Talk:George Harrison/Archive 5

Continuing reference work
I think all ISBNs are good now, unless we need one for Rolling Stone (do we?). I've gone through and added refs where appropriate (mostly from Doggett, Leng, Tillery, and web sources) but there are still a few places that need attention in that area. I've tagged most of them, but if anyone sees something I've missed, I would appreciate it if you could either tag it or let me know here. I'll be going through tomorrow to ensure that all internet sources meet WP:RS, so if you have any concerns about that, best to speak now. Thanks, everyone! Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 07:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The "Guitars" section is sourced almost entirely to a Spanish-language site, for which I have no way of measuring WP:RS compliance. Would anyone object to this section being removed? Alternatively we could find better sources. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 09:20, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Would the The Guitar Collection: George Harrison iPad app or Andy Babiuk's Beatles Gear book be better sources? (Neither of which I own).  GoingBatty (talk) 16:14, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I own Babiuk's book and will go through it now and improve the sourcing in the "Guitars" section. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:59, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * "Guitars" looks good now! I have updated all Leng cites to the 2006 edition and updated page numbers accordingly (there was some info I needed to cite that wasn't in the '03 printing). Just a few more things to address and we'll be good to go, I think. Happy New Year, everybody! Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 02:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

This sentence:"The first film produced under the company was Time Bandits (1981), equipped with a soundtrack by Harrison, a solo project by Python Terry Gilliam for whom HandMade originally also was to finance The Adventures of Baron Munchausen before several funding parties including HandMade dropped out of the project."still needs a cite (probably two different ones). There may be some other sourcing issues, but if there are, I haven't seen them yet. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 05:21, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I removed the Munchausen bit as probable trivia. The Time Bandits thing may still need a source; I'm really not sure. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 11:47, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Sourcing improvement needed

 * Cite #4. - "George Harrison Irish Heritage". Beatles Ireland. Retrieved 25 November 2012. Does not appear to be a WP:RS. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:11, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Cite #60. - a b Self, Joseph C (1993). "The "My Sweet Lord"/"He's So Fine" Plagiarism Suit". The 910. Retrieved 13 December 2008. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  23:08, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Cite #103. - "Biography: Gary Wright". Absolute Radio. Retrieved 30 December 2008. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  02:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * All fixed. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 05:23, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I think all maintenance tags have been addressed and removed. I don't have a lot of time to do source checking at the moment, but if anyone sees any more unreliable sources, let me know and I'll do my best to find replacements. Thanks! Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 06:42, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I have concerns about the reliability of refs 148 (IMDb), 188 (Factmonster), 196 (International Vegetarian Union), 199 (Shawstar), 220 (Amazon), and 244 (British Mirror--not Daily--article embedded in a message board) . I can also convert the remaining Cite book templates to the Harv format if necessary (is that standard procedure for books with only one page cited?). Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 09:15, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice work! I never bother coverting books cited to only once or twice. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  11:37, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a relief! I've asked about the Mirror thing here, in case anyone is interested. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 11:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Just the Shawstar ref left to take a look at now. Once that is cleared up I think we'll be pretty much ready to nominate. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 13:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice work! I'll go through and see if we missed any. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  23:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Cite #200. - George Harrison & Hinduism – His Idea of God & Reincarnation". Hinduism.about.com. Retrieved 31 October 2008. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  23:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Cite #219. - "An autobiographical sketch by John Lennon, titled after one of his songs, The Ballad of John and Yoko, was posthumously published in 1986 as part of his collection Skywriting by Word of Mouth." Semms like a footnote not a citation.
 * Both Shawstar and the About.com piece have been replaced. The footnote regarding Lennon's book looks fine to me, as it doesn't seem necessary to cite a negative statement (i.e., that no other Beatle published an autobiography); the footnote itself could go, if you think it should. Anything else that stands out? Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 01:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * On second thought, Pete Best published an autobiography, and he's technically a Beatle. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 01:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Right! How about we open up a proper "Note" section for it and anything else that may be excess but interesting. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  02:51, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds good! I'll take care of it in a bit. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 03:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Now done. I was thinking of going ahead with the nomination today (3 January), if you think it's ready and no further issues crop up in the meantime. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 04:04, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks ready to me, though I am sure some issues will come up at FAC, as they always do. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  00:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Alright, great! I've started the review page here. Feel free to add something to my opening blurb if you think there's anything else that needs mentioning. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 00:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi guys, I think the article should include more information about the George Harrison, Pattie Boyd and Eric Clapton love triangle, no? This article has some information: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/books/27masl.html?_r=0 Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 11:18, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. Essentially, the article was deemed too long at the last FAC and was subsequently trimmed down to accomodate that concern. Excessive detail about this particular love triangle would be more appropriate at an article titled: Personal relationships of George Harrison. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:21, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Instruments played
George Harrison played a tamboura on Tommorow Never Knows, should I add that to his instruments section on his infobox? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhattarai7 (talk • contribs) 05:56, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * No. We've been over this thousands of times. Check the archives for the reason why. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 06:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Template:Infobox musical artist states: "General class(es) of instrument(s) played by the artist, e.g.  or  . Include ,  ,   and/or   if relevant."  Should this be updated to indicate that this should be notable instruments and not every instrument the musician ever played?  GoingBatty (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * GoingBatty, I would say yes. Way too much time is wasted on Wikipedia with these infobox discussions. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, let's discuss at Template talk:Infobox musical artist. Thanks!  GoingBatty (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 4 May 2013 to add article to Yogis category
Another user reverted edit attempts to add this article to the Yogis category and suggested to "get consensus first."

