Talk:Back in the U.S.S.R.

message: I can't find anything in the lyrics for most of those references...  Anthony DiPierro 05:12, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Lyrics

message: Mike Love is hinted to cowrite this song-especially the "Well the Ukraine Girls" part.  How come there is no mention of him, even if he didn't?J. M. 13:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because that would seem to be an unsubstantiated rumor...nothing I've ever read on the song says that anyone but McCartney had a hand in the composition. Compare "Helter Skelter" on the same album: a Who-like song with no Who involvement. --Stlemur 18:13, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually nearly every Beach Boys documentary I've seen has Mike Love re-telling the story that he had a conversation with Paul in India and suggested to him that he sing about the girls in different regions.  He doesn't claim to be a co-writer, just that he made a suggestion which influenced the song.  I was surprised not to see any mention of this. 74.65.6.62 03:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mike Love

message: I mentioned this to some friends of mine & most of them seem to remember Paul playing this at a gig in Red Square, years before Glastonbury 2004.. Can anyone confirm? Vanky 16:22, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I went to one of his concerts in 2002 too, and I remember him performing it there.  Andrea Parton 16:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  McCartney never performed the song live until he headlined at Glastonbury 2004? 

message: according to the article on Helter_Skelter, this was said after the 18th take of that song, nothing to do with Back in the USSR..
that one is referanced, this one isn't, so i'm removing it. atleast have some consistancy please wikipedia! feel free to revert if some more compelling reasoning is found..
:Please sign your posts on talk pages per Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages. Thanks! Hyacinth 06:13, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  i've got blisters on my fingers 

message: Why does this article uses the line "the "superior" beauty of Soviet women" and not ""the superior beauty of Soviet women"? Where they only joking when they wrote it (?), cause Ukraine actualy has some really good looking woman (Yulia Tymoshenko, Ruslana and my friend Lyudmyla). If nobody comes up with proof Paul McCartney meant it as a parody I will remeove the ""'s. Cause I find it a bit insulting and arrogant otherwise...that's not what Wikipedia is about! Mariah-Yulia 00:56, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say considering it's basically a surf rock song singing about the Soviet Union, it probably is a joke. But even if it is, the joke isn't implying that "Moscow girls are ugly" or whatever. The parody is in the fact that in the context of this style of music, you'd be expecting them to be singing about beach girls or California girls, as opposed to girls in Soviet Russia. Think of it as if the song was called "Back in Nazi Germany" and singing about "the Aryan girls" and such. --Foot Dragoon 06:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superior beauty of Soviet women 

message: In this article it is stated that 'Georgia on My Mind' refers to the US state, but on the Georgia on My Mind article I find the following:
:While the song's namesake is popularly mistaken as the State of Georgia, it was actually written for Hoagy's sister Georgia Carmichael.
This seems somewhat inconsistent. Dash 06:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Allright, so Im unsure of how reliable of a source this is, but if you've ever seen the movie "Ray" about Ray Charles life, they make it apparent that "Georgia on My Mind" is a response to Georgia's banning him from playing in there state because of his refusal to play at racially segregated venues. I assume it to be a reliable source, in which case the song would deffinately be about Georgia the U.S. state. 
RickO5 03:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

text: It's a pun, and a great one. Paul is referring to the Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic, but is calling out the song "Georgia on My Mind". Truly genius. This song is fantastic lyrically. Very clever and funny. Kingturtle (talk) 21:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Georgia on My Mind' refers to the US state? 

message: I've heard that the song was created as a reaction against Soviet Occupation of Czechoslovakia at 1968 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prague_Spring#Occupation). It was recorded only seven days after the Invasion of five armies of Warsaw Pact - it's quite interesting, isn't it?
Please, if you have got a chance, can't you look the background of this song up? For example, Bill Harry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Harry#Books_written_or_co-written_by_Bill_Harry) has written some Beatles encyclopedias...
Thank you very much
---
Concerning this text: "Released six months after the Warsaw Pact's invasion of Czechoslovakia..."
Infobox says:
Released	22 November 1968
OK, but then the song was released only 3 months after Russian invasion that happened on August, 21st 1968.
It should be fixed.
--Martin M. Mrskoš (talk) 10:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Soviet Invasion to Czechoslovakia at 1968 

message: If Ringo was absent from the sessions for recording this song, which no one disputes, how can Ringo's "I've got blisters on my fingers" at the end of Helter Skelter possibly have any connection with the recording sessions for "Back in the U.S.S.R," as asserted on the page? MicroProf 19:24, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Helter Skelter connection 

message: :Image:The White Album.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 03:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:The White Album.jpg

message: Lewishon said the drums were performed by John, Paul and George, and probably the final drum track is a composite part. Just Paul is most likely, but not confirmed. The same goes for the bass part (George played the 4-string bass and John the 6-string bass for sure) but is not confimed that Pual played bass, but he played lead guitar along with George.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.40.0.34 (talk) 19:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Drums, bass and lead guitar parts 

message: As McCartney says, this isn't a 'tribute' to the songs it imitates. It is a parody or a pastiche, and at that a rather acerbic one, particularly the ludicrous, screeching falsetto of the middle eight "California Girls" section. People still take the lyrics at face value too easily in the same way that the braindead McCarthyites who tried to ban it did. McCartney wasn't so stupid as to eulogize the Soviet Union. Only a few months before this song was cut Soviet tanks invaded Czechoslovakia. Gunstar hero (talk) 18:28, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed the entire thing is so obviously a parody and the accusations of communist sympathies levelled at the multimillionaires who bemoaned their opression by the Taxman were (and still are)  pretty hilarious. Especially when one considers that in the Soviet Union itself Beatles fans could only hear their music from black market recordings or Foreign Radio stations and emulating western fashions (such as long hair) likely exposed one to harassment from employers/teachers and the police.86.171.134.97 (talk) 12:40, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you a closet "McCartneyite"?? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anybody here understand irony? 

