Talk:If I Fell

message: :Image:04 And I Love Her.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 03:09, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:04 And I Love Her.jpg

message: Is there a way of preventing musically illiterate contributors to edit articles related to music ? There is nothing "unusual" about a 9th chord and the "unrepeated introduction" is an ode to Broadway musicals and early 20th century pop songwriting in general.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.217.41 (talk) 07:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Higher Standards Needed 

message: First of all, I'm not sure the intro of this song is so very "unusual", as the article states, though it is notable.  But prior to the advent of pop/rock, many songs had these unrelated/unrepeated introductions.  It would be called the "verse", while what we now call a "verse" would be called something else.  In the days when published sheet music was on an equal footing with recordings, the "verse" would be marked as optional!  Paul McCartney has talked about this in relation to "Here, There, and Everywhere", which, you'll notice, has this very same feature.  It's not even that unusual for the intro/"verse" to be in a different key.  I would say, no offense to the author of this article, but one needs to listen to older music, other than pop, to fully understand how The Beatles developed.  They spent a lot of time in the Hamburg clubs playing old oldies, what were considered "oldies" in 1963.  If you become familar with this old material, certain things about The Beatles will seem less innovative (though no less enjoyable).
Secondly, I don't think it's particularly worthwhile to describe the intro as "a series of descending barre chords".  That's only applicable to the guitar -- it's not a musical observation, it's a practical matter.  They're only barre chords because no open chords exist for chords like Ebm or Bbm9.  Let's not make it out like this is further evidence of Lennon's genius.
Third, what on Earth is "unusual" about a D ninth?  Again, it's only unusual if you only listen to rock.  A ninth chord is common as dirt outside of rock music.  I would think the G minor sixth might be more notable (there is a Gm6, isn't there?  I know it's a Gm of some sort.)  You wanna talk about "unusual" chords, check out whatever Brian Wilson was doing at the time.  Or maybe Burt Bacharach.
Fourth, I just wanted to comment that I've never heard anything but the version in which Paul's harmony vocal cracks all to hell (on "... was in vain").  There's a better version, but the stations don't play it?  How absolutely rotten of them.  It's that old stereo vs mono thing again, isn't it?  Part of the reason I'm not more of a Beatles fan than I am is how wretched and tacky their stereo albums sound up 'til Sgt. Pepper (and when I was a kid, in the pre-CD era, you couldn't find the UK mono editions!)  I'm afraid this comment doesn't help the article any, however.  Thanks for reading.
--63.25.4.206 (talk) 08:08, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Great comment. We need editors like you! Cheers, Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi 17:27, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Intro 

message: The recent change to authorship that I reverted today included quotes that were unsourced but also unverifiable statements like "this song has always been credited solely to John Lennon." By who?
In addition, Lennon's quotes from his 1980 Playboy interview don't explicitly say that he was the sole author and that McCartney had no role. The existence of a recording where Lennon sang a part McCartney sang on the released version doesn't prove anything and was unsourced.
Changing the article to reflect sole authorship requires a stronger case than was presented in the two edits I reverted. — John Cardinal (talk) 20:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Lennon and McCartney were partners who held working sessions to write songs--including songs primarily written by one or the other--until at least 1967. We have no reason to doubt McCartney's word, and various Lennon interviews prior to his death do not differ significantly from what McCartney has said since. All that aside, you need to present evidence or leave it as is. — John Cardinal (talk) 01:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, also because it sounds more like Paul than John. I find it hard to believe that Paul had nothing to do with the melody or the harmony. Anyway, right now it says "It was written by John Lennon[2], but credited to Lennon–McCartney" while [2] refers to a source (Miles) which states that the song was co-written... so something needs to be changed either way. Trilliane (talk) 06:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who wrote it? 

message: None of the “experts” here mention the fact that this song was written by Meredith Wilson in 1957. It’s from the Broadway show “The Music Man”. JimFBowmn (talk) 15:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Music Man