Request to add this article to Yogis category based on the existing article indicating that the subject was a devotee of yoga. Also, the following articles indicate that the subject is considered a yogi:

http://layogaonline.com/inspiration/artists-musicians/george-harrison-the-quiet-beatle-was-a-not-so-quiet-yogi/ http://www.yogajournal.com/wisdom/651 --Ewj001 (talk) 03:12, 4 May 2013 (UTC)


 * FWIW, according to merriam-webster a Yogi is: 1) a person who practices yoga 2) an adherent of Yoga philosophy 3) a markedly reflective or mystical person. Japa is indeed a form of Yoga, so it would seem that all three of these descriptions would apply to Harrison. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  21:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with it, and it sounds accurate, as Gabe pointed out. Since I'm the only one who came close to raising an objection, I've gone ahead and added it. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 00:13, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for considering this edit request and for building consensus on this. --Ewj001 (talk) 05:17, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Add Harrison contributions to Belinda Carlisle album "Runaway Horses"
I added the following in chronological order to Studio Collaborations: "On the 1989 Belinda Carlisle album Runaway Horses he played six string bass and twelve string guitars on "Deep Deep Ocean" and slide guitar solo on "Leave a Light On." " on 4 May 2013. It was deleted by someone named John who cannot possibly be a real human being, because I have looked at his Contributions page and he changes many things per minute. He said it was trivial. I added it back in on 3 June 2013 (the day I noticed it had been deleted) and almost immediately it was deleted again, saying it was trivia and saying to take it to talk.

Okay, here I am in talk.

The Studio Collaborations section includes many mentions of Harrison playing a track on a recording by another artist. "he recorded a guitar part for "Never Tell Your Mother She's Out of Tune"" "he played guitar on several songs during a recording session for Dylan's album New Morning"  " he played electric slide guitar on "How Do You Sleep?" and a dobro on "Crippled Inside", both from Lennon's Imagine album"  There are multiple other examples, where his sole contribution was to play guitar on one or more songs on someone else's album. How is a contribution to Carlisle's album any different??? Is this anti-Carlisle prejudice, is she not as prestigious, artistic or important as the other artists mentioned? Is the aim of an encyclopedia completeness of information, or censoring it to suit someone's preference for some people over others?

