JG66 ( talk) 13:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
The other point that I think is missing is the extent to which McCartney has sought to establish his legacy relative to Lennon since the latter's death in 1980. I've been working recently on our articles on Beatles biographers (eg Philip Norman, Peter Doggett) and specific books ( Apple to the Core, The Love You Make, Paul McCartney: Many Years from Now); in the case of Many Years, I've found there's no end of commentators and book reviewers referring to McCartney's "campaign" to change the supposed perception that Lennon was the Beatles' artist-genius and he merely a talented craftsman. McCartney's 1986 Rolling Stone interview seems to be singled out as the start of this campaign; his self-interview in the 1989–90 tour programme, the 1997 publication of Many Years, and the adoption of "McCartney–Lennon" songwriting credits on Back in the U.S. in 2002 are viewed as further instalments. I'm not saying that any great detail is needed, but the omission of any mention at all just doesn't tally with the level of attention McCartney's very public efforts has received.
For instance, even a rather partisan take (imo) on the 2002 composer credits, at Salon, refers to McCartney's campaign since 1986 as "a P.R. counteroffensive". Doggett, who's similarly supportive of McCartney's claims (but not of the way he has gone about presenting them), says the legacy point was "little short of an obsession" for him; Sounes, referring to his objections to the Willy Russell play John, Paul, George, Ringo … and Bert, in the mid '70s, also says that McCartney's concerns regarding "his part in history" became a "veritable obsession", and that the 1989–90 tour programme and Miles book project were designed to "put the record straight". I've only been able to get very limited access to Peter Ames Carlin's Paul McCartney: A Life so I don't know how he handles this in the chronology until 2000, when he says McCartney "set to refurbishing the parts [of his legacy] that didn't quite satisfy him" and Carlin goes on to discuss projects such as Wingspan, the McCartney–Lennon credits on Back in the U.S., and the reworked Let It Be album in 2003. Chris Ingham handles the subject of McCartney's preoccupation with legacy pretty well, I'd say, mentioning his "increasingly assertive moves" for recognition beside Lennon and, with regard to Many Years from Now and the issue of Beatles songwriting credits, he says "Some onlookers see his point, but most are baffled" and he then quotes Bob Geldof telling McCartney: "There is no greater achievement in the 20th century to beat what you and your mate did … there are the great artists, you're one of them. Relax!" Again, I'm not suggesting we explore the subject in any great depth; I'm just listing some comments here to demonstrate how notable it is and how proactive McCartney has been.
Perhaps I'm missing something – as a few of us did with "Paul is dead" (which was in fact included, but tucked away in one of the many end notes). But I can't see any mention at all where one might expect to find it: in subsections under Musical career for 1982–90, 1991–2000 and 2000–10; under Musicianship/Tape loops perhaps (given McCartney's assertions that he, rather than Lennon, was responsible for the introduction of avant-garde elements in the Beatles' work); in Lifestyle/Creative outlets, where Miles and Many Years are discussed; or Personal relationships/John Lennon or /Reaction to Lennon's murder; or Legacy, of course. JG66 ( talk) 07:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Paul McCartney. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:08, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Paul McCartney. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paul McCartney. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Hey. I just searched for Paul McCartney on google. I took a picture of what came up: Linkitylink
I am not sure if it is a wiki-thing or a google-thing, or if the article preview is even supposed to look as it does. I just wanted to bring it to the attention of someone with more knowledge about it than me :). -- 92.243.251.196 ( talk) 17:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The lead section states that McCartney has 60 RIAA gold discs (43 with the Beatles, 17 with Wings) and puts the Beatles' sales at 100 million albums and 100 million singles. Those tallies are 37 years old by now. To date he has 104 gold discs (74 with the Beatles, 30 solo and Wings) and the Beatles' sales are at 600 million records. Does it make any sense to show a tally from 17 years into a 50+ year music career? Besides, the reader could easily interpret those as current figures. Maybe they should just be removed from the lead section. Piriczki ( talk) 14:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Since it was only "Paul" bidding on the rights,why no details here on Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:4100:17A5:40AE:1F73:64E6:AD1 ( talk) 20:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
The article states "He does not use slapping or muting techniques." While yes, he does not use slapping techniques, muting was an integral part of his sound during the mid-to-late Beatle years. He used the built-in foam mute pad on his Rickenbacker 4001 bass, and later installed a home-made mute on his Hofner 500/1 "Cavern" bass, which is clearly visible in the "Revolution" promo video. That section should be edited to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.143.61.16 ( talk) 16:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
The article tells that McCartney quit taking cocaine after using it for a year. It also says that he quit cannabis in 2015. But when did he stop taking LSD? How long did he use it before he quit?. Vesahjr ( talk) 15:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a little heads up for discussion at Talk:Personal_relationships_of_Paul_McCartney#Wohlers.2FKrischbin_lawsuit, a case where he paid twice in order to avoid child support claims (paying 41,000 Deutschmarks overall), on whether to include the issue in that article over there, even if its relevance may only hinge upon the fact it went to court twice and that he paid for it twice. -- 79.242.222.168 ( talk) 08:01, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm afraid I can't help with your difficulty with math but here are some articles that may enlighten you on the suit.
The Paul McCartney Paternity Case
Judge rejects paternity suit against McCartney
Piriczki ( talk) 13:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I find it hard to use that term in reference to the Beatles first residency at Hamburg. That term is usually reserved for an established artist in performance, not for a bar band that had to go to another country because they couldn't find steady work in their own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil5775 ( talk • contribs) 18:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
He made a $3,000 cash offer for the Beatles to reunite? Can this be correct, or is it a typo? (I would have offered $4,000 myself!)
Paul Magnussen ( talk) 15:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I put "pop music" back in the lead. Numerous sources refer to McCartney as vitally important "in the history of pop music" ( random example). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
This quote is bugging me:
"As Apple's Peter Brown recalled, "it was a poorly kept secret among Beatle intimates that after Ringo left the studio Paul would often dub in the drum tracks himself ... [Starr] would pretend not to notice"."
I've heard that before, but only in the context of this specific quote from Peter Brown. What bothers me is the lack of evidence that would support a statement that, if it were so, would be quite significant. I've looked at the articles for the White Album and Ringo, and (as far as I could see) neither mention this. Indeed, the Personnel section of the White Album only lists Paul as playing drums on the few songs that we know to be ones Ringo wasn't present for (Dear Prudence, U.S.S.R., etc.) because he had quit the group (the only other songs that list Paul as the drummer were a few of his pure solo bits he did for the album). There certainly isn't any official backing that Paul redid the drumming for any parts that Ringo had done. In fact, the primary source for the recording details of the Beatles works (Mark Lewisohn, "Complete Recording Sessions") says that based on drumming style, recording setup, and the fact that hi voice is always present on the outtakes, it's clearly Ringo drumming on almost every song.
So it's not so much that the quote is inaccurate (in that Peter Brown really did say that), my objection is that it simply seems to be untrue, and rather inflammatory toward Ringo. You would think that with all of the documentation surrounding the recording sessions that this "fact" would have been born out, but that hasn't been the case. Unless we are to think this is a grand conspiracy to hide the truth, not only by the Beatles, but by the whole recording/engineering staff, the Beatles' intimates (whatever that means) and authors, including Lewisohn (who, if this were true, would have noted all of those late night sessions where Paul would come in and redo the drums, which he of course does not...which either makes the "poorly kept secret" false or makes Lewisohn a liar). That seems rather hard to believe, so I question the inclusion of the quote, at least in the manner it is presented (which brings it up as "fact" and then leaves it at that)
Should it be included? (If so should it be followed by Lewisohn's observations, which I would think are a lot more reliable than Brown's recollections?) If it were to stay in I think it needs a lot more to back it up...any shred of evidence...something, beyond just one man's quote. Thoughts? 70.91.35.27 ( talk) 18:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)Tim
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
McCartney sang CO-Lead Vocals in The Beatles, not "lead vocals". "lead Vocals" suggests he was the sole lead singer and frontman of the band, which he was not because the Beatles are commonly known as a 4-piece vocal pop group. This mistake is listed on the page introduction at the top, and is especially misleading in that it immediately follows the sentence about "McCartney's songwriting partnership with John Lennon being one of the most celebrated of the 20th century". McCartney and Lennon sang and wrote most of the Beatles songs (together and individually), yet all members of the Beatles sang lead vocals on their respective songs. That sentence is misleading and misrepresentative of The Beatles via Paul McCartney. Please make this change.
