Talk:List of The Beatles songs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Unknown
This article has
not had its quality
rated on the
assessment scale.
  This -related article is within the scope of The Beatles WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of The Beatles, Apple Records, George Martin, Brian Epstein/NEMS, and related topics. You are more than welcome to join the project and/or contribute to discussion.

This article
has not been
rated on the
importance scale.
Suggested article edit guidelines:
If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Assessment Department for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Assessment.

Article Grading:
The article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
The Beatles To-do: You can HELP!:
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 3 September 2007. The result of the discussion was Keep and cleanup.

Contents

[edit] Suggested additions/deletions

I am indeed a Beatles fan, but by no means an expert. However I did notice this article and the similar List of Beatles songs by singer seems to have different song lists, slightly. Having too much time on my hands, I have compared them and tried to trace all the song titles back to a source, ie. to prove they are a Beatles song. I compiled the results in a spreadsheet, but here are the findings.

[edit] To Be Added

  • Moonlight Bay: Anthology 1
  • My Bonnie: The Beatles with Tony Sheridan
  • From Us To You: Live at the BBC
  • Mailman Blues: Sessions
  • Nobody's Child: The Beatles with Tony Sheridan
  • Sweet Georgia Brown: The Beatles with Tony Sheridan
  • Take Out Some Insurance On Me Baby: The Beatles with Tony Sheridan
  • Saints, The: The Beatles and Tony Sheridan
  • Why: The Beatles with Tony Sheridan
  • Carnival of Light: The Beatles —Preceding unsigned comment added by Muchachos (talk • contribs) 22:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Some of these were found at this site.

[edit] Unsourced (in other article, but can't find listed elsewhere)

  • Can You Take Me Back
  • Christmas Time (Is Here Again)

Can anyone else please help to verify the additions and check the unsourced list?

Stu 10:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

  • "Glad All Over" does not appear to have been covered by The Beatles. Remove?
Can You take Me Back is what the outro of Cry Baby Cry is called. I've been told (unsourced) that it was an unfinished song

--Crimson Thing 21:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject

Should this be added to The Beatles WikiProject?

Stu 10:01, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

It should be in my opinion ~ Jean-FrédéricFr 11:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clean-up per AfD

With respect to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Beatles songs I've created a small table at List_of_Beatles_songs#E that also merges content from List of Beatles songs by singer and List of Beatles songs written by Lennon/McCartney etc. The original idea was to have one big table. Please consider the current one a prototype and discuss here the columns and the way they are filled. Once there is consensus on the table content and structure, it might still be best to proceed first by letters and only then see how a complete table would look like. This way there would remain a decent version to roll back to. Maybe the letters can be retained as anchors in such a huge table.--Tikiwont 10:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks it's looking good. Having though about this, I would also like to be able to sort the cover versions separately, ideally by the date of the originals. I'm not sure how wide the table can go. Kappa 10:42, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Are you talking about covers done by the Beatles such as Everybody's Trying to Be My Baby or covers of Beatles songs such as Eleanor Rigby. I assume the first, which is so far only indirectly addressed by the Author column. What exactly do you have in mind? The second is also interesting, but too vast for specific info in this table. At best there might be a note if a song has been covered with a link (See e.g. Italian cover versions of The Beatles' songs) On a general note I'd be wary to have too many columns because the smaller the columns get, the more text will be wrapped, making the whole table longer.
Great That looks fantastic, except the "Single" column seems redundant if you have chart positions. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Well I picked this up from the discussion and being s single is strictly speaking a prerequisite for being charted as single (But are there any Beatles' singles that didn't reach the charts?). Moreover, the E list contains one that has only been released in US. So maybe we should rather have (instead) one general Notes section, even if it amounts to some compromise with respect to systematics and sorting.--Tikiwont 12:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
Singles If you had a U.S. chart position of 32 and a U.K. chart position of n/a that would make sense to me, but I suppose it could be ambiguous to someone else. I would personally prefer a generic notes section, but having separate chart listings is handy for sorting them. Also, I would recommend ultimately merging all of the tables for precisely that reason: you could sort all of them simultaneously. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:31, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
The idea is of of course eventually to merge all small tables. I've just found out how to set an anchor, so one could still navigate by first letter as in the lits. But there might be unexpected bahaviour due to the size. E.g sorting the singles by chart downwards will first list the blanks, so this is a good reason to add n/a in any case for the non-singles. These I wanted to keep in any case, just one Notes section at the end, for e.g. Cover. I've updated the columns accordingly.--Tikiwont 12:54, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
I have a couple concerns with this layout. I assume we are using the attribution scheme from List of Beatles songs written by Lennon/McCartney, but this seems a bit objective, I'm not sure where these decisions come from and if there are any sources for them. Plus in many cases such as "Eleanor Rigby" there is not even consistency between quotes from band members about who wrote what parts. My other concern is the sung by column. In many cases the background vocals are sung by the other Beatles and these vocals are often quite important. For instance in "Everybody's Trying to Be My Baby," Harrison sings the verses and Paul or John sing harmony with him on the chorus, in the same way as Paul and John sing together on "Every Little Thing" which the chart attributes to them both. Also for a song like "Paperback Writer," which notably features four-part harmony in the intro, should this be mentioned in the list and how? Perhaps a "George, with Paul and John" approach would work? Maybe the backing vocals issue is too specific for the list? Either way this chart is an improvement from the other various lists, and I do think the author and singer columns are a good idea, especially since that is probably how I would use the list. One final thing, I feel that there should be some distinction made between songs that were officially released by the Beatles, songs released by Tony Sheridan and the Beatles, songs released only on Anthologies and others. For instance I see in the C section "Carol," "Clarabella," and "Crying Waiting Hoping," which I've never heard of before and have no pages. I hope this is helpful. -Tripswithtiresias 21:04, 15 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tripswithtiresias (talk • contribs)
As you gather, the idea is to merge existing information from other lists and tables, and information on author and singer. There are certainly issues e.g. with attribution but they do not change if we put all in one place. It seems to me that many articles discuss attribution, and the basic choice is whether to list the standard credits or something else. Updating and correcting would actually be easier afterwards, since it can then be done for single fields or via search and replace, whereas now songs need to be moved form one list or list part to another. I understand that your question about Anthologies translates into the question, what to allow as legit entry in the albums column, e.g only the original studio albums. Given that we have now 8 columns already, I'd say to try to use the notes column for everything else. --Tikiwont 13:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes I agree, you are right, it's much better to merge them all first and discuss the materials later.  :) --Tripswithtiresias 21:46, 25 September 2007 (EST)
For me it looks more practical to merge the whole lists 'vertically' to fill the author and singer columns and then go through the individual songs / letter blocks to fill the other columns. I've started with the singer list. --Tikiwont 09:25, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
List of Beatles songs by singer is merged now. --Tikiwont 13:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Al above mentioned lists have been merged to mostly fill the columns for authors and singers. It might now be best to continue to fill entries (lines) by song proceeding by blocks of letters. to avoid edit conflicts as well as the necessity to look up song articles several times. --Tikiwont 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I've now merged all tables together. There are still some glitches such as the blanks and that it sorts the chart poristions as strings and not as numbers. But while tehre are content questions as per above and below, I'd say the merge and basic cleanup has been done.--Tikiwont 11:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Content

