Talk:His Band and the Street Choir

Album article class reviews
Individuals who contribute substantially to this article should not assess it themselves for the Wikiproject album, but may as appropriate request reassessment at WikiProject Albums/Assessment. This is important to ensure that fresh, uninvolved eyes have an opportunity to point out issues that contributors may have missed. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 23:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

August 27 reassessment notes
Sourcing is much improved, although I have added another "fact" tag. Who says that Morrison was a consistent hit-maker? A statement of this sort needs attribution and citation. At this point, the lead section needs revision. A lead section is meant to summarize the contents of the article. It should be a concise snapshot of the contents that will follow. Most of the material currently in the lead could probably be dispersed into the article body. For example, "Morrison's then wife, Janet (Planet) Rigsbee, sang on the album." should be stated perhaps in the "recording" section. Its significance might also be expanded. So did Ellen Schroer. Why is it important enough that Janet Planet sang on the album to deserve separate mention? Is it the fact that Morrison was then married to her that makes her worthy of singling out, or is there something more? The text should make that clear since readers unfamiliar with Morrison (like this one) might not see why this signifies. If it is very significant, then it may be bear specific mention in the summary, but as it is it feels like "trivia", and it may represent undue weight on this one fact. (It may not; context would make that clear.)

Similarly, there is a quote from the Rolling Stone reviewer in the lead. Lacking context, this also could represent "undue" weight. More appropriate might be a "Critical response" section that summarizes a larger representative sample of locatable reviews.

There are additional opportunities for expansion and clarity within the text. For instance, the article says, "In America the album was initially as well received as Moondance". Then what? That "initially" hints at more to the story, which the article does not provide.

I've watchlisted the article for now in case contributors to this would like clarification on these points and suggestions. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:43, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * You guys are doing nice work here. :) As somebody who works on less common album articles (mostly old jazz stuff), I might suggest you take a look at google books to find more reference material. It can be very useful. If you aren't familiar with it, just head over to this link and look for the ones that boast a "limited preview." For instance, there's a little bit about the album in this book. To get citation information, you click on "more about this book", and it gives you all you need to fill in the citation template. I could use that one, for example, to talk more about Janet Planet and her importance here. I might say "Music journalist M. Mark suggested in Stranded that Morrison's marriage to Janet Planet played a major influence on this album and its follow-up, Tupelo Honey, noting that they are "his rendition of Dylan's family-man music." (Source: ) (Note that this is by way of illustration only. I'm not suggesting as am article reviewer that this is an essential fact for the article or anything.)


 * Anyway, you may already be well familiar with google books and how to mine it for Wikipedia articles, but I know I was delighted when I stumbled upon it, so I won't presume. Forgive me if I'm pointing out the obvious. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:29, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Moonriddengirl. I'm not familiar with google books, I don't know about Agadant though. I'm sure the info you've given us will be very helpful. Thanks again. Kitchen roll (talk) 11:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ha, I can't read any of it at the moment - I've lost my glasses! Kitchen roll (talk) 11:58, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Punctuation, etc.
I spent hours working on this article today; it may not be perfect but I hope someone will discuss changes to what I've revised today, before changing it. I applied the American and British English differences. Perhaps more clear is the statement in this article: Michael Quinton writes on International English from a British viewpoint.

"Moreover, formal British English practice requires a closing full stop to be put inside the quotation marks if the quoted item is a complete sentence that ends where the main sentence ends:


 * She had told me, "I still love you."
 * The sign said, "Keep off the grass.""

This method of quotation also follows the style used by the biographers quoted, who were British and Irish, not American. (although I'm not sure about Clinton Heylin.) Agadant (talk) 21:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

"Domino" release date
Infobox says 14/10/70. "Domino" article says 14/11/70. Both can't be right. Cloonmore (talk) 02:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * According to the old and usually accurate Van Morrison Website (Michael Hayward's) the charting date says 11/14/1970 (Weeks on Charts = 12). That website gives only 1970 as the release date. Seems a little odd that it would have charted exactly a month from release (Especially since October has 31 days. Shouldn't it have been 4 weeks if accurate or 30 days later - as the charts are today?)  That's why after Cloonmore pointed out the discrepency,  I decided it would be best to only use the year as a release date.  I don't think it serves a purpose to give an exact date unless it is undisputed. Agadant (talk) 15:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