2602:306:CCD3:2E40:151C:3EF6:7EAA:F516 (
talk) 17:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
This is a locked, featured article. How is it that the month of birth is wrong? And it is unsourced!
78.147.212.35 ( talk) 00:05, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
I got my info from the birth docs held online eg registered births. I would expect official documentation to be accurate. Now you have my mind questioning sourced info I read across wikipedia in general.
Do you want the source?
freebmd just have to search for James P. McCartney and possibly narrow it down the approximate 5-10 years. I think narrowing it down by area works as well eg district of Lancashire (as Liverpool was within the district back then) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 03:17, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I thought sources were supposed to be disclosed when fist needed on wiki articles? Also I checked source 5 link and it links to nothing verifiable for readers, and if it is a book, well that just proves its unreliability given a quick research online can disprove the month!
Any thoughts regarding the month now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 03:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Also looks like I was right in the title... The more I research, the more turns up... https://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/information.pl?r=175958957:5385&d=bmd_1477344112 Of interest is the year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 03:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
To clarify:
I thought convention here on articles was to provide superscript reference as soon as it is needed eg for the first need - by this i mean shouldnt the ref 5 be on the first mention of the d.o.b.
Hopefully that bmd link shows for you. It was September to be precise. Not June as stated everywhere else.
Williams d.o.b. was June 1938. In my research I discovered this using bmd archives. That is what I meant about my title on this talk page.
Let me know what you think regarding the inaccuracy of the month. Thanks 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 05:31, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
https://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/information.pl?r=184673566:4048&d=bmd_1477344112 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 20:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Consider this and it holds scanned paper records more reliable than internet misinformation and bias which you have shown with the use of 'superstardom'. Lets remain objective and let the research do the talking. 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 20:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
It is NOT an error to find that an event that took place in January is shown in March. Events are recorded in QUARTERS (e.g. January, February, March make the MARCH QUARTER), not MONTHS.. Also,
Events are recorded in the quarter that they were REGISTERED, not the quarter when they occurred. It is perfectly possible that a birth in May will appear in the September Quarter.clpo13( talk) 20:17, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I will make this as clear as I can. The link I provide allows anyone and everyone to perform an unbiased, good faith search using that site for the following info...
Births
Surname McCartney
First name(s) James P.
Date range Mar 1935 to Dec 1945
Obviously there can be multiple people with that name.
Can there be multiple born in Liverpool, with his full name including the middle initial, his mothers same maiden name?
Highly unlikely but still possible but now getting more unlikely. So they are quarterly? The archiving is sorted quarterly but follow the search i provided then examine the actual scans and it clearly shows that each birth is written for specific months, not batch quarters.
This evidence should cast credible doubt on the accuracy of the facts and should encourage everyone, regardless of bias and agendas, to conduct 'proper' research.
It has been stated above that the birth certificate archives should be examined to ascertain the truth. I would encourage and urge all concerned to seek out irrefutable evidence such as this.
I say let the evidence speak for itself.
78.147.212.35 ( talk) 20:46, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The article omits that Paul McCartney received a Honorary Degree from the University of Sussex in 1988. 12th July 1988.
If it is reasonable, which it certainly is, to list "2008: Honorary Doctor of Music degree from Yale University.", then his Sussex degree should also be listed.
Here's a link to the university's page http://www.sussex.ac.uk/graduation/honorary and I can provide images of his degree certificate, his signature in the appropriate book, and a few photos.
(It is mentioned at /info/en/?search=List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Paul_McCartney but ought to somehow be cross referenced here).
HTH 114.198.35.150 ( talk) 21:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC) Steve Carter - then University of Sussex staff member.
(Steve Carter again...) Thanks for the (possible) change. I would of course argue that if the list of Awards has to be a subset of the full list of Awards (a reasonable point), then the Sussex one, being the first, may have priority. We gave him the award because he actually lives in Sussex most of the time (well, did so at the time) in Peasemarsh. Interesting experience meeting his security folk (8 years after John's murder, so it was a consideration) and then the man himself.
114.198.35.150 ( talk) 04:57, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Steve Carter
(Steve Carter again) If (reasonably) you do decide on showing a subset of his awards (making that clear by the way), then I've added to the talk page on Paul McCartney's list of Awards and Nominations that he also has the Freedom of the City of Liverpool. It would be nice to see that survive any shortlisting here. 114.198.35.150 ( talk) 05:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Steve Carter
Why is Beatrice being excluded from the infobox? GoodDay ( talk) 02:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Hey. Just one simple question. Why the sir title before his name? Only GBE, KBE or DBE can use the title. But Paul is just a Member (MBE). Just wondering.-- DoubleBreadCZE ( talk) 18:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Should we add Jane Asher as a partner ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by The first stone ( talk • contribs) 15:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
At least that's what the Guinness Book of Records said, with over 1600 covers as of January 1986. But there have been over 30,000 recordings of " Summertime" as of May 2011, and I think the song is still under copyright. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 06:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Speaking of other sources, here are some that might also answer the starting question of this discussion or at least shed a different light on it:
I'm not sure whether there is need to distinguish between covers and recordings in any case this seems a rather frustrating state of affairs and it seems even if guiness might not list that record anymore it certainly seems to have it relisted for a while (otherwise I don't get the different guiness figures). Does anybody have full access to guiness archive or several editions by an chance?
Anyhow my personal suggestion would be to write something like:
In particular using one of the most instead of the most and skipping any concrete figures (being outdated anyhow). However the sentiment/meme that Yesterday is one of the most covered songs can be found throughout reputable literature, but unfortunately usually without any further explanation/details other than an occasional hint at guiness.-- Kmhkmh ( talk) 14:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Paul McCartney. 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) 15:41, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Can someone who is able to (since this page is locked) remove this from the Ringo section: "As Apple's Peter Brown recalled, "it was a poorly kept secret among Beatle intimates that after Ringo left the studio Paul would often dub in the drum tracks himself ... [Starr] would pretend not to notice" This has been brought up several times (not just be me, but by others as well), all who chimed in agreed it should come out Basically, the objections were that it's quite an inflammatory accusation; the source that it came from (Peter Brown's book) has been noted by other as not being very reliable; and there is zero corroborating evidence to support such a claim (in fact, there is a mountain of evidence to the contrary: recording session documentation and so forth). In short, it's a very condemning statement that, by all evidence (Peter Brown's unreliable recollection not withstanding) is simply untrue. Not to mention very insulting. Again, this has been brought up a few times before and no one objected to removing it (in fact, someone wondered why it was even still in there and it should have been taken out long ago)...yet it remains. Can someone who has editing ability please remove it? If there is objection to removing it, can we have a discussion about it? Thanks! Tim 70.91.35.27 ( talk) 17:23, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add the category "English people of Irish descent", as both of his parents were of Irish descent. 213.205.251.114 ( talk) 10:59, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Obviously everything in this article is sacrosanct and perfect.
But most of the lede is a list of trivia about awards and such. Apparently this rather tedious list is intended to establish significance, apparently aimed at readers who have never heard of the subject at hand, or who need convincing.
