The Beatles Bible - Topic: Wikipedia error? http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/ Simple:Press Version 5.2.6 frylock on Wikipedia error? http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57765 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57765

Von Bontee said
So, are you going to edit the Wikipedia article yourself?

Not in any rush if anyone wants to beat me. Yeah, Wiki is generally good. And that error, if an error, is not a pressing matter.

]]> Thu, 13 Sep 2012 07:34:49 +0100 The Walrus on Wikipedia error? http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57679 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57679

meanmistermustard said
Wiki isnt the best place to go as its not entirely accurate, it doesnt help that over the years numerous books and authors have claimed someone played something only for another book to contradict it so there are differing sources offering different details. Even now recording details are being questioned. Should also add that Lewisohn has admitted to there being errors in his books due to deadline pressures, not that theyre flatally flawed and should be ditched, they are still some of the best beatle books about.

 

Going off topic, there was a story recently about an author (Philip Roth) who spotted ...]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 20:54:59 +0100 meanmistermustard on Wikipedia error? http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57667 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57667 Wiki isnt the best place to go as its not entirely accurate, it doesnt help that over the years numerous books and authors have claimed someone played something only for another book to contradict it so there are differing sources offering different details. Even now recording details are being questioned. Should also add that Lewisohn has admitted to there being errors in his books due to deadline pressures, not that theyre flatally flawed and should be ditched, they are still some of the best beatle books about.

 

Going off topic, there was a story recently about an author (Philip Roth) who spotted an error in ...]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 17:52:00 +0100 Von Bontee on Wikipedia error? http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57660 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57660 So, are you going to edit the Wikipedia article yourself?

]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:42:21 +0100 frylock on Wikipedia error? http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57654 Recording and musicology http://www.beatlesbible.com/forum/recording-and-musicology/wikipedia-error/#p57654 On the Dear Prudence article it says: "Lennon recorded additional layers to his vocals. Handclapping, tambourine and cowbell were then added by McCartney and Harrison." Seems to me, from what I just read in the Lewisohn book, Lennon only added double tracked vocals, while Paul and George added the additional vocals. Thought I'd post here first... Maybe there is another source, as http://www.pophistorydig.com/?.....nce-farrow has many sources listed. The latter about additional vocals could be fixed regardless I think. Thanks

]]> Tue, 11 Sep 2012 08:55:03 +0100