I just filled in the Y section and it brought up a couple questions I had about how some of these columns should be filled. First, what is to be done with songs that were originally released a B-sides only? They have all been subsequently released on CD, so I included the first CD it was released on and a note that it was a B-side. Although I wonder if what it's A-side was should be included. Also for Yes It Is I ran into the sticky situation of it first being released on Beatles VI which was an American release. Should this page list both the American and British chronologies? I think not especially since the CDs have been standardized to the British releases. So should this be changed to Past Masters, Vol 1? Finally for Anthology only releases the year becomes the year recorded, not the year released like it is for official releases. This should, I think be clarified at the beginning of the article. --Tripswithtiresias 23:10, 25 September 2007 (EST)

Well, also form above, I gather that one idea is only to list the original studio albums. In any case I'd say albums should be wikilinked. As regards the B-sides, would it help to wikilink the entry to the a side?. I've tried that out for above example. --Tikiwont 13:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Author column

Beside filling in some more authors, there are two more general changes by George cowie: (1) listing the full names also for the Beatles, which uses more space, and (2) effectively overwriting the more differentiated attribution scheme for Lennon/McCartney form that was actually part of the merge from List of Beatles songs written by Lennon/McCartney and is explained in the current list header. Unfortunately doing all this together in one step will make it difficult to restore later the old authorship list unless we revert now. If we later want to change it or agree to use full names this can easily be done. --Tikiwont 19:35, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crediting Mal Evans

Since this article consistently attempts to identify the true author of each song instead of crediting everything to "Lennon-McCartney" or "Harrison," I think it is important to credit Mal Evans for co-writing "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" and "Fixing a Hole." The most important evidence for this is Evans's private diary. I think this evidence should more than suffice, especially because Paul McCartney has never denied Evans's claims and because Evans really had no incentive to lie in his own private diary, which has never been proven unreliable. But even more importantly, Evans's diary is confirmed by other sources: McCartney admits that Evans was with him when he developed the "Sgt. Pepper" concept. Evans had musical ability, as demonstrated by co-writing a song with George Harrison, "You and Me (Babe)," for Ringo Starr's album, and producing the hit "No Matter What" along with several other songs for Badfinger. Allon Fambrizzi 16:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi

Regarding his musical ability, there is counter-evidence. Watch him in the Let It Be film of "Maxwel's Silver Hammer" trying to hit the anvil at the proper time. Read the story where McCartney had to nod to Evans to instruct him when to play and release a single note on an organ; McCartney taped or scribbled on the proper key so Evans would know which note to play! Mal Evans was no musician and we only know about him because of his roadie/confidante role with the Beatles.
Regarding his diary claims, that's evidence, but not irrefutable evidence, and it comes from an interested party: Evans himself. You asked, why would he lie in his own diary? Who knows? Maybe he had an exaggerated sense of his own importance to the process. Other people have claimed writing credit for songs because they suggested a lyric, but no one in the industry suggests that such contributions warrant a credit. Consider Timothy Leary. He thought he was entitled to composer credit because the two words "Come Together" were a slogan for his political campaign. The point is this: Mal Evans may have thought he was a co-writer, but that doesn't it make it so, no matter where he wrote it or who he told.
In other cases such as this--albeit typically involving established musical talents like Lennon, McCartney, Donovan, etc.--we've relied on multiple accounts that agree (such as when John and Paul agree about who wrote a song) or accounts by disinterested observers. In this case, we have only Evans' word. McCartney has not publicly disagreed, but why should he? There's no legal reason to do so, and any publicity about this is guaranteed to make him look bad: "rich Beatle denies claim of fallen ex-comrade."
Evans claim is countered by the legal status of the composition--which credits Lennon and McCartney only--and while we have agreed to try and resolve who among those two wrote all or most of a song, that doesn't mean that any Tom, Dick, or Harry that comes along with a claim should be recognized.
I strongly disagree that Evan's diary is sufficient evidence as claimed above by Allon Fambrizzi. John Cardinal 18:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, we shoudl not go further than the articles themselves and can in any case not report the same level of detail here. Since both articles currently mention Evan's claim, we could mention it here as well, but at most as claim, not as an attribution of co-authorship. --Tikiwont 09:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Tikiwont, I didn't reply earlier, but I agree with your change which was to add Evan's claim in the Notes column. That's basically the edit I made before this discussion topic arose. John Cardinal 22:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't think it is accurate to call it a "claim" because, well, Evans never publicly claimed it, so Evans's claim cannot be characterized as a bid for publicity. Also, I don't think the legal status of Evans's co-authorship claim is strong evidence, because from all accounts Evans was unconditionally devoted to the Beatles, doing literally anything the band asked him to at little pay. Finally, I think the argument favors the notion that Evans had more than enough musical ability to co-write a song:
1. He actually co-authored another song, "You and Me (Babe)", written with George Harrison
2. The Beatles thought enough of his abilities to produce records for Badfinger, and several songs he produced became hits (including "No Matter What"). Indeed, he had a good enough ear to initially recommend signing Badfinger, the band that became the biggest act on Apple besides the Beatles.
3. I think the fact that Beatles actually consistently allowed Evans to play instruments on their records (and he did so numerous times, usually uncredited: sax on "Helter Skelter", tambourine on "Dear Prudence," etc.) favors the idea that Evans had some musical ability: they wouldn't let a complete hack play on their records repeatedly.