In my view, it's among the least interesting and least significant material one could include about the subject. However, I've no intention of messing with this gem. Badiacrushed ( talk) 12:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Kanye West to the "Associated Acts" section. Antianastasio ( talk) 03:33, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know why his coat of arms was removed? It's a high-quality, free file and I don't see any discussion about it in the archives, except when it was added in 2010. File:Paul McCartney Arms.svg —Мандичка YO 😜 03:30, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paul McCartney. 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) 13:42, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Top of page w/ photo; bio info: Change Number of children from "5" to "4". He has one adopted daughter, Heather, and three children with Linda: Mary, Stella and James -- total of 4. Kerrimoon ( talk) 12:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC) Kerrimoon ( talk) 12:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Priczki, this edit, which you summarize as a "ce", is actually removing sourced content. Can you explain your objection to the statement that Wings disbanded "following disagreements over royalties and salaries" which is sourced to the Vincent Benitez book used throughout the article.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 18:57, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
I propose that Dr. Pepper's Jaded Hearts Club Band be merged into Matt Bellamy, Miles Kane, Chris Cester, Ilan Rubin, Sean Payne, Dominic Howard and Paul McCartney. This is not a "band" with its own established presence, and is not notable independently. There is little to no independent coverage of this "band." The article linked simply describes this as a name used to promote an event where members of various notable bands played a Beatles cover with Paul McCartney one time. Merge into the existing articles about the notable people who contributed to this performance. Audiovideodiscoo ( talk) 02:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Paul McCartney's brother is Philip Michael McCartney and was Known as "Phil" during his school years, also at the Liverpool Institute for Boys. He can be viewed in the Green Book (student lists) as P. M. McCartney. 174.118.22.146 ( talk) 18:53, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
[3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.188.78 ( talk) 21:44, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Drums as a instrument he can play. 77.77.218.36 ( talk) 12:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Please add drums and celery to the list of Paul's instruments. He played the drums for the first few songs on the White Album, on his solo albums, and he played the celery on the Beach Boys' Vega-Tables. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by XemnasXVI ( talk • contribs) 21:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
The intro paragraph claims that it was "the most successful of the post-war era"; however, the reference provided says that it was the most successful of all time. And in terms of record sales, this is unquestionably the case (600 million records). The opening paragraph should be changed to indicate that Lennon-McCartney is the most successful of all time. 142.167.242.182 ( talk) 23:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Paul McCartney also did a duet with George Michael. I think George Michael should be added to associated acts. FueledByMusic05 ( talk) 05:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
can change "speded up" to "sped up" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.0.49 ( talk) 01:04, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
This image of McCartney and Mills with Putin in 2003 appears at the top of the section on "Vegetarianism and activism". But it is not explained in the text. Why is it there? Martinevans123 ( talk) 15:34, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Here he clearly states that he isn't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pf19jV1NYw&t=775s 92.192.173.34 ( talk) 00:02, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
When this article was promoted to FA, it included a discography and list of tours, but nothing on films and television shows/specials. These have been added (I'm not sure when) and I question they're inclusion. Apart from when one of the works is referred to in the main text, much of this information is unsourced. Not only that but, particularly in the case of Television, the lists are clearly incomplete. One would expect to see a Filmography at, say, Elvis Presley and Madonna (entertainer), since they each took on dramatic roles in films, and they're introduced as actors in our articles. But McCartney is hardly an actor and never has been.
I'm tempted to just remove Filmography and Television from this article. But perhaps I'm missing something – perhaps there are other artist biographical articles to consider when making comparisons. Any thoughts out there ... any rationale for retaining the two lists? JG66 ( talk) 08:13, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 11:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Ruth McCartney is Paul's step-sister, a musician, artist, pubic speaker and author in her own right and now when I go to her wiki URL from a Google search - someone has hijacked it to go straight to PAUL McCartney/ Who gave them permission to do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucyconlon ( talk • contribs) 02:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I think this should be included by someone able to edit this article. As it is, it sounds as if McCartney were a bigamist. His marriage to Heather Mills ended in divorce in 2008. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7395872.stm . 2003:ED:C3C0:6100:DD97:5FBF:4267:1627 ( talk) 16:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Paul McCartney is 76-years-old in his Infobox photo. A lot of editors and journalists have the mistaken idea that photographs should be current. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Infobox should show a photo of McCartney when he was in his prime with the Beatles, not as an old man almost fifty years later. If you read obituaries, you will see that many photos of the deceased people were taken many years before the persons actually died. It is important to show and visualize people in their prime, not as elderly senior citizens who have lost their looks. If you watch the major news networks such as Fox and CNN, you will see that all the female journalists are young and extremely beautiful. This is no coincidence. A woman could have a magna cum laude degree in broadcast journalism from Harvard; if she's a "dog", she doesn't have a Chinaman's chance of getting the job. It is important to showcase people when they are in their prime. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
This debate reminds me of the time that Jackie Kennedy died at age 64 in 1994. Her portrait was featured on the cover of Newsweek Magazine. The photo was absolutely stunning and was taken circa 1953 when she married Jack and was at the apex of her physical attractiveness. Newsweek would not have been naive enough to publish a current photo of Jacqueline. As you know, Jackie, like the overwhelming majority of women, had lost her looks late in life. Personally, I looked up two women on Facebook who were "hot" when I knew them more than 50 years ago (that sort of dates me), and I could not believe what I saw. People can go from rage to riches, and they can also go from Beauty to Beast. In the case of Paul McCartney, I'd rather see a portrait of him 50 years ago instead of a picture of him today. I would prefer to be remembered for my youth than as an "old man." Getting back to the issue of female TV journalists, the majority of women on the news are young and attractive, with the possible exception of one station that I will not identify. Anthony22 ( talk) 20:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I should be able to put this issue to rest with the following story. Several years ago, I looked at Troy Donahue's Wikipedia page. Donahue was one of the most handsome actors in Hollywood in the late 1950s. When I saw his Infobox picture, I couldn't believe what I was looking at. He was in his early sixties and positively unrecognizable. I mentioned this issue on the talk page. Somebody listened to me and replaced the terrible picture with a picture of him when he was in his prime. What a difference! The article and the new picture were much better. Nobody is going to tell me that the article should have stayed with the original picture. Click on the following link for a group of photographs of Troy Donahue. The original picture is the second from left on Line 2. You will see how bad Donahue looks in the picture.
This scenario also applies to Paul McCartney. Let's have a picture of him before the Beatles split up. Anthony22 ( talk) 18:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Donahue and McCartney were only six years apart in age. They were both very handsome when they were in their prime. Donahue died at 65 and McCartney is still living. I'm not saying that McCartney is not still good looking, but he was better looking 50 years ago. McCartney is best remembered when he was a Beatle, not for what he does today. His Infobox photo should equate with the days that made him a household name around the world. Anthony22 ( talk) 19:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
By the same token, a picture of McCartney at 24 is better than a picture of McCartney at 74. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:06, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2600:6C42:7900:2D80:EB2B:6EC1:EC8C:60EC ( talk) 05:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Heather Mills was not paul's daughter. Beatrice was his and wife Heather's daughter. This is listed in the top box on the right side of the page incorrect.
Not done: Crboyer ( talk) 05:43, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Please note that there are two people named Heather in McCartney's infobox. Heather Mills is listed correctly as McCartney's second wife. The Heather listed as McCartney's daughter is Heather McCartney, aka Heather Louise See, a separate person from Mills. Crboyer ( talk) 05:43, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
The page for Band On The Runstates that Helen Wheels was a single from the LP.This is incorrect. The track does not appear on the LP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.17.216.248 ( talk) 04:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I've just started a discussion at Talk:My Love (Paul McCartney and Wings song)#Songwriting credit. Would welcome input from all interested editors. Thanks, JG66 ( talk) 07:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Paul is one of the most innovative bass players ... half the stuff that's going on now is directly ripped off from his Beatles period ... He's an egomaniac about everything else, but his bass playing he'd always been a bit coy about.
— Lennon, Playboy magazine, January 1981
John Lennon died in December 1980. How can he have given an interview one month after his death? Or was this just published posthumously? JIP | Talk 12:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
In the section on Wings, the article says that London Town was "Wings' best-selling LP since Band on the Run." That means it outsold Venus and Mars, Wings at the Speed of Sound and Wings over America, which is highly unlikely based on the sales chart performance of each album and is contrary to how the commercial success of the album is described in the London Town article and other sources. Here is a summary of the four albums on the Billboard chart in the US:
Venus and Mars: 1 week at No. 1, 5 weeks at No. 2, 9 weeks in the top 10, 77 weeks on the chart.
Speed of Sound: 7 weeks at No. 1, 21 weeks in the top 10, 51 weeks on the chart.