I am not a "pro" at Wikipedia editing, so I may be breaking all the rules of etiquette, but this annoys me. "Trivial" by whose definition? The information I contributed is exactly like much of the rest of the information in the section unless you set yourself up to say some recording artists are more significant than others. Why not let Harrison make that choice? If he worked with Carlisle -- if she was good enough for him -- she's good enough for this article. Gms3591 (talk) 09:38, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Seems like a reasonable addition to me. Any thoughts from others? -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 17:41, 3 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm with John, who is most certainly a "real" person, whatever that means. I say its trivial. The article is already overstuffed with "George played with X, then George played with Y". Maybe this "sleeper" account should write an article called Musical collaborations of George Harrison. Also, while Harrison might have thought Carlisle was important enough to work with in 1989, I would assert that her popularity and notability have since dropped significantly. There are several collaborations with much more notable and accomplished individuals then Carlisle that are not mentioned. See WP:COATRACK for good reasons to favour an overarching narrative and not bog an article down with excess trivial detail. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:00, 3 June 2013 (UTC)
 * How about adding an "Other appearances" section to George Harrison discography, similar to the one on Paul McCartney discography? GoingBatty (talk) 00:05, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a fine solution to me! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  00:14, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the main issue here is that it's not our job to ascribe importance to one thing or another; that's the work of reliable sources, and we reflect what they publish. Harrison's relationships with Dylan and Lennon are both the subject of far more sources, and covered in far greater detail, than his collaborations with Carlisle. While I don't object too strongly to the information being in the article, it's more of the general coatrack principle we should be trying to avoid. The proposal above for a new section at the Discography page seems like a reasonable one, and I'd be more than willing to help out there if needed. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 00:35, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I thank everyone for their opinions and contributions to this discussion. It seems that there is support for both sides; that is, no consensus. It seems that there is support for the idea that there should be an "important relationship with other artist" filter regarding which collaborations are mentioned (I find that criterion reasonable; the "is the other person still considered significant" criterion less so -- seems snobbish, to me). I don't have the technical ability to add a new article or section (I can barely add a sentence with a reference and get it right) so I can't follow through on those suggestions. So I guess I'll just give up on this idea, since John obviously has some way to automatically detect and delete any change to which he objects. Again, thanks for the input. Gms3591 (talk) 10:09, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * - My guess is that John's automatic detection tool is his watchlist, and he uses the "undo" link to delete.
 * I have started the George Harrison discography for you. If you want to add on to it or comment on Talk:George Harrison discography, we can all work together to improve this list.  Thanks!  GoingBatty (talk) 16:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you. It was very kind and generous of you to take the time and use your expertise to help me.  I appreciate it.  Ms. Carlisle looks lonely in the added chart.  Would it be appropriate for me to add the information from the rest of the Studio Collaborations section of this article to that chart?  Or should that be done by the people who contributed that information originally; would I be out of line to assume they wanted it both places? Gms3591 (talk) 07:23, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank YOU for posting your ideas and concerns here! Please go ahead and update the new discography section.  I believe everything that is in the George Harrison article belongs in the George Harrison discography article, but not the reverse.  Thanks!  GoingBatty (talk) 14:27, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you everyone for your comments and contributions to this civil discussion. In reading the thread above I would second User:Evanh2008's comment that: " it's not our job to ascribe importance to one thing or another; that's the work of reliable sources, and we reflect what they publish". That in my mind is the crucial factor as to whether the Carlisle bit should be included or not. My guess is that it hasn't had much coverage in comparison to other collaborations such as Dylan etc.. and should be left out but I am not fluent enough in the sources on this topic to take a strong position one way or the other. -- — Keithbob •  Talk  • 17:44, 7 June 2013 (UTC)