Finally, the evidence that Evans helped develop the "Sgt. Pepper" concept is documented by other sources. And, let's face it, the evidence for many of the other authorship claims are simply the unconfirmed recollections of Lennon and/or McCartney years later. Allon Fambrizzi 02:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi

"unconfirmed recollections"??? We are talking about two of the most popular songwriters of all time. They wrote hundreds of songs, and many, many people witnessed them actually composing songs. For most songs, they agree about how it was composed and while some of those recollections are not precise, many are. There is ample reason to trust their recollections far more than Mal's diary. (BTW: Has that diary been confirmed to be authentic?) With Evans, there is evidence that he wrote songs--as you described--but there is also evidence that he had little or no musical ability. He was a roadie/assistant, and that means he was sometimes in the right place. Absent legal standing, and absent acknowledgment by anyone else, Evan's diary is not sufficient for WP to grant him co-composer status. John Cardinal 04:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Just read the WP article on "No Matter What" and it says that the version that became a hit was not produced by Evans, but rather by Geoff Emerick. John Cardinal 04:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
I really think that if you read the diary extracts you will find the co-authorship claim compelling [1]. I was somewhat skeptical myself after hearing of the issue from WP articles, but after actually reading the diary extracts and finding out that Evans was credited as co-author of another song with George Harrison, I became convinced that Evans actually co-authored the songs. I'll respond to your claims one by one:
1. Lennon and McCartney generally wrote their songs in private, so the vast majority of the authorship claims are indeed based on individual, unconfirmed recollections. They may have been quite popular, but they did not write their songs on stage. And, despite what Paul has said about the disagreement being confined to two songs, most of the accounts of songwriting given by either have discrepancies. Who wrote "I Call Your Name," for example? McCartney claims he helped John write it, but John says it was "his song" and he wrote it "when there was no Beatles and no group." McCartney is credited as a contributing writer in this article, although it is not known in any detail what he contributed to it and his comment that he contributed to it came 1994, over 30 years after it was written. If you look closely enough, discrepancies such as this appear on numerous songs, and for many of the "with McCartney" and "with Lennon" claims, the extent of the "with" contribution is entirely unclear.
2. It is telling that you didn't raise the issue of the authenticity of Evans's diaries in your first response, because no serious doubt exists as to their authenticity. The diaries, written on a 1963 issue Postal Office Engineering Union diary, were not part of the 2004 suitcase hoax but rather were in the possession of Evans's ex-wife, Lily, who has released execerpts which were published in the Times.
3. In terms of "legal standing", Lennon and McCartney co-authored each of the songs written by either of them while members of the Beatles, yet co-authorship credit is not shared equally between the two for each of the songs. So "legal standing" is not dispositive on this article.
I think the evidence for Evans's co-authorship is just as strong, if not stronger, than any of the other "with X" or "with Y" claims in this article. Evans's diary has never been contradicted by anything written or said by McCartney; he had no motive to lie or exaggerate his claims in his diary, and the diary was written contemporaneous to the events it describes and is generally accurate in other regards. It is misleading to say that Evans "claimed" co-authorship; rather, his diary is strong objective evidence of coauthorship.

Allon Fambrizzi 05:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi

First, Thanks for deleting grammar lesson. It doesn't help your case. Second, it's clear we will never agree. Third, I have a question. Some sources say both Donovan and Mike Love had significant input to "Dear Prudence". Are you prepared to add their names to this list and the song's article as co-authors? If not, why not? John Cardinal 12:29, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
My view is that we should credit on the basis of what reliable primary sources tell us. From some preliminary googling, I think there may be a case for crediting Mike Love as a co-author of "Back in the USSR," because according to several sources he suggested the "California girls" bridge portion of the song-- and I frankly doubt that McCartney would have had the temerity to so blatantly lift from a Beach Boys song otherwise-- but it isn't clear whether Love just suggested McCartney use it or actually that part. What source exactly are you referring to for his contribution to "Dear Prudence"? However, Donovan never claimed that he helped write "Dear Prudence" outside of teaching Lennon the finger-picking style, although it seems he helped with the lyrics to "Julia." Here is what he said in an interview:
John could already play acoustic guitar but I taught him finger style in India. He looked at me playing and said, 'How do you do that?' He really wanted to know and he learnt it really fast… It was a joy to teach him and we were very good friends as I was with all of them. I taught him the secret moves over two days. The first thing he wrote was the moving ballad to his mother, "Julia ". I helped him with the lyrics a bit as he said I was good at child songs. And he wrote "Dear Prudence" soon after learning the new style. [2] ::Also, I still think you'd agree with me on Mal Evans if you'd read the excerpts from the diaries.

Allon Fambrizzi 15:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi

[edit] McCartney Bias and Other Errors

In looking through this, there seemed to be a large bias towards Paul McCartney, with songs such as "We Can Work it Out," "Birthday," "She's Leaving Home," and "With a Little Help From my Friends" being solely attributed in authorship to McCartney, all of which were written by both Lennon and McCartney, and all of which say this in their respective articles. I changed this the best I could, but there might be other discrepancies that are imperfect, including songs that were written by Lennon and McCartney solely attributed to Lennon, but I didn't notice these. So if someone else wants to look through it, it would probably help.

