Talk:I've Just Seen a Face/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about I've Just Seen a Face. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Background vocals
who is singing the background vocals on this recording? Did Paul overdub his own background? It doesn't sound like John. Capmango (talk) 16:05, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've always thought this was all McCartney except for Ringo and maybe the others on percussion. Background vocals sure sound like Paul too. Just my opinion, and nothing to cite as fact. Airproofing (talk) 22:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Simon & Garfunkel
I just listened to this song and wow...it really sounds like Simon & Garfunkel. Did S&G ever cover this track? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwanderson (talk • contribs) 18:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Michael Nesmith
I could have sworn I heard a version of this covered by Mike Nesmith, either solo or with the Monkees. Minaker (talk) 10:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
"Pleasant Valley Sunday" seems sounds similar, same energy, same na-na-nas. Just saying.
False Start on U.S. Rubber Soul
Unless my memory is totally shot, I recall "I've Just Seen A Face" on the U.S. Rubber Soul LP included a false start, which was not included on the U.K. Help! LP. Anyone else recall this? ZincOrbie (talk) 02:13, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- You're thinking of "I'm Looking Through You", which in fact has two false starts before the proper intro. Radiopathy •talk• 02:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, that's it! Thanks. ZincOrbie (talk) 19:06, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
"I'm Looking Through You" is on Rubber Soul BOTH in the U.K. and in the U.S. However, "I've Just Seen a Face" was on the British "Help!" album (among the songs not in the Help! movie). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 20:44, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
where the Beatles were heading musically
This is the first song encountered if playing the U.S. Rubber Soul album in order. Prior to that record coming out, there had been Beatles VI album, and then the Help! soundtrack album (the latter containing only 7 songs by the Beatles), along with Help! and Yesterday as singles (backed respectively by I'm Down and Act Naturally). This song ("I've Just Seen a Face") had been on the British "Help!" album, but until the U.S. Rubber Soul album came out, the only way to get that song and "It's Only Love" (leading off side 2 of U.S. Rubber Soul album) was to play an album that was brought over from England.
So we had an altered understanding of where the Beatles were heading musically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.20 (talk) 20:42, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Covers
this seems excessive. perhaps just notable covers, of which there may be none.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Skiffle & Lonnie Donegan
The article makes no mention of the song's connection to Skiffle, i.e. what Americans typically call Rockabilly music which gets much of it's influence from American Bluegrass. While the Wikipedia article on Skiffle makes no mention of Bluegrass and focuses on the origin and use of the term in African American blues, the British appeared to have latched onto to the word without making the musical distinction between bluegrass and blues simply because both black and white musicians played a common set of instruments, e.g. washboards, jugs, bucket bass, etc.
The quote from McCartney relating it to country music is from a questionable source and rather banal. The key feature of the song is it's tempo which is a hallmark of Bluegrass and it's offshoot, Rockabilly, made popular by Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly, Eddie Cochran, etc. However, the signature style of British skiffle is derived from the legendary, Lonnie Donegan, who's "Rock Island Line" is the true inspiration for this song (it should be noted that John Lennon's first band, the Quarrymen, was a skiffle band). Pvsalsedo (talk) 08:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- Do you have specific suggested changes and, more importantly, reliable sources to support those changes? Sundayclose (talk) 13:59, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
- These are specific suggested changes since there are no specific references to Skiffle or Lonnie Donegan in the article which seems odd since the author's source, Beatlesbooks.com, also states in live performances with Wings that Paul introduced the piece as a skiffle song. However, the claim made there that it was "revamped" by Wings is false both in the strict sense of the word or that it was changed into a Skiffle tune. Furthermore, Beatlesbooks.com is a website owned by a fan named Dave Rybaczewski who is the author of the source for the McCartney quote and who provides no professional credentials either as a music critic/historian or a musician. The web-site promotes his self published E-book on the Beatles and provides no reference for his quoting McCartney which is subsequently used in this Wikipedia article. As for my providing reliable sources, I'd rather first give the author the opportunity to do the research and actually provide "reliable" sources of his own since this article is not consistent with that standard and because I'm not the one writing the article. However, if the author wishes to make the claim that no such reliable sources exist to connect this song or any of the Beatles work to Skiffle or Donegan, then reliable sources that actually meet Wikipedia's standard can be provided. Pvsalsedo (talk) 21:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.242.179.31 (talk) 21:07, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Pvsalsedo: No single person wrote the article. Wikipedia is a collaborative project. The article is the result of the editing of many people. If you're waiting for "the author" to do the research, provide reliable sources, or make a claim, you may be waiting a long time (on the other hand, someone may read your comments and try to make changes). And remember, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so there's nothing stopping you from making changes. If you do edit the article, please carefully read WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:RS, and always fully explain the changes in edit summaries or on this talk page. Sundayclose (talk) 23:21, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- It's not my responsibility to edit someone else's material or to impose on it no matter how justified the action may be, and, as I have clearly proven (and, which has not been rebutted with any proof, to the contrary), the article containing the quote from McCartney about country music is from a source that does not meet Wikipedia standards. If