Talk:The Beatles' London

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



B
This article has
been rated as
B-Class on the
assessment scale.
  This Beatles-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.

Mid
This article has
been rated as
Mid importance 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 following comments were left by the quality and importance raters: (edit · refresh)

  • A lot of interesting facts. But they're just scattered about with only minimal sorting, and no citations at all. I waffled between B and Start class, actually -- Lar (12 March 2006)
The Beatles To-do: You can HELP!:

Contents

[edit] The Abbey Road picture used

There seems to be some controversy about which picture to use to illustrate Abbey Road (the street), the lead image of the article. I believe that to be the case since my replacement was reverted, and I got a mail from the person who took the image reverted back to, in which they say: "Just letting you know I have reverted the Abbey Road picture to the original used on the page as it is a photo of the actual crossing that I took and so is more fitting than the generic crossing (which is NOT on Abbey Road) that you added. "

If we compare the album cover image: AbbeyRoad.jpg with this image: Abbey Road sin Beatles.jpg the resemblance is striking. Clear sky, the crossing aligned square on at the bottom of the picture and the road receding into perspective directly at the center of the pic. The creator of that image does state it is indeed Abbey Road, not a generic crossing.

Compare the album cover again with this image: Abbeyroadcrossing2005.JPG (the one reverted to, currently on lead) The image is not square, the sky is dark and it is, in general, a less colorful, less memorable image. I would have no problem using it elsewhere in the article, but not on lead.

That's why I replaced that image with the "Abbey Road sin Beatles" image. The lead image of the article needs to be striking, vivid, and should resonate with the reader. But since the change got reverted, I think it appropriate to raise it for discussion. What do others think?

Note: Since the album cover is fair use I have not transcluded the image, but just given links. Fair use images are not to be used on talk pages, even temporarily, as I understand things. ++Lar: t/c 16:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Gosh, we might have egg on our faces here... AbbeyRoad.jpg has low walls on the left. The Abbey Road studio, I know for a fact, has a low wall and a small courtyard or drive in front of it. The buildings on Image:Abbey Road sin Beatles.jpg have no courtyards, their frontage is directly at street level. Furthermore, that road is wider it seems to me. It looks like a main London thoroughfare, whereas Abbey Road is in essence a leafy suburb street.
Unfortunately Image:Abbeyroadcrossing2005.JPG is cropped to the left, whereas the Beatles album cover is mostly cropped on the right hand side! That makes it hard to compare. We can also see a modern building on the right, in the distance, which I would wager is post 60s. I'll say one thing though: that scene is familiar to me. So, I think this one is probably genuine. (I should point out that it's many years since I've been to St Johns Wood so I can't say from direct experience. The input of a Londoner would be nice. I also have a feeling that the crossing might have changed location since the 60s??).
For use in the Project templates though we 'could' stick with Image:Abbey Road sin Beatles.jpg since - genuine or not, and I really don't know - it looks the part. --kingboyk 22:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I dunno about egg, no harm done, I think.... however, if it's not actually Abbey Road, it needs to not be used, the person who mailed me is right. I have no way to tell myself, I was only at Abbey Road very briefly in 2000 and certainly don't remember details like wall heights. However, it looks STYLISTICALLY like the SORT of image we want to use. Need to find a Londoner to go take a picture for us that looks like that one (blue sky, square, perfect receding perspective, etc)... ++Lar: t/c 22:42, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Two different uses. There's no question Abbey Road sin Beatles.jpg shouldn't be used on this page, if there's any doubt about it's "authenticity". Because it's stylistically correct we could continue to use it on the Project templates though. Agree with you about the style, the new Abbey Road image is a bit naff because of the framing and other issues. --kingboyk 22:45, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Nod. So who do we know in the UK or going soon, that can do this dogsbody work for us, and get a nicer piccie?? Someone with lots of time on their hands or a willingness to go to London? ++Lar: t/c 23:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Lol. --kingboyk 23:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I wasn't actually thinking of YOU, mate... But now that you mention it??? ++Lar: t/c 20:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
If there is such a problem with the Abbey Road pic - and as it is generally used in the talk pages where we seek each others advice - should we swap it with the "Help" album cover?LessHeard vanU 20:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
No we can't, because that photo is copyright. We have to use a free image not a fair use one, per Wikipedia policy. --kingboyk 20:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Funny you should ask that! That was my first image in the project invite box way back when, but as Steve says, we can't use fair use images to illustrate anything other than what they DIRECTLY relate to, which means not at all in project or user space... But boy it would be neat, HELP! seems to fit the project invite box perfectly! ++Lar: t/c 20:22, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi, with reference to the discussion over the photo I can confirm that the photo currently in use is definately the Abbey Road crossing as that was where I was standing when I took it. I'll admit the angle isn't the same as it is on the Abbey Road album cover but I found it difficult to recapture that image due to some rather persistent traffic. On the matter of the Abbey Road Sin The Beatles image, this picture is certainly NOT the Abbey Road crossing. The street in the picture has two avenues seperated by trees, unlike Abbey Road. In addition the style of the street signs and the car registration plates indicate that the street in the photo is not in England but probably in France instead. Hope this clears some things up! Richard J Stanley