Wings over America: 1 week at No. 1, 11 weeks in the top 10, 86 weeks on the chart.
London Town: 6 weeks at No. 2, 11 weeks in the top 10, 28 weeks on the chart.
Initial sales of London Town were good but it quickly dropped down the chart and was out of the top 100 after 19 weeks and off the chart after only 28 weeks, McCartney's shortest chart stay since Wild Life. By comparison, in week 28 on the chart Venus and Mars was still at No. 32 and Speed of Sound was at No. 73. In Billboard's year-end charts, Speed of Sound was the No. 3 album of 1976 while London Town was ranked No. 56 of 1978.
The relative chart performance of these albums was similar in the UK.
While its possible sales of London Town were similar to Venus and Mars and Wings over America, it doesn't seem possible that it sold more than Speed of Sound. RIAA awards tell us nothing since all of these albums shipped platinum and if any of them have sold more than 2 million, Capitol apparently was not interested in researching it years later. Ohnothimagain ( talk) 17:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I think the article's lead undersells the success of Wings.
"In 1970, he made his solo debut with the album McCartney, which anticipated the lo-fi movement. [1] Along with Ram (1971) and McCartney II (1980), the records have enjoyed a cult following among later generations of musicians. From 1971 to 1981, he led the group Wings, and in 1993, he formed the music duo the Fireman with Youth of Killing Joke."
It seems very odd to me that the cult following of some of his solo albums is mentioned and those albums referred to by name, but no album or single by Wings is mentioned anywhere in the lead. Wings were huge, scored many US and UK number one albums and singles including what was, to that point, the biggest selling single of all time in the UK. If I didn't know anything about McCartney after the Beatles, reading that might make me assume Wings weren't very successful or notable in his career. What do we think? Humbledaisy ( talk) 18:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Absolutely! Another early example is Emitt Rhodes's second album (or first album proper), recorded in his own home studio 1969-1970. I honestly don't think the McCartney lo-fi thing is relevant to the lead at all, I think it really needs to go. I propose that section is changed to something like this - it's not perfect and very difficult to sum up a career so successful over such a long time, so any improvements welcome.
McCartney debuted as a solo artist in 1970 with the album McCartney. This was followed by Ram in 1971. The same year, McCartney formed the rock band Wings, who's albums such as Band on the Run and Venus and Mars and international hit singles including " My Love", " Live and Let Die", " Listen to What the Man Said", " Silly Love Songs", " Let 'Em In" and " Mull of Kintyre" made them one of the most successful bands of the 1970s. McCartney resumed his solo career in 1980. Since 1989, McCartney has toured consistently as a solo artist and in 1993, he formed the music duo the Fireman with Youth of Killing Joke. Beyond music, he has taken part in projects to promote international charities related to such subjects as animal rights, seal hunting, land mines, vegetarianism, poverty, and music education. Humbledaisy ( talk) 18:10, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
References
British rather than English? Britfan97 ( talk) 17:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
PM said in the Anthology that George was a year and a half younger. Mark Lewisohn pointed out that George was actually around 8 months younger, but he'd been held back a year at school - otherwise he'd be in the same year as Paul. Lewisohn also pointed out that Paul continues saying the age difference is year and a half. I don't know if this is worth a mention.
83.168.38.154 ( talk) 07:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
In the meditation subsection is a quote “The whole meditation experience was very good and I still use the mantra ... I find it soothing.” cited from a 1997 book. Please can the statement be dated? Boscaswell talk 05:28, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
"Soon afterwards, the members of the band invited McCartney to join as a rhythm guitarist" .. that's inexact. the true story is, as John Lennon stated, that it was John Lennon himself who invited Paul McCartney to join his The Quarrymen band. Paul was hesitant at first that evening, but accepted to join the next day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.88.211 ( talk) 20:06, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It is now Paul’s birthday, so he is no longer 77, but 78. A minor change, I know, but a necessary one Thoughtsonvinyl ( talk) 23:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
The article cites a claim by Benitez that McCartney became de facto leader of the Beatles after Epstein's death. This is at odds with everything I've read. In the Anthology documentary, McCartney says the band was very democratic until close to the end (when Lennon tried to force Allen Klein on him). Thoughts? Talk to SageGreenRider 21:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The second paragraph included the following:
I doubt that Paul McCartney's range is that large. Can any provide a citation? Can anyone provide evidence regarding his range? John Link ( talk) 21:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Spitz's name occurs twice in the article without explanation. There are numerous citations of him by surname only in the footnotes. What's his full name, and who is he? Koro Neil ( talk) 02:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
The introduction reads:
“His songwriting partnership with John Lennon remains the most successful in history.”
Unless you define “success,” this largely a matter of opinion, albeit one that I and most people agree with.
This article is locked, so I propose the following edit:
“His songwriting partnership with John Lennon is widely considered the most successful in history.” Fielding99 ( talk) 01:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Google's definition of successful says "having achieved popularity, profit, or distinction." What other songwriting partnerships even approached the popularity and record sales of Lennon-McCartney's output? ili ( talk) 11:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace
learn by ear
with
learn by ear
"by ear" is just six characters long and it's easier not to notice the link, but if you link "learn" you'll double the length of the link and make it more noticeable. 64.203.186.120 ( talk) 13:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove the following unjustified claim:
Starting with the 1967 album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, he gradually became the Beatles' de facto leader, providing the creative impetus for most of their music and film projects.
Where is the source for this statement? 106.207.151.105 ( talk) 14:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. A source is cited in the section "1960–1970: The Beatles". Do you have a reason to doubt the source?
Sundayclose (
talk) 18:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)According to https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/the-home-heather-loathed-7283152.html "For three decades, Sir Paul ,s rural home in the village of Peasmarsh, near Rye, East Sussex, had been his retreat from the glare of fame." any idea where to add it (apart from the category)... GrahamHardy ( talk) 16:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The instruments category of the quick facts panel should include drums. McCartney recorded the drums on several Beatles tracks like The Ballad of John and Yoko, Back in the U.S.S.R. as well as most drums on solo albums like Ram and McCartney II. Spingolaa ( talk) 06:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Include McCartney's net worth - US $1.12 Billion - in the infobox. This would make him the wealthiest living musician in U.S. dollar-terms. 76.71.157.66 ( talk) 16:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
I think we should add the instrument drums and trumpet Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 02:36, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
The trumpet was the first instrument Paul ever learned Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 04:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
I didn't say it was his prime i just it's the first instrument he ever learned Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 13:07, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Paul did record two songs with Stevie Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 13:15, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
We can add Elvis too Pink Floyd iii ( talk) 21:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Some of the songs which are mentioned under musicianship such as "Lady Madonna" and "Back in the USSR" have their own pages but are not linked to where others mentioned there have been linked to. Could someone rectify this and put in the links? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.206.39 ( talk) 14:32, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I believe it is a bit misleading to state that Paul's main instruments were bass and vocals. I understand this has been discussed in the past, but I think it warrants further discussion. He plays a significant amount of guitar, piano, and drums during both his Beatles careers and solo albums. His guitar virtuosity is well documented in literature, as is his piano playing in the Beatles and drums on several albums (The White Album for multiple tracks, McCartney, McCartney II, Tug of War, Pipes of Peace, Flowers in the Dirt, Band on the Run just to name a few). Yes, that section should be reserved as what the artist is primarily known for, which is why I don't think adding every instrument like upright bass, ukulele, organ, harmonica, etc is necessary, even though he is rather adept at those instruments. But at least guitar should be added; he started as a guitarist and still remains a guitarist through and through to this day. There is some discussion about his guitar, keyboard, and drum work in musicianship - if those instruments warrant an entire section, it would follow that they should be added to the instrument section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awaizy ( talk • contribs) 06:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
This edit was rightly reverted, but all the same I'm surprised there's no mention at all of the Paul is dead controversy in the article. An FA should be comprehensive and this is definitely notable enough to get a brief mention. McCartney even referenced the affair in one of his album titles.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 03:17, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
As mentioned above, I think the article needs to say that McCartney's announcement that he was leaving the Beatles inadvertently led to the group's break-up; that he was subsequently blamed for the break-up; and that his early solo/Wings work was generally received unfavourably by music critics (partly as a result). When working on articles about the Beatles, I keep coming across these three points in sources I've got, so I'm confused about why we avoid the issue altogether here. And again as mentioned, there seems no reason for the omission when you consider the detail given in this article's Beatles section about things that just aren't McCartney-specific at all.
