lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:I Should Have Known Better

message: The article currently states: "In the stereo version, the harmonica drops out briefly."  I've seen this listed on other web sites and in books as a playing mistake, but please note that the drop-out (technically referred to as a "rest") is actually part of the harmonica melody and not a mistake.  69.86.132.210 03:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "please note that the drop-out (technically referred to as a "rest") is actually part of the harmonica melody and not a mistake."  Agreed. 76.124.8.137 (talk) 04:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "In the stereo version, the harmonica drops out briefly." 

message: It states this is when the song was released (on the right). Termin8er850 01:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 8th, 1976? 

message: Capitol Records released Something New a month later with songs from the UK version of A Hard Day's Night that were not used in the film. "If I Fell" was used in the film. It's also on "Something New". While the UK Album (mono) uses a different version "Something New" contains the film version (no overdub of McCartney's vocals).--188.97.118.52 (talk) 19:27, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Something New

message: What is the key of the harmonica John Lennon plays on this song? ICE77 (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm assuming this is for research. The song is in the key of G and Lennon apparently used a Honer harmonica in the key of C. Patthedog (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key of the harmonica
Talk:I'm Happy Just to Dance with You

message: I am trying to find out the name of the female singer who covered this great song.
If you know anybody who ever sung this song, please let me know. Many Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.22.19.44 (talk) 13:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: how about anne murray?   she is listed as having sung it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.235.53.182 (talk) 02:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  female singer who coverd this song. 

message: Why did someone change the information in the articles so it says that this song was co-written? My Beatles book may have a few mistakes, but it's normally very accurate. It says that all but three of the songs were written or primarily written by John Lennon. ― C.Syde (talk | contribs) 22:50, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It's reliably sourced. What's your source and what does it say specifically? Sundayclose (talk) 17:23, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Primary composer / Co-written?

message: Is a scene from a film a "commercial music video"?  I kind of don't think so, especially as there were no music videos at all in 1964. --Daveler16 (talk) 17:05, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Why I say this, is because this is a 'teeny bopper' song. Made specifically for the ladies and for the dancehalls.http://www.beatlesebooks.com/happy-just-to-dance Yes, the song is guitar heavy as most Beatle songs are.    "I Should Have Known Better" is considered a Pop Rock song, why isn't this? This certainly fits the bill as it's very poppy. Pop rock is described as a rock song with more emphasis on songwriting and recording craft rather than the attitude that carries from rock and roll.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_rock Safe to say this song is pure songwriting craft as Lennon & McCartney have said themselves.http://www.beatlesebooks.com/happy-just-to-dance Pop rock is also heavily influenced by doo-wop, the verses contain the doo-wop chord progression. Therefore, I would like to change the genre of this song to Pop rock as it fits better than it just being a Rock song. DestinyBattle (talk) 22:13, 6 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: . The source you cite does not identify it as a "pop rock" song. Sundayclose (talk) 00:28, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a Pop rock song.
Talk:And I Love Her

message: Thanks for uploading or contributing to :Image:Beatles and i love her.ogg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media 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. Papa November 17:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for [[:Image:Beatles and i love her.ogg]]
Talk:Tell Me Why (Beatles song)

message: Shouldn't the label be Capitol?  George Slivinsky 21:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Using simple doo-wop chord changes and block harmonies, "Tell Me Why" races along at a pace.
Wow!  When I read this exciting description, my heart started pounding at a rate.
--63.25.248.176 (talk) 17:24, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The female singers' names are not mentioned in the article.Vesahjr (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I have listened to this song for over 40 years, and I´ve always thought there are female singers there singing one line ("is there anything I can do"). Can it really be that they are Lennon, McCartney and Harrison?Vesahjr (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "races along at a pace"? 