Please sign your talk page posts with four tildes, like this: ~~~~. Thanks for the input... if as you say that is france, it's clearly not where we want to go with that! I still would like to see a better framed and brighter picture. Next time I'm in the UK I guess I'll try for one myself if one doesn't turn up before that. ++Lar: t/c 14:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A bit of a rewrite.

I've just gone through the article, and it probably needs going over again, but I would like to made a few comments; Firstly, full stops are mandatory! Secondly, links to people, places, records, etc likely to have Wiki articles should be made when they are mentioned in the text. Thirdly, I'm not sure of Wiki policy - but surnames should be used at the beginning of sections, paragraphs etc. and fornames then after only when the article is about that subject in most formal cases. Fourthly, I really should get a life...

At present this article is really only Paul McCartney (and Apples) London, plus some other blokes who were in a band with him. Previous to my editing most references to Mr McCartney were "Paul" and the other band members were surname (apart from "Ringo"). A John Dunbar was mentioned as many times as a George Harrison, to the best of my memory. My point is, this article has a definate "Macca" POV - much of the stuff is good, but we need more of the same for the other band members.

I am now going to look at the article history and find out whose feathers I may have just ruffled! LessHeard vanU 20:59, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Paul is my favorite Beatle (well maybe George is...) but I think you did fine. Thanks for taking the time to give the article a good washing. Most largish articles here can benefit from it from time to time and really, it's a job for a dogsbody, so cheers... ++Lar: t/c 21:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Woof!LessHeard vanU 21:39, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Following confirmation of Wiki policy, this article needs amending to fully comply. All name references should be full name followed by surname/full name as appropriate. I will do this when I have time, but I would not be upset if someone else had a bash in the meantime!LessHeard vanU 12:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I've done what I can. It is now up to the passing editors to spot the "deliberate mistakes"! I urge anyone who can contribute more information regarding Messrs. Lennon, Harrison and Starr homes, hangouts and haunts to add their piece(s).LessHeard vanU 20:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Abbey Road Studios section.

Third indent; who did Macca take back home, George Martin or John Lennon? If it was Lennon then who took their first acid drop is obviously McCartney, if it was Martin then it needs to be made clear who was it who first dropped acid (I believe that Martin has alluded he did take acid on a few occasions, though it would likely be McCartney in this instance.) In other words, once we know who was taken home and which one of them tried LSD for the first time then this piece should be rewritten.LessHeard vanU 13:03, 15 April 2006 (UTC)


Macca took John home (to Macca´s house, which was not far away) and then Macca decided to join Lennon on his trip. andreasegde 18:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ringo's House

I've added Ringo's house (and EMI House), I saw the address in an article about Ringo's book, "Postcards from the Beatles". It was on a postcard from John, but he'd written the address incorrectly as "Ringo Starr, Highgate, Compton Avenue" (Highgate is the area, and there are no houses called "Highgate" in Compton Avenue). I don't know what the exact address was, but there are only about 8 houses in that road and they're all huge. (If anyone has the book I'm sure it must be in there.)