This is from Chris Hunt's introduction to NME Originals: Beatles – The Solo Years 1970–1980: "After the split it took Paul McCartney some while to win back the trust of the public and the critics. Believed at the time to be the Beatle who spoiled the party, his reputation wasn't helped by the Paul'n'Linda effort Ram and the offerings by his new group Wings, Wild Life and Red Rose Speedway, records that were perceived to be an infuriating mix of the slapdash and the glib. Band on the Run changed all that, drawing much praise that amounted to a critical cheer of relief."
That's the most succinct summary I've come across so far, in print. (In The Cambridge Companion to the Beatles, Michael Frontani's essay on McCartney comes close, although I find it confusing the way he separates "the mainstream press" from rock music critics, and even then, "rock critics" seems to consist solely of Rolling Stone album reviewers.) Schaffner, Doggett and Rodriguez each touch on the three points but not necessarily in a single, tidy discussion – they're spread throughout their books, if I remember correctly.
Looking online, this post-breakup scenario I'm proposing seems to have become a common theme in the Band on the Run legacy – eg The A.V. Club and International Business Times. JG66 ( talk) 13:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
The other point that I think is missing is the extent to which McCartney has sought to establish his legacy relative to Lennon since the latter's death in 1980. I've been working recently on our articles on Beatles biographers (eg Philip Norman, Peter Doggett) and specific books ( Apple to the Core, The Love You Make, Paul McCartney: Many Years from Now); in the case of Many Years, I've found there's no end of commentators and book reviewers referring to McCartney's "campaign" to change the supposed perception that Lennon was the Beatles' artist-genius and he merely a talented craftsman. McCartney's 1986 Rolling Stone interview seems to be singled out as the start of this campaign; his self-interview in the 1989–90 tour programme, the 1997 publication of Many Years, and the adoption of "McCartney–Lennon" songwriting credits on Back in the U.S. in 2002 are viewed as further instalments. I'm not saying that any great detail is needed, but the omission of any mention at all just doesn't tally with the level of attention McCartney's very public efforts has received.
For instance, even a rather partisan take (imo) on the 2002 composer credits, at Salon, refers to McCartney's campaign since 1986 as "a P.R. counteroffensive". Doggett, who's similarly supportive of McCartney's claims (but not of the way he has gone about presenting them), says the legacy point was "little short of an obsession" for him; Sounes, referring to his objections to the Willy Russell play John, Paul, George, Ringo … and Bert, in the mid '70s, also says that McCartney's concerns regarding "his part in history" became a "veritable obsession", and that the 1989–90 tour programme and Miles book project were designed to "put the record straight". I've only been able to get very limited access to Peter Ames Carlin's Paul McCartney: A Life so I don't know how he handles this in the chronology until 2000, when he says McCartney "set to refurbishing the parts [of his legacy] that didn't quite satisfy him" and Carlin goes on to discuss projects such as Wingspan, the McCartney–Lennon credits on Back in the U.S., and the reworked Let It Be album in 2003. Chris Ingham handles the subject of McCartney's preoccupation with legacy pretty well, I'd say, mentioning his "increasingly assertive moves" for recognition beside Lennon and, with regard to Many Years from Now and the issue of Beatles songwriting credits, he says "Some onlookers see his point, but most are baffled" and he then quotes Bob Geldof telling McCartney: "There is no greater achievement in the 20th century to beat what you and your mate did … there are the great artists, you're one of them. Relax!" Again, I'm not suggesting we explore the subject in any great depth; I'm just listing some comments here to demonstrate how notable it is and how proactive McCartney has been.
Perhaps I'm missing something – as a few of us did with "Paul is dead" (which was in fact included, but tucked away in one of the many end notes). But I can't see any mention at all where one might expect to find it: in subsections under Musical career for 1982–90, 1991–2000 and 2000–10; under Musicianship/Tape loops perhaps (given McCartney's assertions that he, rather than Lennon, was responsible for the introduction of avant-garde elements in the Beatles' work); in Lifestyle/Creative outlets, where Miles and Many Years are discussed; or Personal relationships/John Lennon or /Reaction to Lennon's murder; or Legacy, of course. JG66 ( talk) 07:19, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Paul McCartney. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:08, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Paul McCartney. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paul McCartney. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Hey. I just searched for Paul McCartney on google. I took a picture of what came up: Linkitylink
I am not sure if it is a wiki-thing or a google-thing, or if the article preview is even supposed to look as it does. I just wanted to bring it to the attention of someone with more knowledge about it than me :). -- 92.243.251.196 ( talk) 17:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The lead section states that McCartney has 60 RIAA gold discs (43 with the Beatles, 17 with Wings) and puts the Beatles' sales at 100 million albums and 100 million singles. Those tallies are 37 years old by now. To date he has 104 gold discs (74 with the Beatles, 30 solo and Wings) and the Beatles' sales are at 600 million records. Does it make any sense to show a tally from 17 years into a 50+ year music career? Besides, the reader could easily interpret those as current figures. Maybe they should just be removed from the lead section. Piriczki ( talk) 14:03, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Since it was only "Paul" bidding on the rights,why no details here on Wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:4100:17A5:40AE:1F73:64E6:AD1 ( talk) 20:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
The article states "He does not use slapping or muting techniques." While yes, he does not use slapping techniques, muting was an integral part of his sound during the mid-to-late Beatle years. He used the built-in foam mute pad on his Rickenbacker 4001 bass, and later installed a home-made mute on his Hofner 500/1 "Cavern" bass, which is clearly visible in the "Revolution" promo video. That section should be edited to reflect this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.143.61.16 ( talk) 16:58, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
The article tells that McCartney quit taking cocaine after using it for a year. It also says that he quit cannabis in 2015. But when did he stop taking LSD? How long did he use it before he quit?. Vesahjr ( talk) 15:28, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Just a little heads up for discussion at Talk:Personal_relationships_of_Paul_McCartney#Wohlers.2FKrischbin_lawsuit, a case where he paid twice in order to avoid child support claims (paying 41,000 Deutschmarks overall), on whether to include the issue in that article over there, even if its relevance may only hinge upon the fact it went to court twice and that he paid for it twice. -- 79.242.222.168 ( talk) 08:01, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I'm afraid I can't help with your difficulty with math but here are some articles that may enlighten you on the suit.
The Paul McCartney Paternity Case
Judge rejects paternity suit against McCartney
Piriczki ( talk) 13:11, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I find it hard to use that term in reference to the Beatles first residency at Hamburg. That term is usually reserved for an established artist in performance, not for a bar band that had to go to another country because they couldn't find steady work in their own. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil5775 ( talk • contribs) 18:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
He made a $3,000 cash offer for the Beatles to reunite? Can this be correct, or is it a typo? (I would have offered $4,000 myself!)
Paul Magnussen ( talk) 15:18, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
I put "pop music" back in the lead. Numerous sources refer to McCartney as vitally important "in the history of pop music" ( random example). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
This quote is bugging me:
"As Apple's Peter Brown recalled, "it was a poorly kept secret among Beatle intimates that after Ringo left the studio Paul would often dub in the drum tracks himself ... [Starr] would pretend not to notice"."
I've heard that before, but only in the context of this specific quote from Peter Brown. What bothers me is the lack of evidence that would support a statement that, if it were so, would be quite significant. I've looked at the articles for the White Album and Ringo, and (as far as I could see) neither mention this. Indeed, the Personnel section of the White Album only lists Paul as playing drums on the few songs that we know to be ones Ringo wasn't present for (Dear Prudence, U.S.S.R., etc.) because he had quit the group (the only other songs that list Paul as the drummer were a few of his pure solo bits he did for the album). There certainly isn't any official backing that Paul redid the drumming for any parts that Ringo had done. In fact, the primary source for the recording details of the Beatles works (Mark Lewisohn, "Complete Recording Sessions") says that based on drumming style, recording setup, and the fact that hi voice is always present on the outtakes, it's clearly Ringo drumming on almost every song.
