Talk:The Beatles' Christmas records

message: It would be nice if the covers from each flexidisc could be added to the article, it would add some extra colour. --kingboyk 07:59, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was pondering that, but wondered if it might be excessive. Danthemankhan 14:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so, if they're small thumbnails to the left of each single in the list - a la The Beatles discography or The KLF discography. --kingboyk 14:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks great! --kingboyk 18:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cover Art 

message: Would it be possible to write a little about Kenny Everett's involvement in the Christmas records and indeed how he came to be involved in the first place? --kingboyk 15:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My source unfortunately does not elaborate on that issue. I will try to find one that does. Danthemankhan 15:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Kenny Everett]] 

message: "but come off as disturbing"? What is so hard to understand about NPOV?
:What's so hard to understand about signing your comments?! :P --kingboyk 13:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: The text for the second record claims " Another Beatles' Christmas Record is the only Beatles' Christmas fan club records not sent to American fans." yet the text for the next record claims the american fans did not recieve it. I don't know which is correct.  --dgasperut
:Nor me. Good spot! Anyone know the answer? --kingboyk 21:06, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  U.S. fans got the 1963 message in 1964. Then, because "the tape arrived too late to prepare the record" (I have a source for the quote), they didn't get the 1965 message. So the first time USA fan-club members received either the '64 or '65 British message was on the album. I've added the info with an in-line citation. Cheemo 02:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Record Vs. Third 

message: There is currently a link to a transcript for each disc.  The link goes to a website presumably set up by a well-intentioned fan.  The transcripts are for the most part - fairly accurate.  But perhaps inevitably there are some errors.  Possibly because the discs have been transcribed by someone (an American maybe?) not accustomed to the strong Liverpool accents when the Beatles are speaking - and the occasional funny voices and Goon Show humour.   In any event - the article is linking to imperfect and thus inaccurate transcripts.  Should there be a little annotation?  Perhaps they should each be described as "rough transcript"?  Otherwise the article is implying an accuracy that is not the case.  Any thoughts?  Davidpatrick 14:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I Absolutely agree for all of the reasons you stated, I have edited the page as such, and, have added an allmusic guide review as well. --Isshii (talk) 17:47, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Transcripts

message: Hi! I don't know if there's a consensus or what, but why is this article named after the American name? You know, The Beatles was a British band. RocketWobbuffet (talk) 15:13, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: True but as is, the article might better be named "The Beatles' Christmas Messages". Wrapped in Grey (talk) 17:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: From Then To You

message: "An elaborate production, Christmas Time is Here Again! was developed around the concept of several groups auditioning for a BBC radio show." That may have been the original concept, but the finished version, as heard on the recordings, is quite clearly a parody of a day's radio shows overall, starting with a brief mention of an audition, then an ad for "Wonderlust", a panel interview, a quietly spoken DJ introducing a requested song, a game show, another "Wonderlust" ad, a play, and another snippet of game show before everyone wishes the listeners a happy Christmas and John launches into some mock-Scottish gibberish. Grutness...wha? 13:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description of "Christmas Times Is Here Again" looks wrong... 

message: Substituted at 07:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: “This group of fields establishes a timeline of an artist's releases.”  Long-standing consensus (since 16 September 2011,‎ Radiopathy) is that the LP was never released (only gifted), so it does not belong in the chronology.  To establish a new consensus, please use the talk-page.—Aquegg (talk) 06:08, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology 

message: Sorry that I messed up all the formatting for the album art section after adding some cover arts for the 2 compilation infoboxes, especially at the 1963 and 1964 sections. Can anyone help me to fix it? Seems like source editing doesn't work anyway at my side. Weareblahs (talk) 06:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I've fixed it by moving the second infobox to the next section. Seems like an annoying quirk of the wiki was preventing the infoboxes and pictures from appearing next to each other. Not sure if there's another workaround. I also moved the picture in the lead section to further down to avoid the top being crammed with pictures on both sides. MClay1 (talk) 08:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messed up formatting 

message: Is it "From Them to You" or "From Then to You"?
The cover art image says "Then", but the article has both titles.
Am I misunderstanding something? Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 23:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  From Then or From Them