Talk:George Harrison/GA2

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA and have listed the following comments as suggestions for improvement. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 21:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * The musical apprenticeship that Harrison received playing at the Kaiserkeller, including guitar lessons from Tony Sheridan, laid the foundations of The Beatles' sound, and of Harrison's quiet, professional role within the group; a role that would contribute to his reputation as "the quiet Beatle". - this sentence seems clumsy to me. Aosl it doesn't explain where the Kaiserkeller comes in. Alfter the semicolon, it should theoretically be a complete sentence.


 * Brian Epstein: "he changed their image" - should you say from what image to what? Or does everyone automatically know?


 * and his involvement in Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band mainly consists of his one song, Within You Without You, on which no other Beatle plays,[41] and which stands out as not in keeping with the rest of the album. - can you phrase this as a positive rather than "as not in keeping with the rest of the album"?


 * Harrison's guitar work with The Beatles was varied, flexible and occasionally innovative - this is rather bland but maybe that is the reality.


 * 60s - usually the full year is required, e.g. 1870s - I don't know if the 60s are so  iconic that they can stand alone. But you have to be consistent. Probably better to use 1960s as you use 1965.


 * "Guitar work" - much of this section is somewhat dense, with listings of guitars and a lot of us of the word "first" toward the beginning.


 * Perhaps his greatest contribution to the guitar - I know people use "perhaps" but it is rather weak


 * Harrison used the slide not in a purely Blues context - not only in a purely blues context? or something


 * each from the bottom to the top of the neck and incorporate as many as four separate parts - parts as in harmonies or "voices"?


 * why do you switch from Harrison to "George's"?


 * I don't understand the time sequence. You have "Later life: 1990-2001" but "Handmade Films" was formed in 1979. Also the interest in Indian music started in 1965.


 * These any anything else I add are nit picks, as everything is in order and it looks like it will pass as a good article. The pictures, references appear in order.


 * I just need a little more time to read through it. And I wish the TOC were clearer, although maybe it is to Harrison fans.

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 21:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, having read the Another GA non-review above, I agree what that reviewer says. If you implemented his suggestions, it would help to clarify the article.
 * Thanks for the suggestions - I'll start work on them now. Den dodge  Talk Contribs 10:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 1: ✅, is it satisfactory now?
 * 2: ✅ - I explained the change in image
 * 3: ✅ - I made it a bit more positive (the song would have been more at home on Revolver - should we mention that?)
 * 4: ❌ - it's the best way I can think of to word it, but I'm not declining that it be altered, and is good enough to pass GA
 * 5: ✅ - there's a number of these, it may take a while
 * 6: ✔️ - it's as good as it's going to get
 * 7: ✔️ - it's not in there any more
 * 8: ✔️ - I can't find it in there
 * 9: ✔️ - the paragraph has been removed
 * 10: ✔️ - they're all within quotes
 * 11: ✅ - it's normally easier to remove the years (we did at The Beatles), so that's what I'll do here
 * I'll now start work on the non-GA review, as you suggested. I would appreciate it if somebody were to work on the things I have marked as "not done", especially #6. Den dodge  Talk Contribs 11:20, 7 February 2009 (UTC), updated following below comments at 19:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * hoping i'm following that list right, and hoping this will make it easier for other editors to follow: the "not done" points that Dendodge is referring to are:
 * 4 Mattisse said: "Harrison's guitar work with The Beatles was varied, flexible and occasionally innovative - this is rather bland but maybe that is the reality." Dendodge said: "it's the best way I can think of to word it, but I'm not declining that it be altered"

✅ I'm OK with that wording. It may be an issue for the "brilliant prose" of FA, but I think it's generally "clear" enough for GA. Somebody may want to alter it later when looking at FA.  SilkTork  *YES! 17:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 6 Mattisse said: "Guitar work - much of this section is somewhat dense, with listings of guitars and a lot of us of the word 'first' toward the beginning." Dendodge said: "it's beyond me to reword all that, but it does need to be done."