While I'm here I also have a suggestion; at the moment the list appears to be in order of importance, so Buckingham Palace should be moved down, it shouldn't be above Savile Row or Cavendish Avenue. (Should it even be on the list at all? The header says London landmarks famously associated with The Beatles, personally I don't associate Buckingham Palace with The Beatles. The same goes for the Royal Courts.)

And how about London locations associated with/mentioned in Beatles' songs - I think they should go on the list (there's a particularly significant one I'm thinking of). Pufnstuf 00:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC) I am not aware of any particular order for this article, I feel it must have just evolved. If you want to order it in your preferred way (although "most important" is likely to be one of interpretation) then go ahead - although I think the dissolution of The Beatles should still end the article since it is important - since such a contribution may be a way of "upgrading" the status.

Yes, also, to your suggestion regarding lyrics - although it should be the better known songs... er... off hand I can only think of "A Day in the Life"/'Albert Hall'. Have fun! LessHeard vanU 21:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I've added some more locations; Chapel Street and Trident Studios, and moved Buckingham Palace and Marylebone Registry Office farther down the list. I didn't realise there was no existing order to the items, I don't want to mess too much with the current ordering.

Fool on the (Primrose) Hill was the song/location I was thinking of, it's the only London location I can think of that's actually referenced in a Beatles song title, so I've added that as well. A Day in the Life also mentions the House of Lords, there may be other Beatles songs that have London locations in the lyrics, but I guess the article might become trivial if too much gets added to it. Maybe there should be a seperate article for Locations mentioned in The Beatles' songs - Penny Lane, Dakota, USSR, etc, or maybe that would be considered fancruft?Pufnstuf 03:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the whole list should be arranged to a timeline. Abbey road, EMI and Apartment "L" were the first, so they should be at the top. --andreasegde 16:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
Re Ringo's London House: He moved from there in 1965, and lived on the same estate as Lennon. Cheers, Vera, Chuck & Dave 16:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No, he didn't. I've detailed this below with conclusive proof. Pufnstuf 00:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
lennon and Cynthia's first flat was in Emperor's Gate. It should be in. --andreasegde 17:18, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ringo Starr lived in Highgate 1969-1973

This is a photo from Ringo's book showing a postcard sent to him by John and Yoko. It is clearly addressed to Compton Avenue, London, N6 (that's Highgate). The postdate is... 1970! This confirms that Ringo Starr definitely lived in Highgate at this time.

I have also added a citation for Ringo Starr's book Postcard from the Boys which contains this postcard, and others, that confirm the dates and addresses.

This information was already in the article, but User:Vera, Chuck & Dave decided to change it (see their comment above), claiming that Ringo left Highgate in 1965 and lived on the same estate as Lennon. But if they were living on the same estate, then obviously Lennon wouldn't be sending postcards to Ringo's old Highgate address FIVE YEARS after Ringo had left there.

I hope this doesn't get changed again, I haven't been on Wikipedia for a while, or I would have corrected this edit sooner. Pufnstuf 00:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photos

I'm surprised that there are not more photos from Commons in his article, considering the number of editors that must be in London. --andreasegde (talk) 22:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Confusion on Edits Showing Up

Please forgive my novice status here, but I am confused as to why edits I've made seem to not show up when first navigating to the page. I made small additions to the Abbey Road Zebra Crossing and Trident Studios sections. They DO NOT show up when I navigate to the page from, for example. Google. However, if I then look at the history page (not clicking anything once I'm on the History page, just looking at it) then click back to article - voila. I have also noticed that the IP I seem to be on comes up as having made some Madison Univ. edits that I guess are being questioned, so I'm wondering if that's part of the problem. Can someone please explain? -jim boggia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.201.156.180 (talk) 01:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)