So it's not so much that the quote is inaccurate (in that Peter Brown really did say that), my objection is that it simply seems to be untrue, and rather inflammatory toward Ringo. You would think that with all of the documentation surrounding the recording sessions that this "fact" would have been born out, but that hasn't been the case. Unless we are to think this is a grand conspiracy to hide the truth, not only by the Beatles, but by the whole recording/engineering staff, the Beatles' intimates (whatever that means) and authors, including Lewisohn (who, if this were true, would have noted all of those late night sessions where Paul would come in and redo the drums, which he of course does not...which either makes the "poorly kept secret" false or makes Lewisohn a liar). That seems rather hard to believe, so I question the inclusion of the quote, at least in the manner it is presented (which brings it up as "fact" and then leaves it at that)
Should it be included? (If so should it be followed by Lewisohn's observations, which I would think are a lot more reliable than Brown's recollections?) If it were to stay in I think it needs a lot more to back it up...any shred of evidence...something, beyond just one man's quote. Thoughts? 70.91.35.27 ( talk) 18:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)Tim
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
McCartney sang CO-Lead Vocals in The Beatles, not "lead vocals". "lead Vocals" suggests he was the sole lead singer and frontman of the band, which he was not because the Beatles are commonly known as a 4-piece vocal pop group. This mistake is listed on the page introduction at the top, and is especially misleading in that it immediately follows the sentence about "McCartney's songwriting partnership with John Lennon being one of the most celebrated of the 20th century". McCartney and Lennon sang and wrote most of the Beatles songs (together and individually), yet all members of the Beatles sang lead vocals on their respective songs. That sentence is misleading and misrepresentative of The Beatles via Paul McCartney. Please make this change.
2602:306:CCD3:2E40:151C:3EF6:7EAA:F516 (
talk) 17:20, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
This is a locked, featured article. How is it that the month of birth is wrong? And it is unsourced!
78.147.212.35 ( talk) 00:05, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
I got my info from the birth docs held online eg registered births. I would expect official documentation to be accurate. Now you have my mind questioning sourced info I read across wikipedia in general.
Do you want the source?
freebmd just have to search for James P. McCartney and possibly narrow it down the approximate 5-10 years. I think narrowing it down by area works as well eg district of Lancashire (as Liverpool was within the district back then) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 03:17, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I thought sources were supposed to be disclosed when fist needed on wiki articles? Also I checked source 5 link and it links to nothing verifiable for readers, and if it is a book, well that just proves its unreliability given a quick research online can disprove the month!
Any thoughts regarding the month now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 03:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Also looks like I was right in the title... The more I research, the more turns up... https://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/information.pl?r=175958957:5385&d=bmd_1477344112 Of interest is the year! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 03:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
To clarify:
I thought convention here on articles was to provide superscript reference as soon as it is needed eg for the first need - by this i mean shouldnt the ref 5 be on the first mention of the d.o.b.
Hopefully that bmd link shows for you. It was September to be precise. Not June as stated everywhere else.
Williams d.o.b. was June 1938. In my research I discovered this using bmd archives. That is what I meant about my title on this talk page.
Let me know what you think regarding the inaccuracy of the month. Thanks 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 05:31, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
https://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/information.pl?r=184673566:4048&d=bmd_1477344112 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 20:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Consider this and it holds scanned paper records more reliable than internet misinformation and bias which you have shown with the use of 'superstardom'. Lets remain objective and let the research do the talking. 78.147.212.35 ( talk) 20:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
It is NOT an error to find that an event that took place in January is shown in March. Events are recorded in QUARTERS (e.g. January, February, March make the MARCH QUARTER), not MONTHS.. Also,
Events are recorded in the quarter that they were REGISTERED, not the quarter when they occurred. It is perfectly possible that a birth in May will appear in the September Quarter.clpo13( talk) 20:17, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
I will make this as clear as I can. The link I provide allows anyone and everyone to perform an unbiased, good faith search using that site for the following info...
Births
Surname McCartney
First name(s) James P.
Date range Mar 1935 to Dec 1945
Obviously there can be multiple people with that name.
Can there be multiple born in Liverpool, with his full name including the middle initial, his mothers same maiden name?
Highly unlikely but still possible but now getting more unlikely. So they are quarterly? The archiving is sorted quarterly but follow the search i provided then examine the actual scans and it clearly shows that each birth is written for specific months, not batch quarters.
This evidence should cast credible doubt on the accuracy of the facts and should encourage everyone, regardless of bias and agendas, to conduct 'proper' research.
It has been stated above that the birth certificate archives should be examined to ascertain the truth. I would encourage and urge all concerned to seek out irrefutable evidence such as this.
I say let the evidence speak for itself.
78.147.212.35 ( talk) 20:46, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
The article omits that Paul McCartney received a Honorary Degree from the University of Sussex in 1988. 12th July 1988.
If it is reasonable, which it certainly is, to list "2008: Honorary Doctor of Music degree from Yale University.", then his Sussex degree should also be listed.
Here's a link to the university's page http://www.sussex.ac.uk/graduation/honorary and I can provide images of his degree certificate, his signature in the appropriate book, and a few photos.
(It is mentioned at /info/en/?search=List_of_awards_and_nominations_received_by_Paul_McCartney but ought to somehow be cross referenced here).
HTH 114.198.35.150 ( talk) 21:51, 1 January 2017 (UTC) Steve Carter - then University of Sussex staff member.
(Steve Carter again...) Thanks for the (possible) change. I would of course argue that if the list of Awards has to be a subset of the full list of Awards (a reasonable point), then the Sussex one, being the first, may have priority. We gave him the award because he actually lives in Sussex most of the time (well, did so at the time) in Peasemarsh. Interesting experience meeting his security folk (8 years after John's murder, so it was a consideration) and then the man himself.
114.198.35.150 ( talk) 04:57, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Steve Carter
(Steve Carter again) If (reasonably) you do decide on showing a subset of his awards (making that clear by the way), then I've added to the talk page on Paul McCartney's list of Awards and Nominations that he also has the Freedom of the City of Liverpool. It would be nice to see that survive any shortlisting here. 114.198.35.150 ( talk) 05:10, 2 January 2017 (UTC) Steve Carter
Why is Beatrice being excluded from the infobox? GoodDay ( talk) 02:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Hey. Just one simple question. Why the sir title before his name? Only GBE, KBE or DBE can use the title. But Paul is just a Member (MBE). Just wondering.-- DoubleBreadCZE ( talk) 18:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Should we add Jane Asher as a partner ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by The first stone ( talk • contribs) 15:22, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
At least that's what the Guinness Book of Records said, with over 1600 covers as of January 1986. But there have been over 30,000 recordings of " Summertime" as of May 2011, and I think the song is still under copyright. -- Kailash29792 (talk) 06:56, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Speaking of other sources, here are some that might also answer the starting question of this discussion or at least shed a different light on it:
I'm not sure whether there is need to distinguish between covers and recordings in any case this seems a rather frustrating state of affairs and it seems even if guiness might not list that record anymore it certainly seems to have it relisted for a while (otherwise I don't get the different guiness figures). Does anybody have full access to guiness archive or several editions by an chance?