Also, the "lead vocals" information is a mess. Paul McCartney did not sing lead vocals on "In My Life" or "Happiness is a Warm Gun," even though he sang on both tracks. But there were too many errors in this fashion that I couldn't change them all in one sitting. But it needs cleaning up. --andrewlargemanjones 00:03, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the McCartney bias (which I agree exists) is due to the fact that many of the claims of co-authorship originated with Barry Miles, whose account, though quite detailed, reflected the fact that he was Paul's close friend. It is as if Pete Shotton or Elliot Mintz or some John confidant were to wrote a John biography at John's direction.

Allon FambrizziAllon Fambrizzi

'Many Years From now' is probably the closest Paul will ever come to writing an autobiography on his own, even if its content is primarily based on interviews Miles did with Paul in the early nineties. I don't think any of the credits have been fabricated by Miles in any way. I'm pretty sure they all originate from Paul himself, and therefore should be taken at least as seriously as the interviews John did with Rolling Stone in 1970, and with Playboy in 1980.192.153.194.200 (talk) 17:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of songs?

Does anyone know how many songs they made in total? Xozny 17:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, the intro to this list said at a certain point it would contain 280 songs. If someone wants to double check and count the entries, we could re-enter it. --Tikiwont 08:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
I got 282 total songs. Wiki131wiki (talk) 22:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I Feel Fine

I can't find any evidence that McCartney contributed to I Feel Fine, so I ascribed it now to solely Lennon. Can anyone else find anything about whether or not he contributed? I don't want him to be excluded from credit if he did indeed have input on the song.

CinnamonCinder 20:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

There is no 'evidence' that Paul did this, other than he says so in his book. He doesn't really specify what part of the song he helped create, but the thing that gives him some credibility, is the point(fact?) that both 'I Feel Fine' and 'She's a Woman' were at least partly written in the studio. Lennon didn't mention any help from Paul concerning this song in any of his two major interviews(1970-Rolling Stone/1980-Playboy), but as John so eloquently put it in the Playboy interview just before he died: ...it's easier to say what what my contribution was to him than what he gave to me. And he'd say the same.

In order to get as close as possible to the truth(which is what I want, anyway), you'll have to treat Lennon's interviews and McCartney's 'Many Years From Now'-book as EQUALLY valid. Of course, many of Paul's claims contradict what through years and years has been accepted as FACT, but that fact is 99,9% based on John's interviews anyway, so it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

I think we'll agree that John had at least an equal amount of Lennon-bias as McCartney has a McCartney-bias. The truth often lies somewhere in-between.--84.208.240.143 07:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Source Format

I changed the source format to put multiple cells on a single source statement. That makes it easier to tell which song was changed when using the Diff function to compare versions; when the Diff function shows a change, it shows a line of context before and after the change, which in the old source format didn't usually show enough information to know which song was changed. John Cardinal 21:58, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits

I'd like to see how people think of these recent edits by Allon Fambrizzi, particularly JohnCardinal.

I disagree with almost all of these changes, I'll enumerate the ones I particularly disagree with:

"Getting Better" and "Drive My Car": I disagree with these being "Lennon and McCartney." I believe it's safe to say McCartney was the main writer of both. Lennon only helped some with the lyrics for Getting Better--his main contribution (according to both) was the legendary "Can't Get No Worse." Lennon helped rework "Drive My Car"'s lyrics, but he did that with McCartney, and the music is all Paul's. "McCartney with Lennon"

(I couldn't agree more.--84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"A Hard Day's Night": John's song. Paul claims to have wrote the middle eight ("When I'm home...") but John and others say he just sang that because John couldn't reach the notes.

(In the book 'Many Years From Now' Paul makes NO claim to having written ANY part of 'A Hard Day's Night', so I wouldn't take that bit of information seriously.--84.208.240.143 07:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"Girl": At most, that was "Lennon with McCartney," not "Lennon and McCartney"; Macca only wrote a few lines, and even that's in contention (Lennon claims he wrote "Pain would lead to pleasure," etc).

(I have yet to see any source where John claims those exact words, but I'll be glad if you can show me. Paul claims this one was written at a writing session out at Kenwood, but from John's original idea. Paul also takes credit for the 'greek' ending, not that it matters much, because now we're entering the wonderful world of arranging, leaving songwriting behind. At the same time, Paul DOES refer to 'Girl' as John's song. 'With' is probably accurate enough. --84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"I'm Only Sleeping": Pretty sure this was almost solely John.

(According to Paul, the song was written and arranged in one writing session, co-written but from John's original idea.--84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"Eleanor Rigby": Numerous sources (Paul and I believe Pete Shotten) say that Lennon did practically nothing for this song. His "70% claim" is very dubious. I think this should be solely Paul.

(I agree, but I think giving John a small piece of the action, somehow helps justify Paul's inclusion as equal partner on 'In My Life', which is something I have been fighting for lately.--84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"I Saw Her Standing There": Nowhere have I seen Lennon take any credit for this one. Sole Paul, I believe.

(Paul: Co-written, my idea, and we finished it(...)--84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"Hey Jude": This one is the most ridiculous. Lennon's only contribution was telling Paul to keep "The moment is on your shoulder." Lennon frequently ascribes this solely to Paul, in the 1970 Rolling Stone interview he calls it "The best thing Paul ever wrote" (I believe it was that interview).

(Agree. Ridiculous to include John's name for NOT writing anything.)

"I'm a Loser": Sole John, don't see where Paul comes in.

(Paul says, "...there may have been a dabble or two from me", but he's not being specific, so I think his name shouldn't be included.)

"I'm Down": Pure Paul.

(Paul: I'm not sure if John had any input on it, in fact I don't think he did. But not wishing to be churlish, with most of these I'll always credit him with 10% just in case he fixed a word or offered a suggestion. But at least 90% of that would be mine.--84.208.240.143 08:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"Lady Madonna": Pure Paul, no Lennon at all--Lennon disliked the song, in fact.

John referred to 'Get Back' as an improved version of 'Lady Madonna'(or something like that). I don't think he ever expressed any particular dislike for it. It was not a favourite, to put it like that. --84.208.240.143 08:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC) John was apparently responsible for the 'See how they run'-line, since it appeared on 'I Am The Walrus' a couple of months earlier.192.153.194.200 (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

"Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds": Paul contributed "Newspaper taxis." That's about it. Pure Lennon.