the author(s) don't want the editing responsibility or fail to uphold the standards, then they shouldn't be authoring anything, at all. Furthermore, I will not add anything that comes from a dubious source - as the author(s) do - even if that source upholds my own claims. Now, it's not a question of how long I want to wait but how long the author(s) wish to wait before they (or someone in a higher authority) decides to uphold Wikipedia standards and remove the quote and the source. Furthermore, while I have given proof to support my claim about the dubious source, Beatlesbooks.com, there's nothing in Wikipedia's standards that requires that any talk page suggestions must have proof to support their claims (as this talk page clearly demonstrates in the other sections) unless the standard only applies in this particular instance, which only further demonstrates my claim of inconsistency with respect to upholding Wikipedia standards. As for any other suggestions, take them or leave them. I'm not holding my breath.Pvsalsedo (talk) 22:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- OK, you're right that you have no responsibility to edit. Most of us edit because we want to improve Wikipedia, but that's entirely up to you. Thanks for your suggestions. Sundayclose (talk) 01:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- And what about those who don't want to improve Wikipedia by using dubious sources that don't meet the standards? If you agree that it's not my responsibility, then who's responsible? No one? In which case, improvement is futile and this article proves the point. Thanks for nothing.Pvsalsedo (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Pvsalsedo: Please try to understand this. No one has any "responsibility" to make a change to Wikipedia. Everyone is an unpaid volunteer. So please don't ask who is responsible if you don't want to fix something you see as a problem. Who do you suggest fix the problem? No one at Wikipedia can force someone to change an edit they made, but anyone is free to make the change, and that includes you. "Thanks for nothing"? Are you suggesting that I have some responsibility to fix a problem that you have identified, or that I have an obligation to find the person "responsible" and coerce them into making a change? It seems to me that you're only here to pick a fight. If that's the case, I'm not taking the bait. I suggest that you move on. I'm not responding to your comments here any more. Sundayclose (talk) 18:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- And what about those who don't want to improve Wikipedia by using dubious sources that don't meet the standards? If you agree that it's not my responsibility, then who's responsible? No one? In which case, improvement is futile and this article proves the point. Thanks for nothing.Pvsalsedo (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
- OK, you're right that you have no responsibility to edit. Most of us edit because we want to improve Wikipedia, but that's entirely up to you. Thanks for your suggestions. Sundayclose (talk) 01:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
- It's not my responsibility to edit someone else's material or to impose on it no matter how justified the action may be, and, as I have clearly proven (and, which has not been rebutted with any proof, to the contrary), the article containing the quote from McCartney about country music is from a source that does not meet Wikipedia standards. If the author(s) don't want the editing responsibility or fail to uphold the standards, then they shouldn't be authoring anything, at all. Furthermore, I will not add anything that comes from a dubious source - as the author(s) do - even if that source upholds my own claims. Now, it's not a question of how long I want to wait but how long the author(s) wish to wait before they (or someone in a higher authority) decides to uphold Wikipedia standards and remove the quote and the source. Furthermore, while I have given proof to support my claim about the dubious source, Beatlesbooks.com, there's nothing in Wikipedia's standards that requires that any talk page suggestions must have proof to support their claims (as this talk page clearly demonstrates in the other sections) unless the standard only applies in this particular instance, which only further demonstrates my claim of inconsistency with respect to upholding Wikipedia standards. As for any other suggestions, take them or leave them. I'm not holding my breath.Pvsalsedo (talk) 22:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Pvsalsedo: No single person wrote the article. Wikipedia is a collaborative project. The article is the result of the editing of many people. If you're waiting for "the author" to do the research, provide reliable sources, or make a claim, you may be waiting a long time (on the other hand, someone may read your comments and try to make changes). And remember, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so there's nothing stopping you from making changes. If you do edit the article, please carefully read WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:RS, and always fully explain the changes in edit summaries or on this talk page. Sundayclose (talk) 23:21, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- These are specific suggested changes since there are no specific references to Skiffle or Lonnie Donegan in the article which seems odd since the author's source, Beatlesbooks.com, also states in live performances with Wings that Paul introduced the piece as a skiffle song. However, the claim made there that it was "revamped" by Wings is false both in the strict sense of the word or that it was changed into a Skiffle tune. Furthermore, Beatlesbooks.com is a website owned by a fan named Dave Rybaczewski who is the author of the source for the McCartney quote and who provides no professional credentials either as a music critic/historian or a musician. The web-site promotes his self published E-book on the Beatles and provides no reference for his quoting McCartney which is subsequently used in this Wikipedia article. As for my providing reliable sources, I'd rather first give the author the opportunity to do the research and actually provide "reliable" sources of his own since this article is not consistent with that standard and because I'm not the one writing the article. However, if the author wishes to make the claim that no such reliable sources exist to connect this song or any of the Beatles work to Skiffle or Donegan, then reliable sources that actually meet Wikipedia's standard can be provided. Pvsalsedo (talk) 21:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.242.179.31 (talk) 21:07, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- FWIW I had heard many years ago that this song was considered to be an example of skiffle. However I see no sources. --evrik (talk) 16:43, 31 August 2019 (UTC)