 * FWIW, Simon Leng called the collaboration with Carlisle: "[Harrison's] most unlikely guest appearence ever", which would seem to support my assertion that the sources find this particular pairing odd.(Leng, 2006, p.257) Also, Leng does not mention Harrison's bass or guitar playing on "Deep Deep Ocean", he only mentions the slide guitar solo on "Leave a Light On". Leng goes into far more detail about Harrison's work with Elton John's then wife, Renate, then he does Harrison's collaboration with Carlisle. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  21:27, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi all. I see this discussion is all done and dusted, which is good. Just dropped in to say that I've recently completed that list of other appearances in the GH discography – it's a long list. FWIW, I think Harrison's guest appearance with Cheech & Chong in 1973 was just as unlikely as his work with Carlisle (as Alan Clayson notes also). Her "Leave a Light On" was a top-ten hit internationally, so it's hardly a trivial guest appearance, I suggest – certainly more notable than, say, his playing on a Mick Fleetwood track in 1981. I'm not saying the Carlisle association necessarily needs mentioning in the article, but thought I'd mention it anyway after reading Gms3591's point. JG66 (talk) 07:14, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * FWIW, Harrison also sang on the Mick Fleetwood track. JG, it doesn't look like you added any references to the Other appearances section. That leaves a lot of work for others should anyone ever want to take the article to FAC. Also, it seems that you've included numerous tracks Harrison produced, but did not play or sing on, which I don't think is the purpose of Other appearances, which seems to imply that his musicianship is present in some way on the tracks, not that he helped produce the tracks, which would be more appropriate in a section titled Production work, or similar. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  21:05, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, "e-liminate the positives", why don't you! (as the song might've gone). Adding refs now. I've changed section heading to "Collaborations and other appearances", but perhaps someone else can come up with a more suitable choice of wording. My feeling is a separate "Production work" section should be avoided anyway. It would be unhelpful to readers, I'd think, to have Lomax's "How the Web Was Woven" single, say, in a separate list from the likes of Starr's "It Don't Come Easy" or Spector's "Try Some, Buy Some". And books such as Castleman & Podrazik's All Together Now and the Rolling Stone Press Harrison tribute make no distinction between the nature of Harrison's involvement on projects by other artists – whether as musician, singer or producer. As I say, if someone wants to fine-tune wording in the heading, that would be great. JG66 (talk) 05:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
 * FWIW, the Rolling Stone Press Harrison tribute section of which you speak is titled: "Other recordings: Side projects, guest appearances and production work". Nice job with the sourcing BTW! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  20:40, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Reverted with no explaination?
I had added a couple of sentences to the end of the Guitar Section and actually split out a "Other Instruments" section for the last two paragraphs.


 * Harrison was such a fan of the ukulele that normal after dinner routine at his house was to pass around ukuleles and play. The guests would be taught how to play and when they left at the end of the evening, they would be given an instrument from a stash he kept just for the purpose. George Harrison liked Jim Beloff's book The Ukulele: A History so much that he sent out copies to all his friends one Christmas.

So, considering the references I'm not sure it was removed without explanation.


 * It wasn't really removed without explanation so much as I asked you in the edit summary to follow WP:BRD. 1) I don't see any need to expand on Harrison's ukulele playing beyond what the overly long featured article already covers. 2) You want to break-off a "new" section of Other instruments, but a bass guitar and a ukulele are really just different versions of guitars. They aren't really different instruments except by name. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:42, 20 June 2013 (UTC)


 * There wasn't any explanation, just a cryptic WP:BRD in the note which means noth1ng to a noob. (I was Bold!  I added the edit.)  It helps if someone that has tens of thousands of edits here doesn't assume that everyone has a detailed knowledge of how everything works and what every little WP note is supposed to mean.  That's the attitude that drives new contributors away.  In this case a quick note to the person being reverted would have helped a great deal.  Or despite having zapped it, could have started the discussion instead of just deleting the entry.


 * 1) Harrison was a huge fan of the ukulele, to the point of being a fanatic about the instrument, which is not reflected in the article currently. He was known to walk into a store in Hawaii and buy every ukulele they had.  He kept dozens of extras to give away (And not the cheap ones, either!).  The Beatles were big fans of the instrument, having grown up with Formby and O'Shea.  Glossing over the importance of this instrument to George does not give one a complete picture of the musician.