message: How come the song is considered surf rock? just because the Beach Boys-influenced chorus? Does it means that any artist ever influenced by the Beach Boys is a surf rocker? and that Pet Sounds is a surf rock album?
True, it is a parody of the Beach Boys, but it's also a parody of Chuck Berry's song Back in the U.S.A., and both songs that were parodied are actually rock and roll songs.
The Beatles only parodied the Beach Boys by emulating their harmony-style in the chorus, other than that the song has nothing to do with the Beach Boys (or surf rock, for that matter). Rain has Beach Boys-esque harmonies, does that mere influence makes it a surf rocker? I seriuosly doubt it. --~Magnolia Fen (talk) 15:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Back in the U.S.S.R. is not merely influenced by the Beach Boys, Back in the U.S.S.R. is a shout out to and a tribute to the Beach Boys. This song half-mocks half-pays-homage to the Beach Boys' surf sound. Kingturtle (talk) 17:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

text: Looks like California Girls needs to be edited then, since it lists it as a pop song. Hyacinth (talk) 18:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I think citing sources is important here. Our opinions are just original research really. Can you add that citation to the article? Kingturtle (talk) 19:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I have loads of beatle books, but they are all in boxes in the attic, and it's too hot up there to poke around for an extended period of time. Do you have Revolution in the Head? That might have something. Kingturtle (talk) 19:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: @Hyacinth, It may contain some surf rock elements (like I said before, the harmony in the chorus), but the fact that the song was influenced by surf rock or contain some surf rock elements doesn't make it a surf rocker (or you might as well say that Led Zeppelin are a funk band, because they employed a lot of funk-oriented techniques). --~Magnolia Fen (talk) 20:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surf rock? 

message: Since Allmusic have changed the syntax of their URLs, 1 link(s) used in the article do not work anymore and can't be migrated automatically. Please use the search option on http://www.allmusic.com to find the new location of the linked Allmusic article(s) and fix the link(s) accordingly, prefereably by using the  template. If a new location cannot be found, the link(s) should be removed. This applies to the following external links:
* http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=33:kuoibkj9ka1z
--CactusBot (talk) 18:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead external links to Allmusic website – January 2011 

message: Please note that request for input by email was made on the talk page, *not* on the  page mentioned above. Email must be submitted to be considered as your input to this matter. 99.251.125.65 (talk) 12:04, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beatles "The/the" Issue Mediation Input Request 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Back in the U.S.S.R.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060406113102/http://www.allmusic.com:80/cg/amg.dll?p=amg to http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=33:kuoibkj9ka1z
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:15, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I suggest merking the three infoboxes into one, like it was before. It just looks messy with three different infoboxes for one single recording. Yes, they contain somewhat different information, but that is limited only to release dates, label and chronologies of the respective countries in which they were released. These could easily be merged into the same infobox. --Te og kaker (talk) 19:20, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest that the change that I made which was reverted should be used instead of three infoboxes. --Te og kaker (talk) 19:23, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

text: User:Sundayclose, it would be helpful if you participated in this discussion. Thank you. --Te og kaker (talk) 20:26, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three infoboxes? 

message: I see someone has been messing with the genres again. I was going to change it back, but looking at the online one here there is no genre given. There is a vague reference to some saying that satire has no place in rock music, but that is a comment about rock music in general rather than this track specifically. The reference to Campbell is then used twice, once to say it's rock and once to say it's rock. So can someone with the Campbell book please tell us what it actually says, other than the fact that it's called Rock and roll, an introduction? Richerman   (talk) 14:07, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  More genre wars 

message: I feel that the information that was added with this edit here should be readded, provided that a valid source is found. Because without that information, users will have no way of knowing precisely what those variations are, unless they listen to the song on both albums. But not every user has the observation to pick up on these variations accurately. Similar information exists regarding the variations of A Day in the Life. So I fail to see why the same shouldn't be done for Back in the U.S.S.R. The information was removed with this edit here, likely because it was unsourced. But it would be great if a valid source could be found, or the information could be rewritten in order to be readded to the article.
With regards to Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band [Reprise], the song wasn't included on 1967–1970 and yet there is still information about it being separated from A Day in the Life on the CD release of 1967–1970. Without the similar information regarding Back in the U.S.S.R. fading out before the crossfade from Dear Prudence starts, rather than fading out at the same time as its album counterpart, but cleanly, readers aren't going to be educated of the differences between Back in the U.S.S.R.'s appearance on The Beatles and 1967–1970. I myself wasn't fully educated about it until the very start of 2011. Because I never really paid attention, and assumed that it was probably a clean edition, much like A Day in the Life on the CD issue of 1967–1970.
However, that isn't the case because unlike The Beatles where Back in the U.S.S.R. fades out through the crossfade from Dear Prudence, the song fades out before the crossfade from Dear Prudence would have started. So therefore it doesn't count as a clean edition, as they didn't separate the part with the crossfade. They just made it fade out before the crossfade, and thus taking the easy way out. I don't believe a clean edition of Back in the USSR has ever been released. Since it either fades out through the crossfade, or it fades out before the crossfade would have started. But without the said information remaining in the article, how are readers going to be educated about the differences between the song's appearance on The Beatles and the song's appearance on 1967–1970? ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 10:44, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Readding the information from the removed Variations section