(Paul: John had the title and the first verse(...) I sat there and wrote it with him: I offered 'cellophane flowers' and 'newspaper taxis', and John replied with 'kaleidoscope eyes'. I remember which was which because we traded words off each other, as we always did.--84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))

"Michelle": That's "McCartney with Lennon." Entirely McCartney's sans Lennon's middle-eight.

Lennon's suggestion was the 'I love you x3'-bit. Don't think he claimed the whole middle eight, but McCartney, with Lennon is accurate enough, anyway.--84.208.240.143 08:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

"Norwegian Wood": Should be "Lennon with McCartney," Macca only wrote middle-eight.

As well as having the idea to burn the house down. The title may also be his, as John had no recollection where NORWEGIAN WOOD came from in the Playboy interview.--84.208.240.143 08:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC))


I think almost everything should be reverted back to John Cardinal's last revision. Most of the aforementioned are downright ridiculous and I strongly disagree with leaving them for any prolonged period of time.

CinnamonCinder 01:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)


I actually logged in especially to make a comment on some of these inaccuracies, but I see you beat me to it--and saved me a lot of typing in the process! Thank you! Anyway, I do agree that the JohnCardinal revision is a good place to go back to (even though there are still a small handful of minor inaccuracies/incomplete credits, it's a good starting point and the most factually correct). I also advocate reverting the language in the beginning that distinguishes what "Lennon and McCartney," "Lennon with McCartney," etc mean. Woohoo5241 19:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
First, I am entirely sure I didn't change "Hey Jude" to "with Lennon." I also didn't change the credit on "A Hard Day's Night" or "I'm A Loser". Second:
1. John sang the "can't get no worse" part on "Getting Better," but wrote most of the verses, including the "I used to be cruel to my woman/I beat her and kept her apart from the things that she loved"
2. As for "Drive My Car" and "Girl," the guidelines have always said that songs written "eyeball to eyeball" are counted as "Lennon and McCartney." The evidence is that both of these were written in such a manner. Paul has also said that "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" was written in such a manner.
3. As for "Michelle," John wrote the middle eight. On other songs where one just wrote the middle eight (i.e. "We Can Work It Out") the credit is to both. And the middle eight is a major part of the song.
4. As for "Norwegian Wood," John Cardinal specifically chided me for changing that to "Lennon with McCartney," so I changed it back.
5. The article was very inconsistent before I made the revisions that I did. Sometimes minor contributions were credited (usually to McCartney), but sometimes they weren't (usually when they involved Lennon). I think the safest approach is to go as follows:
1. Songs written "eyeball-to-eyeball" or where one contributed a middle eight, are credited to both
2. Songs where one made some contribution, however minor, are credited as "with"
3. Only songs written solely by one are credited to one singly.

This is because we don't know all the details about the process. Remember, the songs were originally credited to both songwriters, so it is better and fairer to err on the side of including minor suggestions and revisions than excluding them. For "I Saw Her Standing There," John rewrote the opening line. On "Lady Madonna," John helped write the verses (and only commented that he didn't like the song after the band broke up). John also said he helped write the verse to "I'm Down." Paul said that "I'm Only Sleeping" was "co-written, but from John's original concept." On "Eleanor Rigby," the evidence seems to be clear that Paul turned to the band to help finish the song off, and I think we should err on the side of believing John's account because the credit did say "Lennon-McCartney." Allon Fambrizzi 03:07, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi::

Honestly, I think with songs where we know one or the other was the primary composer, the attribution should read "____ with ____." Which would make "Drive My Car" and "Michelle" McCartney with Lennon and "Norwegian Wood" and "Girl" Lennon with McCartney. Never has there been any dispute about who was the primary composer of any of these four songs, and while the middle-eight is certainly a major contribution, I think it's incorrect to say that Lennon's contribution to Michelle or McCartney's contribution to Norwegian Wood constitutes a co-writing credit. So, with these four where facts and evidence are solid, I am reverting them to what I have stated above. As it happens, it's two songs becoming "Lennon with McCartney" and two becoming "McCartney with Lennon," so there should be no accusations of Beatle favoritism. I would make cases for the other songs, but with these four the evidence is irrefutable. I also think an "accuracy disputed" header may be appropriate at the top of the page.
CinnamonCinder 05:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Also, I personally don't think something like "I Saw Her Standing There" should be "with Lennon." Does one line really count as a major contribution? Should "Eleanor Rigby" be "with Harrison and Starr" because Harrison contributed "All the lonely people" and Starr the line about McKenzie darning his socks? I think it's a little ridiculous. I've also never heard Lennon lay claim to anything else more than "Can't get no worse" and the "I used to be cruel to my woman..." stanza. I think that should be "McCartney with Lennon." While I agree there was a McCartney bias going on this page (and in Wikipedia in general), I don't think we should similarly perpetuate a Lennon bias just to even it out; we should work on eliminating the McCartney bias.
CinnamonCinder 05:55, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) I am not going to respond in detail, partly because there are many comments above and many changes to the article, and partly because I don't want to heat up anything that doesn't need it! In general, for songs officially credited to Lennon/McCartney, I think we should err on the side of inclusiveness. For example, if Lennon added lyrics to a McCartney song, that's "with Lennon", even if he contributed a line or two. Why? Partly because the two of them gave each other official credit, but perhaps more importantly, nearly all of their songs were discussed in joint writing sessions. They really did collaborate and while the contributions of one or the other might be minor, the two of them continued to have those writing sessions until at least the White Album. They saw the value in it, and who are we to argue?

Regarding the distinction between "A, with B" and "A and B", well, it's a matter of opinion. If L&M agree that one helped a little (or something similar) then I'd say the "with" version is appropriate. If L or M asserts that he helped a lot, then I'd say "A and B". If there is an absence of evidence, I think we should fall back to the formal credits and say "A and B".

