Consensus per this RfC closure and this RfM closure is to use "the Beatles" mid-sentence.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 26, 2004.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

The Beatles High‑importance This Beatles-related article is within the scope of WikiProject The Beatles, which focuses on improving coverage of English rock band The Beatles and related topics on Wikipedia. Users who are willing to participate in the project should visit the project page, where they can join and see a list of open tasks.The BeatlesWikipedia:WikiProject The BeatlesTemplate:WikiProject The BeatlesThe Beatles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to albums on Wikipedia. This article was the project collaboration on at least one previous occasion. To-do list: For WikiProject The Beatles A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles. Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood. Verify : Beatle wives Other : Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here. This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

I am missing here a producer of such musical albums. I guess the Beatles weren't producers of their own albums. By chance I own one original of this particular LP.

It is written on it: Produced for records by George Martin E.M.I. Records Limited | THE PARLOPHONE Co., Ltd. LSPAR-70807 (PCS 3058) 1964 + Jugoton (former Yugoslav gramophone undertaking :) Best regards. -- XJamRastafire 16:17 Aug 22, 2002 (PDT)

Some of my disks don't list all the credits (yes, they're legal--part of a boxed set), so any information like that you want to add to the articles, please do.

How to play ogg-files? Patrick 02:29 Dec 17, 2002 (UTC)

I use Winamp v2 (I don't like v3, but that works as well, after a fashion) --Camembert

Visit http://www.vorbis.com/software.psp for plugins for Macs, etc. --KQ

Thanks, Winamp works fine. Patrick 03:50 Dec 17, 2002 (UTC)

Actually the All Music Guide gives this five stars. The three star review is for the truncated American version that is no longer in print. Syncrolecyne

Shouldn't the movie and the album be different wikipedia entries? --Samuel Wantman 07:55, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Second paragraph begins with "The album rocks.". Erm, while I concur heartily, this is an encyclopedia, not a Beatles fanpage (God knows there's enough of those...), and as such I am being bold and changing it to something less POV. Lost Number 03:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion was posted on Wikipedia's main Beatles discussion page, and appears to also be relevant here:

Are links to lyrics sites appropriate? I have noticed them in some music articles, and I believe they do add value to the listings. I added one at the bottom of the external links section. In the interest of full disclosure, it is a website I maintain. If the interest is positive, I would likely add lyrics links to other musical articles where appropriate. Shadar 19:35, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that lyrics sites reprint lyrics in violation of copyright, and that's why we're not supposed to link to them. The relevant guideline to check would be Wikipedia:External links, but that page doesn't directly address this question. I'm going to post a question to the discussion page there, and perhaps someone can tell us whether my idea is correct or mistaken. In the latter case, I'd be happy to restore the link myself. -GTBacchus^(talk) 19:40, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I posted my question Wikipedia talk:External links#Lyrics sites here. -GTBacchus^(talk) 19:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the decision is made that lyrics sites are inappropriate due to the copyright violation issue, I would like to delete the links I found. As a newbie, it would give me good practice in editting. Is that an appropriate action for a new user, and is there a FAQ on deletion etiquette? Shadar 19:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we received an answer, and it refers us to item #2 at Wikipedia:External links#Restrictions on linking. It comes down to whether the lyrics are actually under copyright or in the public domain, and whether or not the site in question has the copyright holder's permission to publish the lyrics. If you'd like to remove links to lyrics sites that are in violation of our copyright policy, then you're welcome to do so. The best way to avoid offense is probably to mention the External links policy (or WP:EL, as we like to call it) in your edit summary. -GTBacchus^(talk) 20:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can certainly understand that decision. It turns out I violated the self interest clause anyways, since I posted my own site. I should have recommended the change in talk, and then if someone agreed they could make the change. Thanks for the help with this, GTBacchus. Shadar 17:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that there are also links to lyric pages on each of the Wikipedia Beatles album pages. I should have time to fix those tonight. I'll follow the above advice of GTBacchus in mentioning the WP:EL, and refer to this discussion on each album discussion page. InnerRevolution7 02:57, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the above-stated change. InnerRevolution7 03:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AHardDaysNightUSalbumcover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 17:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added/updated FU rationale. — John Cardinal 03:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Beatles hard days night.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 17:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 17:57, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:HardDayUK.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added formal fair use rationale. Steelbeard1 11:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's well documented that 1964 was a Lennon-dominated year -- especially when songwriting was concerned -- but if you read McCartney's book 'Many Years From Now', AS WELL as reading the John Lennon interviews, you'll find that McCartney refers to 'I'm Happy Just To dance With You' as 50/50 co-written, and also claims to have had a hand on 'If I Fell' and 'I'll Be Back'.

Of course, Lennon claims to have had a hand on 'And I Love Her', but McCartney downplays Lennon's role on that one.