message: I believe the reference to Paul McCartney's lower-register harmony vocal during the chorus of "Tell Me Why" is incorrect. I am curious as to the source of that information.  The harmony work on "Tell Me Why" is indeed unusual, but for this reason:  John Lennon and Paul McCartney both sing the high-register melody, while George Harrison sings the lower-register harmony.  I don't believe this type of arrangement was used on any other Beatle song, and I would bet $10,000 that the lower harmony is George and not Paul.  
1.  In 1963 and 1964, it was common for John and Paul to sing together on the melody ("Thank You Girl", "From Me to You", "I Want to Hold Your Hand", "Eight Days a Week", "A Hard Day's Night"), and George's voice was not suited to the high register of the melody in "Tell Me Why".  
2.  If you listen closely to the harmonies during the verses, you can hear George's vocal a fifth lower than Paul's, which was their common practice.  Why, then, would George's vocal jump upwards a fifth during each chorus, while Paul's vocal jumps downwards a fifth?  It's illogical.  Why would anyone do that?
I could be wrong, but I don't think so.  I have been listening to Beatle music for more than 50 years, I am a guitarist, and I am a singer-songwriter.  I have sung in choruses and I know something about harmonies.  I have listened to "Tell Me Why" hundreds of times.  Unless someone can provide conclusive evidence to the contrary, I will continue to believe that it's George Harrison on the lower harmony vocal during the chorus, with John Lennon and Paul McCartney sharing the higher lead vocal.
Michael F.K. Phelan
21 Dec 201747.205.154.71 (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harrison's Lower Harmony Vocal, Not McCartney's 

message: Also covered by The Chenille Sisters on their eponymous debut album released in 1986. I own the album and can send you a photo if you want. Thanks. 
Daniel Bridges 69.14.23.66 (talk) 00:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tell Me Why
Talk:Nadja (film)

message: Just a head's up.  I am planning on expanding this article somewhat. Zahir13 20:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great!  The film definitely deserves it.  My contribution was most of the third paragraph (sound design/music and cinematography).  The film deserves a better article, but I wouldn't know where to start.  Good luck! - Lontano 06:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:I'll Cry Instead

message: What about a mention of the so-called missing third verse of the song, which can be found on the mono version of Something New.--77.99.231.37 (talk) 14:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Mention it then - but cite your source.--Patthedog (talk) 21:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing 

message: There not exists a third verse. The US-version is perhaps edited. John repeats the first verse. You have to controllate if he had really sung again or if that was edited.
95.90.111.249 (talk) 17:47, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: John sings the first verse again. The music behind it (specifically George's guitar licks) is different, as well as John's actually melody line.  That verse was edited out on some version. Hotcop2 (talk) 18:02, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Releases
Talk:Things We Said Today

message: Isnt the use of the word 'tempo' wrong?, the song had a constant tempo, it didn't vary so not sure why the line reads 
'The tempo of the song moves from ballad to rock '  I suggest
"The song structure moves from ballad to rock......" 109.147.144.66 (talk) 17:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composition 
Talk:When I Get Home

message: I don't thibk it"changes from a major to a minor key".   The verses end on the minor, but that's not a key change, is it? --Daveler16 (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An odd one this, Lennon up to his old tricks. The song appears to start in A major, but then finally lands on C major visiting that key’s relative minor of A minor, which is where the discrepancy occurs (and later repeats). The Beatles Complete Scores shows it being in the key of C major, which it predominantly is, although MacDonald points out its ambiguities describing it as “a round-the-changes tour between the keys of A and C”. But I think you're right; its key duality exists in majors, and therefore the article needs editing. Do you want to do it, or shall I? Cheers Patthedog (talk) 09:57, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor key 

message: Of the 4 artists listed to have covered the song, The Innocents' version is not a cover, but a different song with the same title. The Rustix version is indeed a cover of the Lennon-McCartney song. (I couldn't find a version of either of the other two.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevintimba (talk • contribs) 07:27, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right - thanks. Taken out Patthedog (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover version issues
Talk:I'll Be Back (song)

message: "Encyclopedic content must be attributable to a reliable source." — John Cardinal 04:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources? 

message: the song sounds more like folk-rock, than simply rock.
should the genre be changed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.36.135 (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  genre 

message: McCartney claims this is one of three John Lennon songs from the 'A Hard Day's Night' soundtrack(or album, or whatever...) that he co-wrote with John, although he admits that this one was largely John's idea. McCartney refers to 'If I Fell' in more or less the same fashion, whereas he treats the song 'I'm Happy Just To Dance With You', also mostly attributed to Lennon, as a 50/50 composition.--84.208.240.143 05:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Co-written 

message: The line "I've got a big surprise" could be seen as another example of Lennon's smutty, double entendre humour. I don't think he's taking this lyric very seriously (common during this period).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.136.191.204 (talk) 16:56, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big surprise 

message: They should have combined this song with "Wait" for LOVE. C.Syde (talk | contribs) 23:56, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A song medley for LOVE
Talk:No Reply (song)

message: huh?
where you saw that?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wridi (talk • contribs) 19:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is said than No reply will be covered by Red Hot Chili Peppers? 