I think the evidence bar should be higher in cases where a person is not officially credited. So, for example, adding "with Lennon" to "Taxman" may not be appropriate. Personally, I've only seen evidence that Lennon says he added/changed "Taxman" lyrics. I've never seen evidence where Harrison agrees that Lennon added/changed lyrics. (I've read far more about L/M and certainly may have missed a statement about this by Harrison.) So, absent acknowledgment by Harrison either formally (composer credits) or informally, then we only have Lennon's claim. That claim should be in the "Taxman" article but probably not in this list. By the way, I believe that Lennon did help with Taxman and in general, deserves some credit, but WP is not about what editors believe. It's about evidence. If other editors believe that one person's claim is enough to say "with B", then they should make a case for that.

The main thing here is to make the list reflect the evidence. We've got official credits. We've got joint acknowledgment of hundreds of L&M writing sessions. We've got the Miles book and the Playboy interviews, and many, many songs are covered by those sources. Obviously, there are also other credible sources. If editors here are going to take exception to the list content, they should be prepared to cite evidence. If we can focus our discussions on interpreting that evidence, then we'll probably do a good job. John Cardinal 16:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the point is to make the list reflect the evidence, and I'm concerned that if we don't look closely at the sources on this page, it will end up simply reflecting popular stereotypes of each song being a characteristically "Lennon song" or a "McCartney song." We have to remember that the songs Lennon and McCartney wrote for the Beatles in many ways have more in common with each other than they do with the solo output of either. The evidence from the Rubber Soul period is that songs like "Norwegian Wood" and "Michelle" were written eyeball-to-eyeball almost to the extent of the early days, so I am now against changing those back. Indeed, Rubber Soul is one of the most harmonious Beatles albums-- Mike Wilson said the 12 songs on the U.S. version sound like they were meant to be played together-- and I think a big reason why, as we look back at the sources, is the extent of the collaboration between John and Paul. Allon Fambrizzi 03:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
I don't know that they were written eyeball to eyeball. Where's the evidence? From what Lennon's said in interviews and McCartney as well, Paul had written most of Michelle and went to John for suggestions on flow, and John came up with "I love you" from a song he had heard. And for Norwegian Wood, Lennon had nearly all the lyrics down and the basic tune, but brought it to Paul and he helped with/co-wrote the middle-eight. While both are definitively collaborative efforts, all the evidence (Lennon Rolling Stone interviews, Paul's Playboy interview, etc--http://www.geocities.com/~beatleboy1/dba06soul.html is a good source) suggests that in each case, one had the idea and the basic tune, and brought it to the other for help. So I think it's fair (and most accurate) to give primary credit to the originator of the idea, but ensuring that the other partner gets credit for an important contribution. These songs differ from songs like "She Loves You" and "I Want to Hold Your Hand" (literally written "eyeball-to-eyeball") or "A Day in the Life" and "I've Got a Feeling" (songs not written eyeball-to-eyeball but where both had an equal or near-equal contribution-- a contribution that changed the song, not merely a change within the confines of the song's existing context). The latter four songs are the ones that should be credited as "Lennon and McCartney" (and perhaps songs like "In My Life" which are heavily disputed); with the rest, I think it's appropriate to give slightly more credit where more credit is due-- to the originator and primary composer. CinnamonCinder 23:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Examining only "Norwegian Wood", the evidence is more complicated than you describe. In Many Years from Now, McCartney says Lennon had a stanza, but nothing else, when their writing session began. he goes on to say, "It's 60-40 to John because it's John's idea and John's tune." In his 1980 Playboy interview, Lennon says it is "my song completely." Are they agreeing or disagreeing? Lennon could certainly say it was his song (given he had the idea, the tune, and some lyrics) even though McCartney contributed lyrics and the middle eight. How do we credit that? At 60-40, I think "Lennon and McCartney" is proper. At 80-20, "Lennon, with McCartney" seems right. At 70-30, hard to say. John Cardinal 02:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I suppose this is where we differ. I was aware of these facts concerning Norwegian Wood, particularly McCartney's comment that it was "Lennon's idea and tune" (along with the fact that he had a stanza written). To me, that's sufficient enough to give him credit as primary composer, since McCartney contributed to a piece that already had been established--with a tune and some lyrics written. This, along with the fact that both credit Lennon as the main writer ("60/40" and "my song completely"), I'd say this should be Lennon, with McCartney. I think what this boils down to is: what are people using this page for? Readers aren't perusing this article to see the same old "Lennon/McCartney" credit that they could get on the packaging of the album. They want to know which songwriter was most responsible for a song. So when there's an instance where it's clear that the idea (specifically when it includes the tune and some lyrics) originated with one or the other, I think we should give credit to that member as the one primarily responsible. It also adds greater credence to the "Lennon and McCartney" credits on this page that truly were collaborative efforts (like the four I mentioned earlier), rather than merely one contributing ideas within an already-established melody and lyric structure. CinnamonCinder 03:18, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

(outdent) At 60/40, I think it should say "A and B", and you'd prefer to credit the composer with the original idea, "A, with B". I don't think there is any right answer. I understand that readers might want to know who had the original idea, but I think drawing a distinction at that level of collaboration doesn't acknowledge the importance of the collaborative process. It's incredibly important not to lose how well they complemented each other; there are few examples that compare. They both spawned new song ideas, lyrics, and tunes. They both could add a little, or a lot, to a song, based on the need. They trusted each other's judgment. They were secure enough to help each other and compete with each other. They were different enough without being too different.

In the end, this list is a summary, and readers can get a more complete understanding from the song articles, so perhaps it doesn't matter which way we go. Whatever is decided, the rules ought to be applied to all songs in the same way. John Cardinal 12:46, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'This Boy'...

...according to McCartney('Many Years From Now'), was VERY co-written.

He refers to it as: "...another hotel-bedroom song, twin beds, one afternoon somewhere. Rather like the hotel where we wrote 'She Loves You'. It's funny, I remember the room and the position of the beds: John and I sitting on twin beds, the G-Plan furniture, the British hotel with olive green and orange everywhere, that marvellous combination, the colours of vomit. (...)We wanted to do a close-harmony thing, we liked harmonies and we were quite good at them. We wrote it in two-part harmony and then put the third part in for George to sing. That was quite a departure for us, the close-harmony thing; we'd never actually tried to write something like that. Nice middle, John sang that great, then we'd go back into the close-harmony thing..." --84.208.240.143 08:56, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'And your bird can sing'...