Agree. I'll look into rewording.  SilkTork  *YES! 17:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅? I've extended the opening paragraph to give a clearer overview of Harrison's guitar style before the section goes into the guitars that Harrison used. It may be that the paragraphs on the guitars should be a sub-section of guitar work to make it clearer, though I'm hesitant about creating another section. I agree with the over-use of the word "first", and I had a go at reducing it, though there are few suitable alternatives, and in most cases it would be a case of reducing information to remove the word.  SilkTork  *YES! 18:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 9 Mattisse said: "each from the bottom to the top of the neck and incorporate as many as four separate parts - parts as in harmonies or 'voices'?" Dendodge said: "that part confuses me too, so I'm not the person to fix it."

✅ That troublesome paragraph has been removed.  SilkTork  *YES! 17:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * 10 Mattisse said: "why do you switch from Harrison to 'George'?" Dendodge pointed out: "they're all within quotes". in that case we can mark this point "resolved", no?

✅ That troublesome paragraph has been removed.  SilkTork  *YES! 17:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * hope that's all correct and clear. Sssoul (talk) 12:40, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems like the logic of the order crumbles somewhat toward the end. For example, "Handmade Films" - why is it where it is? I have been looking at the other Beatles Paul McCartney (a former FA ), George Harrison. I know that each was very individual so the treatment in an article will differ. But why does "Handmade Films" deserve a whole big heading to itself? What were the really important issues/sections in his life? (If "Handmade Films" is one of them, then why?) I wish I could find a good model to give ideas. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * I am still confused some by the TOC. Main headings:
 * Early years
 * The Beatles
 * Solo recordings
 * The Traveling Wilburys
 * Live performances
 * The Beatles Anthology
 * Later life
 * Handmade Films
 * Interest in Indian culture
 * Friendship with Eric Clapton
 * Personal life
 * - most of them can, and should, be made into level 3 headings below the relevant subsections; I'll do that now. Den dodge  Talk Contribs 20:12, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry - I completely forgot that I'd promised to do that. I'll do it now. Den dodge  Talk Contribs 12:44, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Is this better?


 * Early years
 * The Beatles
 * Guitar work
 * Song writing and singing
 * Solo recordings
 * All Things Must Pass
 * After All Things Must Pass
 * After the death of John Lennon
 * The Traveling Wilburys
 * Live performances
 * The Concert for Bangladesh
 * The Beatles Anthology
 * Later life
 * HandMade Films
 * Interest in Indian culture
 * Sitar and Indian music
 * Hinduism
 * Personal life
 * Friendship with Eric Clapton
 * Solo discography
 * Albums
 * Honours
 * Notes
 * References
 * External links
 * Den dodge  Talk Contribs 13:17, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I think you need to take your time with this article and get it right. Handmade Films, according to the info in the article before started in 1976. Also, it is preferable if all the headings at the same level, e.g. under "Solo recordings" all refer to the same thing e.g. album names or whatever, just so the unfamiliar general reader doesn't have to guess what is going on, what is meant. You have to remember that someone may be encountering all these specific references to George Harrison's life for the first time, even if they are somewhat familiar with him. Give the reader some guidance.  &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 04:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * i too find these sections and their ordering confusing. it seems like the original idea was probably to have a chronological "music career" section (with subsections like "The Beatles", "Solo activities", "Later career") followed by some not-necessarily-chronological sections about his non-musical activities (HandMade Films, personal life, interest in Indian culture, etc).  but the article's "overgrown" that framework in the meantime, and now seems garbled.  maybe that sort of framework is still potentially useful, but it would need to be made more visible as a framework, with more communicative sections/subsections.  Sssoul (talk) 08:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Final GA review (see here for criteria)
 * This article is much improved in organization. There is one tag in the article. &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 20:23, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I altered the punctuation and removed the tag - I don't see what's unclear about it. {The sentence was "Harrison developed throat cancer which was discovered in 1997 after a lump on his neck was analysed;[145] he attributed it to his smoking in the 1960s.", and I canged the semicolon to a full stop.) Den dodge  Talk Contribs 20:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * ok, a small enough issue, &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations!
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Sets the context b (focused): Remains focused on subject
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 20:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)