 * 2) I'm not hung up on this one, but there are a lot of musicians that would be horrified at the idea that a guitar, a bass and an ukulele are really the same instrument, only different sizes.  The style of playing is different (as is the slide guitar) and the tuning is different, the ukulele using re-entrant tuning.  The number of strings is different and for years the Musicians' union wouldn't acknowledge that the ukulele was even an instrument for purposes of membership.  The Ukulele Guy - Aggie80 (talk) 11:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * 1) Aggie80, I looked at your contribs and noticed that you've been editing Wikipedia longer than I have, so I'm sorry that I assumed that you would know what WP:BRD means, as I don't see it as cryptic at all; its a basic principle on Wikipedia.


 * 2) FWIW, I am a musician of 25+ years (guitar, bass, drums, keys), and I see a ukulele as a little guitar with alternate tunings. A bass guitar is a large guitar with a lower tuned register, but the concept is the exact same. There are also baritone guitars that fall somewhere in between.


 * 3) Regardless of whether or not we agree that these instruments are in the same family, Harrison is not notable for playing bass guitar. The article mentions a few tracks that he played bass on, but in no way do I see need for a separate section from guitar work for his bass playing, since, again, a bass is a guitar even if a ukulele isn't IYO.


 * 4) As far as expanding the detail on Harrison's ukulele playing, I would say there is no need. During the article's recent FACs, several reviewers expressed concern about the article's length, and obviously expanding the material on his ukulele playing would only serve to exacerbate the "problem". The article currently mentions his deep interest in Formby and his participation in ukulele societies. I think he played one on maybe three recordings ever, so while his personal interest is perhaps notable, its relation to his musicianship is tenuous. Having said that, if you want to propose a bit more detail on his level of interest in the instrument I think that would be fine, but I don't see the need for a separate section, Other instruments. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  17:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)


 * While I actually registered many years ago, 99% of my contributions have been in the last three weeks. I'm putting together a blurb to be added in.  It's going to be hard to fit the man's passion for the instrument in a few sentences.  When recording Brainwashed George hated playing the bass, he loved the uke and it or a banjo uke are in every track. (I've got the ref's) He taught most of his friends, including Tom Petty how to play the uke.  He typically traveled with a pair of them so he could always play with a friend and constantly gave people he visited ukes.  Petty got 4 in one week.  12.162.224.26 (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe the blurb and some of those refs could be added to Brainwashed (album) if they're specific to the recording of that album? GoingBatty (talk) 03:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Vocals
We should have a section on Vocals under the Musicianship section. I'm no expert on vocal classification, but I'm sure some Beatles fan is. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 10:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

some new images
Hey, people. I imagine there'll be no objection to this, but thought I'd bring the idea here first. There are some new images on wikiCommons that would suit this article a treat – all Billboard ads from 1968–74, with the same rationale as for, say, the "Imagine" trade ad that appears in John Lennon and Imagine (song) FAs. I've been having fun adding them to Harrison song and album articles, but of course they belong here too.

Here are the candidates:


 * Apple's ad for the Wonderwall album, using Harrison's White Album portrait. Here's the image in Billboard – I've yet to upload this one, in fact. : File:Wonderwall by George Harrison.jpg. Could be useful for the article because currently there's no image of him at all from the years 1964 to 1974. (Well, up to 1987, if you take only the main body of the article.) If others agree it's needed here, perhaps someone could upload it to Commons? (I won't have time to do it for a while.)
 * "Bangla Desh" single – would get the impact of the Concert for Bangladesh across in pretty strong terms obviously; or there's ...
 * Concert for Bangladesh album – instantly recognisable to readers, of course
 * Living in the Material World album
 * Dark Horse Records
 * Dark Horse album

Hope this helps; happy to let others decide which ones work best. Any thoughts – Gabe? Evan?