...is a song Paul refers to as John's song, but... Paul: I suspect that I helped with the verses because the songs were nearly always written without second and third verses. I seem to remember working on that middle-eight with him, but it's John's song, 80/20 to John. --84.208.240.143 09:05, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Being for the benefit of Mr. Kite'...

Paul: 'Mr. Kite' was a poster that John had in his house in Weybridge. I arrived there for a session one day and he had it up on the wall in his living room. (...)almost the whole song was written right off this poster. We just sat down and wrote it.(...)It was more John's because it was his poster so he ended up singing it, but it was quite a co-written song. We were both sitting there to write it at his house, just looking in at it on the wall in the living room. But that was nice, it wrote itself very easily.

(One point I'd like to make concerning this song, is if you listen to it on Anthology2, you can hear them starting a take which almost immediately breaks down, whereupon Paul is heard humming the melody to John(I expect), as if he's teaching it to him. That is my interpretation, anyway.)--84.208.240.143 09:20, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Getting Better'

There should be no dispute as to whether John contributed to this song, because both the second and third verse show obvious signs of his input(Paul gives support to this, although he refers to both verses as co-written), and of course he supplied the famous 'it couldn't get much worse'-countermelody, but isn't an equal credit for John a little too much? The music is nearly totally Paul's, and it seems that John could hardly be responsible for MORE than 50% of the lyrics(the first verse being entirly Paul's), so 'McCARTNEY, WITH LENNON' would seem like an obvious choice.--84.208.240.143 09:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Good Day Sunshine'

Paul refers to this song as: ...me trying to write something similar to 'Daydream'(Lovin' Spoonful). John and I wrote it together at Kenwood, but it was basically mine, and he helped me with it.

Lennon should get a 'with'-credit on this one. Generally, if John OR Paul credits the OTHER guy for contributing to his own song, there should be NO doubt that there is some truth to it. It's when they want to include their OWN name on the other's song, that the situation may become slightly....messy...--84.208.240.143 09:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Day Tripper'

On one occasion(Rolling Stone-1970), John DOES mention Paul having had an input on the writing of this song, although he does so mid-sentence, so bringing an actual quote is a bit hard. Paul also refers to this one as co-written, although...

Paul: We were both there making it all up, but I would give John the main credit. Probably the idea came from John because he sang the lead(sic), but it was a close thing. We both put a lot of work in on it.--84.208.240.143 10:03, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'We can work it out'

There is no doubt that John contributed to this song. Paul admits this in his book. However, he claims that he and John wrote the middle-eight TOGETHER, NOT that John wrote it all on his own, as John has been interpreted to saying in the Playboy interview.

And when you think about it... Would an egomaniac -- as Paul often has been portrayed as(by John, for one)-- write a couple of verses of a song(as well as the chorus), and then bring it to the other guy and just let HIM write the rest ON HIS OWN? I do not think so.

And even if John DID write the middle-eight on his own, giving him an equal credit would seem greatly exaggerated to me, because although John claimed Paul wrote 'the first HALF', and he himself the middle-eight, the middle-eight could only constitute about 40% of the total in my view. AT MOST! So, McCartney, WITH LENNON it is.--84.208.240.143 10:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Here, There and Everywhere'

I don't think John ever took much credit for this one, but Paul in his book acknowledges that 'John might have helped with a few last words'. He finally credits the song as a 80/20 in his own favour. I don't know if Paul's account is sufficient to give John a co-credit, but when the main author GIVES credit to the other guy, there is usually SOMETHING to it, you know...--84.208.240.143 11:02, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Free as a Bird'...

...is of course a song John started long ago and far away, which was finished in the early 90s(not quite as long ago or far away) for the Anthology project. But if I'm not mistaken, the song is credited to all four of them, and if I'm(again)not mistaken there is some extra material footage on the Anthology-DVD where we see Paul, George and Ringo working on the composition. So only including John and Paul's names as writers seems a bit unfair to me. --84.208.240.143 11:22, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Hey Bulldog'

Paul: I remember 'Hey Bulldog' as being one of John's songs, and I helped him finish it off in the studio, but it's mainly his vibe.

Paul doesn't give any percentages on this one, so I dunno... Maybe he deserves SOME recognition?...--84.208.240.143 11:31, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'I don't want to spoil the party'

Paul makes a slightly odd claim on this one, because in addition to claiming 20% co-writer's credit, he says he and John wrote it as a country and western for Ringo, and ends the discussion with the notion that 'Ringo did a good job on it'.

Now, I don't think he meant they wrote it specifically for drums as the solo instrument(there are no drum solos), but if that ISN'T the case, why on earth is JOHN doing the lead vocals? Because it is he. Did Ringo do this one in the live shows perhaps?--84.208.240.143 11:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'It's only love'

Paul, in his book 'Many Years From Now', doesn't just claim authorship on GOOD John Lennon songs, because he claims to have co-written this one with Lennon as well. 60/40 in John's favour, as a matter of fact. It was John's original idea, and Paul helped him finish it on yet another one of their writing sessions at Weybridge.

Although Lennon later showed a strong dislike for this song, he still didn't put the blame on McCartney, which I guess -- had he known the latter would take credit for it years and years later-- he might have done in order to avoid embarrassment.

But that is only me speculating...--84.208.240.143 12:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'I've Got a Feeling'

One could always argue that songs that consist of two(or more) different ideas(like 'A day in the life' or 'Baby you're a rich man')by two(or more) different authors, should lead to them sharing an equal credit between them, but in this case I don't think that should be. Why?