Anyhow my personal suggestion would be to write something like:
In particular using one of the most instead of the most and skipping any concrete figures (being outdated anyhow). However the sentiment/meme that Yesterday is one of the most covered songs can be found throughout reputable literature, but unfortunately usually without any further explanation/details other than an occasional hint at guiness.-- Kmhkmh ( talk) 14:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Paul McCartney. 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) 15:41, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Can someone who is able to (since this page is locked) remove this from the Ringo section: "As Apple's Peter Brown recalled, "it was a poorly kept secret among Beatle intimates that after Ringo left the studio Paul would often dub in the drum tracks himself ... [Starr] would pretend not to notice" This has been brought up several times (not just be me, but by others as well), all who chimed in agreed it should come out Basically, the objections were that it's quite an inflammatory accusation; the source that it came from (Peter Brown's book) has been noted by other as not being very reliable; and there is zero corroborating evidence to support such a claim (in fact, there is a mountain of evidence to the contrary: recording session documentation and so forth). In short, it's a very condemning statement that, by all evidence (Peter Brown's unreliable recollection not withstanding) is simply untrue. Not to mention very insulting. Again, this has been brought up a few times before and no one objected to removing it (in fact, someone wondered why it was even still in there and it should have been taken out long ago)...yet it remains. Can someone who has editing ability please remove it? If there is objection to removing it, can we have a discussion about it? Thanks! Tim 70.91.35.27 ( talk) 17:23, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add the category "English people of Irish descent", as both of his parents were of Irish descent. 213.205.251.114 ( talk) 10:59, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Obviously everything in this article is sacrosanct and perfect.
But most of the lede is a list of trivia about awards and such. Apparently this rather tedious list is intended to establish significance, apparently aimed at readers who have never heard of the subject at hand, or who need convincing.
In my view, it's among the least interesting and least significant material one could include about the subject. However, I've no intention of messing with this gem. Badiacrushed ( talk) 12:59, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Kanye West to the "Associated Acts" section. Antianastasio ( talk) 03:33, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Does anyone know why his coat of arms was removed? It's a high-quality, free file and I don't see any discussion about it in the archives, except when it was added in 2010. File:Paul McCartney Arms.svg —Мандичка YO 😜 03:30, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Paul McCartney. 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) 13:42, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Top of page w/ photo; bio info: Change Number of children from "5" to "4". He has one adopted daughter, Heather, and three children with Linda: Mary, Stella and James -- total of 4. Kerrimoon ( talk) 12:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC) Kerrimoon ( talk) 12:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Priczki, this edit, which you summarize as a "ce", is actually removing sourced content. Can you explain your objection to the statement that Wings disbanded "following disagreements over royalties and salaries" which is sourced to the Vincent Benitez book used throughout the article.-- Pawnkingthree ( talk) 18:57, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
I propose that Dr. Pepper's Jaded Hearts Club Band be merged into Matt Bellamy, Miles Kane, Chris Cester, Ilan Rubin, Sean Payne, Dominic Howard and Paul McCartney. This is not a "band" with its own established presence, and is not notable independently. There is little to no independent coverage of this "band." The article linked simply describes this as a name used to promote an event where members of various notable bands played a Beatles cover with Paul McCartney one time. Merge into the existing articles about the notable people who contributed to this performance. Audiovideodiscoo ( talk) 02:14, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Paul McCartney's brother is Philip Michael McCartney and was Known as "Phil" during his school years, also at the Liverpool Institute for Boys. He can be viewed in the Green Book (student lists) as P. M. McCartney. 174.118.22.146 ( talk) 18:53, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
[3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.188.78 ( talk) 21:44, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add Drums as a instrument he can play. 77.77.218.36 ( talk) 12:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Please add drums and celery to the list of Paul's instruments. He played the drums for the first few songs on the White Album, on his solo albums, and he played the celery on the Beach Boys' Vega-Tables. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by XemnasXVI ( talk • contribs) 21:31, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
The intro paragraph claims that it was "the most successful of the post-war era"; however, the reference provided says that it was the most successful of all time. And in terms of record sales, this is unquestionably the case (600 million records). The opening paragraph should be changed to indicate that Lennon-McCartney is the most successful of all time. 142.167.242.182 ( talk) 23:56, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Paul McCartney also did a duet with George Michael. I think George Michael should be added to associated acts. FueledByMusic05 ( talk) 05:46, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
can change "speded up" to "sped up" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.0.49 ( talk) 01:04, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
This image of McCartney and Mills with Putin in 2003 appears at the top of the section on "Vegetarianism and activism". But it is not explained in the text. Why is it there? Martinevans123 ( talk) 15:34, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Here he clearly states that he isn't: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Pf19jV1NYw&t=775s 92.192.173.34 ( talk) 00:02, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
When this article was promoted to FA, it included a discography and list of tours, but nothing on films and television shows/specials. These have been added (I'm not sure when) and I question they're inclusion. Apart from when one of the works is referred to in the main text, much of this information is unsourced. Not only that but, particularly in the case of Television, the lists are clearly incomplete. One would expect to see a Filmography at, say, Elvis Presley and Madonna (entertainer), since they each took on dramatic roles in films, and they're introduced as actors in our articles. But McCartney is hardly an actor and never has been.
I'm tempted to just remove Filmography and Television from this article. But perhaps I'm missing something – perhaps there are other artist biographical articles to consider when making comparisons. Any thoughts out there ... any rationale for retaining the two lists? JG66 ( talk) 08:13, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 11:52, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
Ruth McCartney is Paul's step-sister, a musician, artist, pubic speaker and author in her own right and now when I go to her wiki URL from a Google search - someone has hijacked it to go straight to PAUL McCartney/ Who gave them permission to do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucyconlon ( talk • contribs) 02:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
I think this should be included by someone able to edit this article. As it is, it sounds as if McCartney were a bigamist. His marriage to Heather Mills ended in divorce in 2008. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7395872.stm . 2003:ED:C3C0:6100:DD97:5FBF:4267:1627 ( talk) 16:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
Paul McCartney is 76-years-old in his Infobox photo. A lot of editors and journalists have the mistaken idea that photographs should be current. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Infobox should show a photo of McCartney when he was in his prime with the Beatles, not as an old man almost fifty years later. If you read obituaries, you will see that many photos of the deceased people were taken many years before the persons actually died. It is important to show and visualize people in their prime, not as elderly senior citizens who have lost their looks. If you watch the major news networks such as Fox and CNN, you will see that all the female journalists are young and extremely beautiful. This is no coincidence. A woman could have a magna cum laude degree in broadcast journalism from Harvard; if she's a "dog", she doesn't have a Chinaman's chance of getting the job. It is important to showcase people when they are in their prime. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:45, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
This debate reminds me of the time that Jackie Kennedy died at age 64 in 1994. Her portrait was featured on the cover of Newsweek Magazine. The photo was absolutely stunning and was taken circa 1953 when she married Jack and was at the apex of her physical attractiveness. Newsweek would not have been naive enough to publish a current photo of Jacqueline. As you know, Jackie, like the overwhelming majority of women, had lost her looks late in life. Personally, I looked up two women on Facebook who were "hot" when I knew them more than 50 years ago (that sort of dates me), and I could not believe what I saw. People can go from rage to riches, and they can also go from Beauty to Beast. In the case of Paul McCartney, I'd rather see a portrait of him 50 years ago instead of a picture of him today. I would prefer to be remembered for my youth than as an "old man." Getting back to the issue of female TV journalists, the majority of women on the news are young and attractive, with the possible exception of one station that I will not identify. Anthony22 ( talk) 20:06, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
I should be able to put this issue to rest with the following story. Several years ago, I looked at Troy Donahue's Wikipedia page. Donahue was one of the most handsome actors in Hollywood in the late 1950s. When I saw his Infobox picture, I couldn't believe what I was looking at. He was in his early sixties and positively unrecognizable. I mentioned this issue on the talk page. Somebody listened to me and replaced the terrible picture with a picture of him when he was in his prime. What a difference! The article and the new picture were much better. Nobody is going to tell me that the article should have stayed with the original picture. Click on the following link for a group of photographs of Troy Donahue. The original picture is the second from left on Line 2. You will see how bad Donahue looks in the picture.
This scenario also applies to Paul McCartney. Let's have a picture of him before the Beatles split up. Anthony22 ( talk) 18:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
Donahue and McCartney were only six years apart in age. They were both very handsome when they were in their prime. Donahue died at 65 and McCartney is still living. I'm not saying that McCartney is not still good looking, but he was better looking 50 years ago. McCartney is best remembered when he was a Beatle, not for what he does today. His Infobox photo should equate with the days that made him a household name around the world. Anthony22 ( talk) 19:07, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
By the same token, a picture of McCartney at 24 is better than a picture of McCartney at 74. Anthony22 ( talk) 00:06, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
2600:6C42:7900:2D80:EB2B:6EC1:EC8C:60EC ( talk) 05:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Heather Mills was not paul's daughter. Beatrice was his and wife Heather's daughter. This is listed in the top box on the right side of the page incorrect.