Best, JG66 (talk) 02:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Hey, nice work JG66! I think most of them would improve the article, but I would cast my votes for File:Wonderwall by George Harrison.jpg, Concert for Bangladesh album and Dark Horse Records. Cheers! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  18:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, it's an absolute pleasure! And in fact it's viniciusmc who deserves the credit – for giving me the idea, and then being kind enough to upload images I'd found in Bruce Spizer's book on Apple Records. The rationale allows for ads up to the end of 1977, I believe, so I'll be uploading similar images through to Harrison's Thirty Three & 1/3 album. (That cover contains another pic of the artist of course.) I imagine there'll also be ads for All Things and "My Sweet Lord" – again, one of them might appeal for this article.
 * I suggest you experiment away, Gabe; it's nice to actually be spoilt for choice ... Best, JG66 (talk) 03:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

changes to the discography
Hey people. I think it's a sensible thing that those recent changes to the discography section have been undone, even aside from the WP Musicians guidelines that GB cited with the revert. Thing is, the changes that Wookie had made there re Wonderwall Music and Electronic Sound have been implemented at George Harrison discography and Template:George Harrison – in that, Electronic Sound is no longer classified as a Harrison studio album. Not only that, but the ordinals in all the subsequent Harrison studio albums have changed; i.e., Living in the Material World is now George's "second studio album", Dark Horse his third, and so on. What's also noticeable in the GH discography article/list is that the artist discog infobox (top right) and the lead both give a total of 11 studio albums, yet only 10 appear in the list under the heading "Studio albums" (with Elec Sound having been moved to sit with Wonderwall under the reworded heading "Other albums").

So, just to check, we are classifying Elec Sound as a studio album? Template:John Lennon groups Two Virgins, Life with the Lions etc under "Experimental albums", and that's an approach I suggested to Wookie a day or two back, simply as an alternative to seeing Wonderwall and ES buried away under "Related articles > Albums" on the temp. I must admit I've always been in favour of that "Experimental albums" treatment for J&Y's works and for Electronic Sound. Anyway, I'm raising it here: what do we think – follow the approach on Temp:JL or reinstate Electronic Sound as Harrison's debut solo album in all the affected articles? JG66 (talk) 20:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I made those changes for two reasons:
 * 1. Because of what critics, fans and Harrison himself have said/felt about ATMP.
 * 2. To, as you said, try to align the four Beatles under a singular format
 * The Wookieepedian (talk)


 * IMO, ES is Harrison's second solo studio album; Wonderwall is his first. I think I made that point a year or so ago when this was being discussed at the Beatles Project page. Why would we list them any other way? Imagine if Harrison had done four or five similar albums before ATMP. Would we still consider ATMP his first because the format is more familiar to fans of his Beatles music? Lets be careful to not reconstruct things to our liking. ATMP was the third Harrison solo album, regardless of how people feel about the work. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  20:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you're coming from the point of view of how the albums appear at the end of this article, Gabe? And I agree with the list as you have it here; as you say, why list them any other way. (Mind you, I've just noticed that Lennon's experimental albums don't appear at the end of his bio article ...)
 * Things get complicated, though, when it comes to a dedicated discography and the template. There, Wonderwall becomes a "soundtrack album", pulling it out of the list of "solo studio albums", and Electronic Sound becomes his debut studio album. I guess that's why I've always been pro the idea of ES receiving "experimental album" treatment – ATMP is most definitely Harrison's third solo album, but my thinking is, if Wonderwall gets pulled out of the category, then so should ES. That is, if "experimental album" is a bonafide category – and again, I'm looking at Temp:JL and thinking that seems to be the case.
 * As a caveat to the above, I should say that it's all dependent on whether individual album articles need to follow the "soundtrack"/"experimental" [if applicable]/"studio" delineation from the discography and template. Because, it's those ordinals appearing at the start of album articles that I think is really confusing to readers. If we could call ES Harrison's "second solo album", Material World his fourth etc, that would be logical.
 * Just thought I'd raise the issue here because of the recent revert, but maybe it's a discussion better suited to the project page. JG66 (talk) 22:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The fact that Lennon's experimental albums aren't listed at the end of his article is absolutely irrelevant here, but IMO their omission is a mistake. I would suggest that comparisons to the other Beatle bios are rarely, if ever, helpful. They are four individuals with four unique articles. I tend to agree with your last point; this seems like a discussion for the disco page, as the listing of Harrison's albums here is not, to my knowledge, in contention. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  22:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Hari's quote about Lennon
In the section "Relationships with the other Beatles", I've always been a bit concerned that Harrison's quote about Lennon being "both a saint and a bastard" comes across as unnecessarily harsh, since it's taken completely out of context (by Badman). In the actual interview, with old friend Alan Freeman in 1974, Harrison's clearly talking with great affection, and he and Freeman immediately share a laugh about it. But aside from the coldness that the words carry in isolation, in fact Harrison never actually says that Lennon "was both a saint and a bastard" as Badman states and as currently quoted in the article.