Well, although John contributes his 'Everybody had a hard year' fragment, which initially had its own melody and chords(I seem to remember having watched a piece of film showing a bearded John, sitting on a bench with Yoko, singing this 'song' to his own acoustic guitar accompaniment -- although musically it didn't resemble 'I've got a Feeling' at all, not to my ears, anyway), 'I've Got a Feeling' would still basically be the same song if John's part were omitted altogether, if not quite as an interesting one. Paul writes the verses as well as the middle eight, and that outweighs John's contribution(should we call it a counter-verse?) by so much that the best John could hope for is a 'McCartney, with Lennon'-credit, which is exactly what I think he should get.

Anyway, John regarded this one as a McCartney-composition in the Playboy interview.--84.208.240.143 12:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Lady Madonna'

Paul commits a whole page in his book to this song, but doesn't mention John's name a single time. John says(Playboy) he 'maybe' helped on some of the lyrics, but he's not being at all specific, so I don't think John should be included as a writer on this song. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.240.143 (talk) 06:58, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Rain'...

...is a song McCartney remembers as John and himself sitting down trying to write together(meaning: John didn't bring the original idea to the writing session), but when they got started, it was John who 'kicked it off'. 70/30 in John's favour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.240.143 (talk) 07:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Wait'

Now, if anyone could get hold of a Lennon-quote on this one, it would be really cool, because neither Jann Wenner nor David Sheff talked to John about the origins of this song. It is usually regarded as a prime example of a Lennon/McCarteny collaboration(and is given a Lennon and McCartney credit here), which could of course be the case. The problem, however, is that Paul doesn't remember John having had ANY input in the writing of this song, which means giving them an equal credit is a bit problematic, for me anyway. But I've decided not to edit, in case someone comes along with a brilliant Lennon-quote... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.240.143 (talk) 07:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 'Norwegian Wood'...

...has already been talked about here, but let's get the main points down. In the Rolling Stone interview(1970), John credits Paul with the middle-eight(musically, I would assume. He does the same with 'In My Life' -- in the same sentence, as a matter of fact.) Ten years later, in the Playboy interview, he's obviously changed his mind, because now he refers to 'Norwegian Wood' as "my song completely".

Paul basically takes credit for the middle-eight, as well as coming up with the idea to burn down the house at the end.(According to him, Lennon only had written the opening line "I once had a girl -- or should I say -- she once had me" when Paul got involved.)

In 1980, John didn't remember where the title came from, so that might also be Paul's.

It seems obvious to me that John didn't have a lot of this song before Paul got involved, so a Lennon AND McCartney credit could be justified, but all in all -- John's conviction that he did it all on his own considered -- a Lennon, with McCartney sounds sufficient to me. The idea being, of course, entirely John's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.153.194.200 (talk) 14:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ringo and Lennon/McCartney

Ringo's writing credits are always under his real name of Richard Starkey. He never had it legally changed to Ringo Starr. So listing a songwriting credit as 'Starr' is wrong.

And all John and Paul songs regardless of who wrote the song are under the Lennon/McCartney banner. Even songs like "Yesterday" are credited to Lennon even though he had nothing to do with it. Same with say, "I am the Walrus", that had nothing to do with Paul. But the credits on all the records are Lennon/McCartney with the exception of the "Please, Please Me" CD which has all originals credited to McCartney/Lennon.

[edit] Main composer and lead singers

I made some changes, based on the books by Lewisohn and Dowlding (see references in the song "You´ve got to hide your love away", I didn´t know where else to put them, if someone can help, thank you).

There´s a lot of songs written by Lennon or McCartney alone, and someone credit them as Lennon with MacCartney or viceversa. In some cases, as in "A day in the life", Lennon wrote most of the song, if you compared the section by McCarteny, is shorter, both in extension, lyrics and melody. So? Who´s the main composer? Lennon, of course, with a big input by McCartney. Another example: "Michelle" is tipically McCartney, but Lennon helped with the bridge, probably just the lyrics or the melody line, so it is fair said McCartney with Lennon. But what happend with songs in wich the input from one or another are just an idea, a word, a chord change. Sould we credit everyone who ever happened suggest any ideas to the guys? In that case, George Martin probably should have a credit in each song. In "Lucy in the sky with diamons", MCartney claims he was the one who sugested the "newspaper taxis". That´s it. Should he deserve a credit for the song? The same with Lennon input in "Taxman". George asked him for help, Lennon helped and he deserved aknowledge for that, but not a credit for the song.

Now, for the lead singer: one thing is lead vocals, another harmony vocals and another background vocals. In "Because", Lennon, McCartney and Harriosn sang a three-part harmony, all the way, so, it´s a example of them sharing the lead vocals; but in "Nowhere man", "Yes it is" or "This boy", they harmonized for a part of the song, then, Lennon took the lead role, while Paul and George sang background vocals. The same for some songs crediting the lead vocals as shared betwen Lennon and McCartney: in "Ticket to ride", "In my life" and "Come together" the lead singer is John, not both, Paul sang harmony vocals and some of the verses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.40.0.34 (talk) 15:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] In my life/Eleanor Rigby dispute

McCartney claims he composed de music for "In my life". Lennon said that Mcartney composed de music for the bridge. Considering that the verse and the bridge have equal measure, and regarding the dispute, the credits have to go 50/50, but just for the music. So, if Lennon wrote the 100% of the lyricis and 50% of the music, and McCartney 50% of the music; the main composer is Lennon, with input from McCartney, but there´s no sense in sharing the whole credits 50/50. The case of "Eleanor Rigby" is similar. Lennon claims he wrote at least 70% of the lyrics. If that´s true, McCartney wrote de rest of the 30% and 100% of the music, so, the main composer is McCartney, with input from Lennon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.40.0.34 (talk) 17:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


[edit] A Day In The Life

While I agree John's contribution was much more significant, it was always widely considered as a co-written song. This is confirmed by both Paul and John... --74.57.210.118 (talk) 23:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Massive Lennon bias

Ticket to ride, Day tripper, Norweigian wood, Girl, Lucy in the sky etc all credited to just Lennon, but Paperback writer, And i love her, Eleanor Rigby, we can work it out etc, all "McCartney, with Lennon"... talk about POV.

MatteusH (talk) 19:53, 17 March 2008 (UTC)