message: I know that Ian MacDonald claims that both John and George contributed acoustic guitars, but are there any other (reliable) sources that verify that both men contributed acoustic guitars? Some sources say that George contributed both electric and acoustic guitars while others say that he only contributed acoustic guitar (e.g. beatlesebooks, MacDonald).
One webpage says that George had his Gretsch Country Gentleman in acoustic mode, but that's impossible since, to my knowledge, that guitar isn't capable of functioning in acoustic mode, so if George did indeed have his electric in acoustic mode, then it's more likely that he would've used the J-160E. If anyone can provide a reliable source to prove that Lennon and Harrison both contributed acoustic guitar work on "No Reply", please do so.
61.69.217.3 (talk) 12:24, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There's already a reliable source to support Lennon and Harrison on acoustic guitars (Ian MacDonald) and Harrison on (overdubbed) electric – Walter Everett. To my ears, there are definitely two acoustic guitar parts on "No Reply". What are you trying to achieve, exactly – do you think there are not two acoustics on the track? JG66 (talk) 14:17, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acoustic guitars from Lennon and Harrison
Talk:Baby's in Black

message: I took out references to 3/4 time, waltzes and "I'll Be Back," because they do not pertain directly to "Baby's In Black."  JSC ltd 05:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Added citations for everything I could find in the article and added information about live performances and a cover version. The "sang into one microphone" was in the article but uncited. I have heard that before but can't find a cite. I left it in and I hope that someone else will find the citation for it. I've looked in MacDonald, Miles, Cross, Spitz (not indexed well, hard to search), Lewisohn (Sessions), Anthology, Harry. Can someone with Lewisohn's Chronicle check that?
Regarding 21 July comment above about 3/4 time, I think it's pertinent. McCartney refers to it as waltz time and 3/4 time even though it's clearly 6/8 and documented as such in reliable sources. He said at that point they were trying to use something other than 4/4 all the time and it works well in this song. I may add some of that to the article but not today. — John Cardinal 14:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked the Chronicle for 11 August 1964.  It just says they worked from 7 to 11 p.m. on John's "Baby's in Black", recording 14 takes and 13 attempts at the opening, none of which was used.—Dah31 (talk) 22:04, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: March 2007

message: Like in the entry for the album 'Beatles for Sale', someone has decided to spread doubt about the writing credit for this song. Of course, it IS credited to Lennon/McCartney, but I see no reason whatsoever to include the line 'as described by some as mainly Lennon's work', as both Lennon and McCartney, in their respective interviews, have been very clear that it was a 50/50 collaboration.(Lennon: Playboy(1980); McCartney: 'Many Years From Now'(auto-)biography(1997))
If some describe it as mainly the work Lennon's, it would be nice to know who those 'some' are, and even then their accounts don't carry any weight whatsoever, since the co-authors are on a 100% agreement about the facts.
Shame!
--84.208.224.234 (talk) 06:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Credit
Talk:I'll Follow the Sun

message: As opposed to being written after its release? That would be a neat trick.Bws2002 21:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The song was released on the Beatles for Sale album in 1964, but was written previously to this album release." 

message: Try acoustic rock?
Pilmccartney (talk) 08:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:V and WP:NOR. Wiki libs (talk) 13:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genre 

message: Please do not tag and run. What needs additional citations for verification? There are 17 citations. What do you think needs more? If you do not rely, remove the tag. Thank you Telecine Guy (talk) 23:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: This article needs additional citations for verification ?
Talk:Mr. Moonlight (song)

message: i think its idiotic having it cited as possibly one of the worst songs they recorded. you just pulled some faggot ass article off the internet of some wank job spouting his opinion 68.253.33.170
:I agree.  I don't see the problem with the song, and that is the only opinion I have read that says something like that.  You can't say "a few" but then only cite one source.  To be more accurate, you would have to change it to "one person" who thinks that, and then is their really any point in having the note?  Please discuss, otherwise I may simply remove this comment. 24.150.133.197 01:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Erlewhine is not a "wank job." He's a respected music critic, and he has praised more Beatle songs than he has tanked. I think the wording could be different, but I think some form of the criticism should stay. If there are opposing points of view from other professional critics, they can be added, with citations, to provide balance. John Cardinal 04:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This song is really terrible and it is completely appropriate for that to be highlighted on this page. The wording could be adjusted slightly, I agree. 12.227.237.37 (talk) 20:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