Not done: Crboyer ( talk) 05:43, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Please note that there are two people named Heather in McCartney's infobox. Heather Mills is listed correctly as McCartney's second wife. The Heather listed as McCartney's daughter is Heather McCartney, aka Heather Louise See, a separate person from Mills. Crboyer ( talk) 05:43, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
The page for Band On The Runstates that Helen Wheels was a single from the LP.This is incorrect. The track does not appear on the LP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.17.216.248 ( talk) 04:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I've just started a discussion at Talk:My Love (Paul McCartney and Wings song)#Songwriting credit. Would welcome input from all interested editors. Thanks, JG66 ( talk) 07:14, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Paul is one of the most innovative bass players ... half the stuff that's going on now is directly ripped off from his Beatles period ... He's an egomaniac about everything else, but his bass playing he'd always been a bit coy about.
— Lennon, Playboy magazine, January 1981
John Lennon died in December 1980. How can he have given an interview one month after his death? Or was this just published posthumously? JIP | Talk 12:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
In the section on Wings, the article says that London Town was "Wings' best-selling LP since Band on the Run." That means it outsold Venus and Mars, Wings at the Speed of Sound and Wings over America, which is highly unlikely based on the sales chart performance of each album and is contrary to how the commercial success of the album is described in the London Town article and other sources. Here is a summary of the four albums on the Billboard chart in the US:
Venus and Mars: 1 week at No. 1, 5 weeks at No. 2, 9 weeks in the top 10, 77 weeks on the chart.
Speed of Sound: 7 weeks at No. 1, 21 weeks in the top 10, 51 weeks on the chart.
Wings over America: 1 week at No. 1, 11 weeks in the top 10, 86 weeks on the chart.
London Town: 6 weeks at No. 2, 11 weeks in the top 10, 28 weeks on the chart.
Initial sales of London Town were good but it quickly dropped down the chart and was out of the top 100 after 19 weeks and off the chart after only 28 weeks, McCartney's shortest chart stay since Wild Life. By comparison, in week 28 on the chart Venus and Mars was still at No. 32 and Speed of Sound was at No. 73. In Billboard's year-end charts, Speed of Sound was the No. 3 album of 1976 while London Town was ranked No. 56 of 1978.
The relative chart performance of these albums was similar in the UK.
While its possible sales of London Town were similar to Venus and Mars and Wings over America, it doesn't seem possible that it sold more than Speed of Sound. RIAA awards tell us nothing since all of these albums shipped platinum and if any of them have sold more than 2 million, Capitol apparently was not interested in researching it years later. Ohnothimagain ( talk) 17:02, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
I think the article's lead undersells the success of Wings.
"In 1970, he made his solo debut with the album McCartney, which anticipated the lo-fi movement. [1] Along with Ram (1971) and McCartney II (1980), the records have enjoyed a cult following among later generations of musicians. From 1971 to 1981, he led the group Wings, and in 1993, he formed the music duo the Fireman with Youth of Killing Joke."
It seems very odd to me that the cult following of some of his solo albums is mentioned and those albums referred to by name, but no album or single by Wings is mentioned anywhere in the lead. Wings were huge, scored many US and UK number one albums and singles including what was, to that point, the biggest selling single of all time in the UK. If I didn't know anything about McCartney after the Beatles, reading that might make me assume Wings weren't very successful or notable in his career. What do we think? Humbledaisy ( talk) 18:28, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
Absolutely! Another early example is Emitt Rhodes's second album (or first album proper), recorded in his own home studio 1969-1970. I honestly don't think the McCartney lo-fi thing is relevant to the lead at all, I think it really needs to go. I propose that section is changed to something like this - it's not perfect and very difficult to sum up a career so successful over such a long time, so any improvements welcome.
McCartney debuted as a solo artist in 1970 with the album McCartney. This was followed by Ram in 1971. The same year, McCartney formed the rock band Wings, who's albums such as Band on the Run and Venus and Mars and international hit singles including " My Love", " Live and Let Die", " Listen to What the Man Said", " Silly Love Songs", " Let 'Em In" and " Mull of Kintyre" made them one of the most successful bands of the 1970s. McCartney resumed his solo career in 1980. Since 1989, McCartney has toured consistently as a solo artist and in 1993, he formed the music duo the Fireman with Youth of Killing Joke. Beyond music, he has taken part in projects to promote international charities related to such subjects as animal rights, seal hunting, land mines, vegetarianism, poverty, and music education. Humbledaisy ( talk) 18:10, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
References
British rather than English? Britfan97 ( talk) 17:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
PM said in the Anthology that George was a year and a half younger. Mark Lewisohn pointed out that George was actually around 8 months younger, but he'd been held back a year at school - otherwise he'd be in the same year as Paul. Lewisohn also pointed out that Paul continues saying the age difference is year and a half. I don't know if this is worth a mention.
83.168.38.154 ( talk) 07:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
In the meditation subsection is a quote “The whole meditation experience was very good and I still use the mantra ... I find it soothing.” cited from a 1997 book. Please can the statement be dated? Boscaswell talk 05:28, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
"Soon afterwards, the members of the band invited McCartney to join as a rhythm guitarist" .. that's inexact. the true story is, as John Lennon stated, that it was John Lennon himself who invited Paul McCartney to join his The Quarrymen band. Paul was hesitant at first that evening, but accepted to join the next day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.52.88.211 ( talk) 20:06, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
It is now Paul’s birthday, so he is no longer 77, but 78. A minor change, I know, but a necessary one Thoughtsonvinyl ( talk) 23:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
The article cites a claim by Benitez that McCartney became de facto leader of the Beatles after Epstein's death. This is at odds with everything I've read. In the Anthology documentary, McCartney says the band was very democratic until close to the end (when Lennon tried to force Allen Klein on him). Thoughts? Talk to SageGreenRider 21:26, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
The second paragraph included the following:
I doubt that Paul McCartney's range is that large. Can any provide a citation? Can anyone provide evidence regarding his range? John Link ( talk) 21:23, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Spitz's name occurs twice in the article without explanation. There are numerous citations of him by surname only in the footnotes. What's his full name, and who is he? Koro Neil ( talk) 02:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
The introduction reads:
“His songwriting partnership with John Lennon remains the most successful in history.”
Unless you define “success,” this largely a matter of opinion, albeit one that I and most people agree with.
This article is locked, so I propose the following edit:
“His songwriting partnership with John Lennon is widely considered the most successful in history.” Fielding99 ( talk) 01:29, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Google's definition of successful says "having achieved popularity, profit, or distinction." What other songwriting partnerships even approached the popularity and record sales of Lennon-McCartney's output? ili ( talk) 11:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please replace
learn by ear
with
learn by ear
"by ear" is just six characters long and it's easier not to notice the link, but if you link "learn" you'll double the length of the link and make it more noticeable. 64.203.186.120 ( talk) 13:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove the following unjustified claim:
Starting with the 1967 album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, he gradually became the Beatles' de facto leader, providing the creative impetus for most of their music and film projects.
Where is the source for this statement? 106.207.151.105 ( talk) 14:54, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. A source is cited in the section "1960–1970: The Beatles". Do you have a reason to doubt the source?
Sundayclose (
talk) 18:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)According to https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/the-home-heather-loathed-7283152.html "For three decades, Sir Paul ,s rural home in the village of Peasmarsh, near Rye, East Sussex, had been his retreat from the glare of fame." any idea where to add it (apart from the category)... GrahamHardy ( talk) 16:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The instruments category of the quick facts panel should include drums. McCartney recorded the drums on several Beatles tracks like The Ballad of John and Yoko, Back in the U.S.S.R. as well as most drums on solo albums like Ram and McCartney II. Spingolaa ( talk) 06:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Paul McCartney has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Include McCartney's net worth - US $1.12 Billion - in the infobox. This would make him the wealthiest living musician in U.S. dollar-terms. 76.71.157.66 ( talk) 16:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)