I've just listened to the interview, and here's my transcription (obviously all punctuation and italicisation is how I've interpreted the dialogue):


 * "John Lennon's an amazing person because he is brilliant, he is brilliant, he's – no question about it – John Lennon is a saint and he's heavy-duty and he's great and I love him. But at the same time, he's such a bastard –"


 * [Laughs; Freeman laughs in the background and says: "Yeah, sure, sure."]


 * "– But that's the great thing about him, you see?"

(Btw, audio for most of the interview can be found here: scroll down to the para beginning "George was running himself and his throat ragged ..." (That is, you download the mp3. I've never had any problems on my Mac.) The relevant section of the interview can be found between 29:55 and 30:15.)

Originally, I'd thought that to attribute the phrase "he was both a saint and a bastard" (in isolation) to Harrison might have been slightly irresponsible – in that it wasn't a fair representation. To me (before re-listening to the tape), a fair and accurate way to convey the tone of his comments was: "Harrison once joked that Lennon 'was both a saint and a bastard'." But now there's a greater issue – because Badman's misquoted him. To connect the words "saint" and "bastard" in that dialogue from the interview, while ensuring that the positive context is clear, a quote should really read: "John Lennon is a saint and he's heavy-duty and he's great and I love him. But at the same time, he's such a bastard – but that's the great thing about him, you see?"

Problem is, Badman doesn't reproduce that dialogue, of course. But is it possible to use details of the original radio broadcast as a source? JG66 (talk) 06:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd say you are correct that the small excerpt we included is not accurate to the original context. On the other hand, I always assumed that George meant it in the way you present here, as half-joking and not as a biting insult. Yes, you can use the details of an original radio broadcast to source a more accurate version of the quote, but be sure to include the location in the tape, as in event occurs at 5 minutes and 46 seconds, or similar. We can enter the details of the source into a harvnb template, and then cite to it as we would a book, except that we include location versus pages. Cheers! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  16:11, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gabe, that's great. I might give you a call when it comes to wording the citation, i.e. how broadcast details fit into the cite "fields". I'm interested to hear you always took the phrase to be a joke of sorts – maybe I'm just being too literal for once! Cheers, JG66 (talk) 22:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've just added the relevant text and citation. I'm absolutely nowhere on this method of citation, so apologies that the reference requires a bit of polish. (It'll be an education for me to see how to go about it correctly, in fact …) I've gone for the 1975 US broadcast, btw, even though the Rockspeak/UK broadcast occurred first, on 6 December 1974; this is because the recording I've got is clearly from Rock Around the World. Hope that's all the details you need? Cheers, JG66 (talk) 04:19, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I ended up using this template:, which I think is the right one.  GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  20:15, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Aha – "cite interview" sounds about right. Doesn't seem to be a field for "program 61" (or whatever that detail was) but I guess that's not too major. Thanks! JG66 (talk) 02:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Good point. How's this? GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  18:57, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Fabulous. I don't know if "program" or something else is needed to clarify "61"? – but hey, it all looks good. I'm just pleased to learn that one can cite from an interview in this way. JG66 (talk) 22:44, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * - Since the template uses date, isn't year redundant? GoingBatty (talk) 00:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Nice catch. My bad. GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  01:01, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've removed year, and think accessdate should also be removed since there's no URL in the citation (per Template:Cite interview). GoingBatty (talk) 05:56, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks once again GB! You are truly the most helpful editor I've ever seen at the Beatles project! GabeMc  (talk&#124;contribs)  17:00, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm just a little wikignome - those of you who are actually creating the content and finding the proper references are much more helpful! GoingBatty (talk) 17:46, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Untitled
Sorry if I disturb something here. But why is Made In Japan not listed in the discography? 83.93.51.178 (talk) 14:07, 11 January 2014 (UTC) kentfabrin@gmail.com
 * Per WikiProject_Musicians/Article_guidelines, only studio albums are listed in the musician's article when the full discography has its own article. You'll find Made in Japan and his compilation albums on George Harrison discography.  GoingBatty (talk) 16:14, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Was the cancer a result of the attack? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.218.236.115 (talk) 17:44, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * His cancer had been in remission. The Scorsese documentary speculates that the knife attack probably brought it back. The Wookieepedian (talk) 05:51, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Genre
The current genres are "Rock, pop, world, experimental". When did George make an "experimental music" or a "world music" album? I believe "gospel" and "folk rock" should be included there instead, since a great deal of his solo work fitted into one of these genres, if not both. Beatlemanioose (talk) 13:16, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * How about Electronic Sound and all the Indian-inspired stuff?  R ad io pa th y  •talk•  16:15, 16 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Electronic Sound was one album in a huge career, and many would say it's more Electronic music than experimental. And in regards to the Indian music, why not list "Indian music" instead of World? Harrison has consistently played folk rock, gospel, and Indian music throughout his career, therefore they should be displayed instead of a genre he has made an album similar to. Beatlemanioose (talk) 17:27, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