message: In Paul McCartney's experimental/ambient album "Liverpool Sound Collage", on the track "Plastic Beetle", you can hear a little yet obvious snippet of "Mr. Moonlight".
Here's the song. It comes in around the end. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=va9N57IF3Uw
Is this worth mentioning in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.219.160.114 (talk) 03:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sampling in McCartney's 'Liverpool Sound Collage' 

message: Why is "The Beatles Bible" being used as a source? All that is a fan site, so as of right now the personnel list needs a reference to a better source, maybe Ian MacDonald 2005 or such.--73.128.145.11 (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Beatles Bible 

message: If the song is so bad, then why is John Lennon singing it so, so passionately and sincerely? Nathan43 (talk) 20:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  In support of the goodness of this song
Talk:Summary offence

message: The title of this page is spelled wrong.  It should be 'offense' not 'offence'. JShust (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This raises an interesting point, as to how international words should be handled (i.e., centre vs. center, for instance).  In this case, it's my understanding that 'offence' is the correct spelling through much of the world outside the United States.  'Offense' is the correct American spelling.  Witzlaw (talk) 22:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling 

message: It is correct that an arrest warrant is needed for neither summary nor indictable offenses?--Zfish118 (talk) 01:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada

message: The article makes it clear that, in England and Wales at least, summary trials are not part of the common law but are an invention of statute law. This begs the question: when was the procedure first used, and when was the class of summary offences created by abolishing the right to jury trial in respect of them? Hairy Dude (talk) 22:50, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of summary offences 

message: This article is a stub, and the concepts are substantially similar so that they may not warrant separate pages. RockstoneSend me a message! 12:43, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge of [[Criminal citation]] into [[Summary offence#United States]]
Talk:Aaron Chorin

message: The article contained two references statements that a descendant of Aaron Chorin was a Hungarian deputy:
* his son, Francis Chorin
* hs grandson, Franz Chorin
Both were redlinks. I was unable to find references to verify which is the case; or if both.  After verification, if desired, please return the verified, appropriate information. —ERcheck @ 00:48, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hungarian deputy descendant?
Talk:I Don't Want to Spoil the Party

message: I actually can hear Paul in the lower harmonies during the verses.
And he's very clear in the high harmonies during the chorus Portel (talk) 23:17, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Harmonies 

message: This is the only time McCartney, in his book 'Many Years From Now', makes an obvious error of judgement/recollection.
His claim to being 20% responsible for the writing of it, may not be all wrong -- it would, after all, still be considered much more of a Lennon song than a McCartney song; but the huge error is that he actually claims that they wrote it as a country and western for Ringo(to sing). He even says that Ringo did a good job on it.
The problem is, of course, that it WAS John who did the lead vocals.
Could there be a bit of a mix-up there, Paul?
I'm not saying that Ringo DIDN'T do a good job on it -- but if we're suggesting that he DID, it would necessarily have to be his drumming that we(and Paul) would have to be praising.
--84.208.224.234 (talk) 06:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Writer/Singer
Talk:Everybody's Trying to Be My Baby

message: Article full of factual errors no references Working on it Tillywilly17 (talk) 16:03, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I am revising all the timeline errors I made now! Tillywilly17 (talk) 16:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repair 

message: Is there a Beatles fan editor that can add references and double-check that section of the article? I will continue to fine tune the early section. Tillywilly17 (talk) 17:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beatles
Talk:The Night Before (song)

message: There's no tambourine on this song.  There are maracas though.  The fact that it is sourced as being a tambourine makes me think that the writer of the book cited was mistaken, which happens.  I am changing it to credit Ringo as playing maracas and I am removing reference to the tambourine. 76.100.57.219 (talk) 06:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like maracas to me, but it could be something else, and MacDonald was unsure. He listed it as "tambourine (?)" in his credits list, and then wrote that "The percussion instrument with which Starr shakes up the middle eight is unidentified." (He had access to the EMI docs for the track.) The credits should be sourced, and we should avoid WP:OR, so how about this compromise: I'll change that instrument to "percussion". — John Cardinal (talk) 13:46, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Tambourine?

message: "The whole being alternated with a second melody" - what does that mean? If it refers to the background singing,then it's not a "second melody" - it's background singing. I don't hear a "second melody". Please explain. Thanks.--Daveler16 (talk) 04:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Melody