Which Beatle Hasn’t Got A Star On The Hollywood Walk of Fame?
The Olde Disc Jockey's Almanac: December 30, 2011
oldediscjockeysalmanac.blogspot.com12/30/11
The Beach Boys received a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. December 30, 1981… … Michael Abram, a disturbed 33-year-old Liverpudlian who believed he was on a "mission from God," broke into the house and stabbed the former Beatle in the chest several times with a six-inch knife. Harrison's wife Olivia attacked Abram … Ross failed all sobriety tests at the scene and reportedly fell over when she was asked to walk a straight line. She was charged with three …
Ringo Starr Finally Gets His Star on Hollywood Walk of Fame …
www.losanjealous.com2/9/10
PREVIOUS BEATLE/HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME STAR-RELATED COVERAGE. George Harrison's Walk of Fame Star Ceremony, Capitol Records, April 14, 2009: Exclusive Photos · Capitol Records, 14 April 2009: George …
A friend of mine just told me that the only Beatle not to have a personal star on the Hollywood Walk Of Fame is Paul McCartney.
That would make no sense to me as Paul and John were the group’s biggest talents.
Is it true?
Related posts:

Well your friend is right.
John Lennon and George Harrison were both awarded their stars posthumously, and The Beatles received the honor collectively as a band in 1988.
Ringo Starr received the 2,401 star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame just last February, and Macca, 67, is now the only Beatle not to have his own star and I can’t for the life of me imagine why.
Are there some politics at play here?
I don’t know but he should certainly have got his star before Ringo got his.
McCartney has already been listed in the Guinness World Records as the most successful musician and composer of popular music, with sixty gold discs and sales of more than 100 million singles.
A spokesperson for the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce, which is the organization that awards the stars, said at Ringo’s recent event, “Paul McCartney has long been approved for one of his own, so a date for his ceremony should be forthcoming”.
“Should be forthcoming” ?
Weird stuff !!