DEATH SECTION
It is easily verifiable (and suspiciously missing from this WIKIPEDIA version) that a Jewish doctor impressed upon Mr. Harrison to sign a guitar in his own hospital bed, while he was ill and in pain. Even the exact quotations of spoken dialog are in the historical record now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starhistory22 (talk • contribs) 01:55, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

Date of Birth
Listening to the Sirius XM radio station "Sixties on Six" today, Tuesday 24th February 2015, the American DJ spoke of an interview he had with George Harrison some 2 years before he died.

In that interview, they discussed the apparent uncertainties related to George's precise date of birth!

George revealed that he had in fact discussed the matter with a spiritualist or guru in India who had determined that he was actually born at 10:40pm on 24th February 1943, not as previously thought, shortly after midnight on 25th February.

Whilst this may not be particularly significant, I thought it worth mentioning.

Sincerely, and with all due respect to the memory of a truly great musician, may he rest in peace, and with respect also to all his family. 71.3.135.26 (talk) 23:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC) Mike Kerr - Chipperfield Herts UK and Naples Florida USA 71.3.135.26 (talk) 23:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Mike. This has been discussed here before, and is a contentious edit often made to this featured article. Type "birth" into the archive search box above to see the various discussions. The way the article currently is now is the way consensus and reliable sources have decided. Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 00:04, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Accuracy of source?
(NB: this is my first time using "Talk" feature, but not sure where else to say it, so forgive me if I don't do it right or if this isn't a Talk-page kind of query.)

My question is: If the sourced reference #174 for an alleged final lunch in New York with Paul and Ringo days before he died is true, then why does Ringo say to Scorsese for the 2011 film that the also-quoted line ""Do you want me to come with you?" which George asked him in Switzerland months earlier was "the last thing he ever heard George say" (which Ringo recalls tearfully) ?  It makes me question this alleged uncovered secret NY reunion ...  Just saw the Scorsese film last night and this seems at odds with it.

cetaylor 15:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)CarolynETaylor 6/12/15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarolynETaylor (talk • contribs)

Living Former Beatles
Excised from the George Harrison entry: "On 12 November, the three living former Beatles met for the last time at Harrison's hotel in New York for lunch."

I would suggest following this line with, in parenthesis, (Excluding Pete Best, of course.) since, technically, Pete Best is a "living former Beatle". 17:26, 29 June 2014‎ 75.82.4.247