Simply accepting Lennon's comments as the comlete truth, and thereby just giving him main ownership on 10 of 13 song, feels a bit unbalanced to me, considering there are differing comments from McCartney. It seems to me, in reality, that seven out of thirteen songs were entirely Lennon's, two were entirely McCartney's, and four were in some form co-written.

It has to be said, though; 'A Hard Day's Night' is still very much a Lennon-dominated album, at least in quantity.--84.208.240.143 (talk) 18:52, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have now changed the wording myself. I found that 'Lennon wrote the majority of the 13 songs on the album on his own', would be an undisputed claim, even if you were to regard McCartney's account as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Mentioning an exact number(10) is more problematic, as John's and Paul's accounts do conflict on certain songs, and McCartney is clearly regarding 'I'm Happy Just To Dance with You' as an equal effort. --84.208.224.234 (talk) 08:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I read/hared on Beatles anthology that A hard day's night when meant to have 14 tracks (as normal with Beatles and other artist’s albums at this time). The 14th song when never properly recorded due to one member being ill at the last planned recording session when that song was to be recorded. If this is true I believe it should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.56.65.247 (talk) 16:29, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Only if there are verifiable citations to back up that info. Steelbeard1 (talk) 16:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel it is reliable enough citation to be placed in the artical and have now included it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.56.65.247 (talk) 21:15, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The unsourced edit made by an anonymous poster conflicts with the original British album's liner notes which reflect the fact that side two of the album contains tracks which were written for, but not included in the film. The quote follows: It became apparent that no more than six songs should be introduced via the soundtrack of the film. To increase this number would have left insufficient screen-time for the action of the plot. On the other hand it seemed most unfair to hold back the remainder of the boys' new songs when each one was of such excellent quality. Eventually the decision was made to record all the material which John and Paul had written and include the extra titles on the second side of the album. Steelbeard1 (talk) 02:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

he's no longer on the professional list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums, so we can kick his review out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.196.255.43 (talk) 21:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the genres should be rock and rock and roll. All of the songs on the album seem to fall into either or both of those genres. --John of Lancaster (talk) 16:49, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think rock and pop sum it up nicer. Rock and roll is just a sub-genre of these two and its applicability could be questionable. McLerristarr | Mclay1 10:02, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think, the genre must be Rock by default. Or "Rock, rock'n'roll". --93.80.253.98 (talk) 15:17, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We should be pointing to reliable sources for genre. Binksternet (talk) 20:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why is "Can't Buy Me Love" being deleted from the singles list in the infobox? It was a single from the album. Yes, it was a single before it was on the album but the guideline given in the latest edit summary does not mention this situation at all. McLerristarr | Mclay1 06:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Can't Buy Me Love' was released four months before the album; it was not released to promote the album, because there was no album to promote in March of 1964. Radiopathy •talk• 15:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But the guideline you cited does not say anything about that. It's still a single that was included on the album. Every similar album infobox I've seen includes singles released before the album. McLerristarr | Mclay1 18:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to participate in an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles on the issue of capitalising the definite article when mentioning the name of this band in running prose. This long-standing dispute is the subject of an open mediation case and we are requesting your help with determining the current community consensus. Thank you for your time. For the mediators. ~ GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:49, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:A Hard Day's Night (album)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

* Y All the start class criteria Y A completed infobox, including cover art and most technical details Y At least one section of prose (excluding the lead section) Y A track listing containing track lengths and authors for all songs N A full list of personnel, including technical personnel and guest musicians Lacks technical personnel. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 19:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 06:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on A Hard Day's Night (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.avclub.com/articles/chuck-klosterman-repeats-the-beatles%2C32560/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090909135956/http://www.blender.com/guide/back-catalogue/53036/hard-days-night.html to http://www.blender.com/guide/back-catalogue/53036/hard-days-night.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23927271
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.reuters.com/article/entertainmentNews/idUSTRE5363RN20090407
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.yle.fi/lista/listat/tuote.php?id=9571

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:44, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article shows United States and North American chronology boxes, but not UK? I don't know if I can fix that! Apepper (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am clarifying the point here. Technically these are Lennon/ McCartney songs but when you detail the facts, song by song, you will see that Lennon was the author of 10 of the 13. This is well known and authenticated. I am not happy with your re-writing. The facts are the facts and were not made clear in the article. Lennonfan1 (talk) 12:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lennon's authorship is already covered in the Contents section. freshacconci (✉) 12:35, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In the Beatles for Sale article there is a Release section, detailing what the band did in terms of publicity for the album and also some chart history for the months after release. I reckon it’s very interesting. But there’s no such section for either this album or Help! I wish there was! I’m sure such sections would be worthwhile. Boscaswell talk 03:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]