"Blue Money" release date
Same issue. Infobox says 13/1/71. "Blue Money" article says May 71.Cloonmore (talk) 03:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Brian Hinton, Celtic Crossroads lists May 1971 as the date and Ritchie Yorke, Into the Music lists January 13, 1971. So the date depends on where it is sourced from. Agadant (talk) 03:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Could one date be for when it was released and the other when it charted? I'm inclined to believe Richie Yorke, because he would have collected the info at the time of its release. Also he's very accurate to list the exact day it was released on, compared to Hinton who just lists the month released. Also Yorke's book is generally more accurate than Hinton's. Thanks Kitchen roll (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * All just an opinion on your part, Kitchen roll. Agadant (talk) 19:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your thoughts, KR. Makes sense to me.Cloonmore (talk) 02:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Michael Haywards old website gave 1971 as a release date and 02/06/1971 as a chart date. (Weeks on chart = 12). So, it doesn't matter to me, I just think under the circumstances the year alone is the most accurate for certaintly. Agadant (talk) 15:41, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Nominator will be away for a week, March 31 to April 7
... according to this note left at WT:Good article nominations. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 19:14, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Many references just don't check out
Since I have several of the books that are used as referencing sources on this article and as I have had particular problems with this editor and his referencing methods for over 2 years now:  some examples here  I took as much time as I could spare to go over this article and check the sources that I had access to for accuracy. There are many liberties taken and I'm not even saying that the information is in itself wrong in all instances, just that some of the specific references cited do not bear out what the information says. I find this very difficult to write but after much consideration and as it has been put up for FA, I feel it is my responsibility to bring it up as not many editors have the books to check out the sources. I could have gone in and changed the material according to the references used but after many unproductive and contentious battles with this editor, I'm not up to it anymore. Agadant (talk) 01:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Some post-FAC comments
As promised I have checked out the article and my comments are given below. I have also done a little copyediting to improve the flow of the prose.
 * Lead: there is lack of clarity in the second and third paragraphs. The statement "Morrison was dissatisfied with the addition of female vocalists, and the album's songs featuring the Street Choir were given instrumental backing" doesn't seem an accurate summary of what I read in the article. In the third paragraph I don't see the point of "as well as Morrison's previous album Moondance"; it should be made clear that "domino" became the first song on the album rather than just describing it as a "sampler single"; a yar should be added for the hit song "Brown Eyed Girl"; "As of 2010, it remains..." should read "As of 2010, "Domino" remains..."; add "from the album" to "Warner Bros. released two other singles..."
 * Recording
 * Three paragraphs begin "Morrison..." Need to vary the prose. I have reorded the opening of the second paragraph, and have reworked the third paragraph to read more smoothly.
 * Fourth para. What concept did Morrison abandon? I find it quite hard to follow this paragraph. The quote beginning ""Street Choir was going to be an a cappella group..." merely tells us what we already know. Am I right in thinking that Morrison dropped the "choir" songs recorded in June, and replaced them with what was recorded in April? If this is so, it needs to be stated more clearly.
 * Morrison recorded six songs in the second session in June with the choir. instead of recording them a cappella (which was what he planned) he included his backing band in these songs as well. He then added the songs from the first recording session in April, which weren't planned for release.  Kitchen Roll   (Exchange words)  20:37, 29 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Composition
 * The statements: "The songs on the album borrow from various music genres and have a free, relaxed sound;[10] the simple lyrics lack the level of poetry popularly expected from Morrison's work.[11]" need to be attributed in the text, as well as cited, so that we know whose opinions we are reading. Check the rest of the text for similar cases.
 * reoccuring": In this context, "recurring" might be better
 * Use of nickname in the sentence "Morrison wrote "Give me a Kiss" about either Planet or his newly born baby girl Shana" is unencyclopedic (and also confusing - I'd long forgotten who "Planet" was. No need to name the daughter, either. Check other uses of "Planet"
 * In what way is it unencyclopedic? Also because Shana Morrison has a wikipedia page on her does that make her notable to name in this situation?  Kitchen Roll   (Exchange words)  09:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * More repetitive phrasing towards the end: "led biographer Clinton Heylin to believe" closely followed by "Clinton Heylin is led to believe".
 * Repetitive prose: "many times" occurs twice in first line of third paragraph
 * Chart performance: The focus of this section, after the opening sentence, seems to be the chart performances of "Domino" and other singles, rather than on the album's performance.
 * The singles helped the album become successful. I think the concluding sentence in that section makes the link between the singles success and the success of the album.  Kitchen Roll   (Exchange words)  09:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Critical response: "In later years" is vague. When did Rogan make these comments?
 * Morrison's response: It is not clear to me, after reading the article, how Morrison "lost control". We learn from the lead that the album was originally titled Virgo's Fool, and was renamed by Warner Bros against Morrison's wishes, but there's no real information in the text that amounts to Morrison's "losing control". Whatever dispute there was between him and Warner Bros is not revealed in the article. I think this needs to be clarified, since it seems to have a bearing on Morrison's attitude to the album.
 * I think how he lost control is summarised in this quote: "Somebody else got control of it and got the cover and all that shit while I was on the West Coast. I knew what was happening to it, but it was like I couldn't stop it. I'd given my business thing over to someone else and although I had final approval on things, they just went ahead and did the wrong thing. They told the record company it was one thing and it wasn't. So the whole thing went wrong." Should it be expanded on in other sections of the article?  Kitchen Roll   (Exchange words)  09:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I suggest that you work on these over the next week or so. When you are satisfied that you have dealt with everything, you could ask Sandy if you may renominate. Brianboulton (talk) 18:17, 24 June 2010 (UTC)


 * IIRC most of Brianboulton's comments are very similar to those I posted at Talk:His_Band and the Street Choir/GA1.
 * However I'd keep "Planet" as the name appeared all over the citations and in fact I've forgotten her real name. But I'd removed their baby girl as superfluous and excessive. --Philcha (talk) 20:43, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I asked a user a while ago to copyedit the article. They did a great job, but because of lack of knowledge of the subject I think the meaning of some of the sentences were changed, which was a lot of what you found in your review. I've adressed most of the issues, but I've added replies below the comments that I'm uncertain how to fix at the moment. Thanks  Kitchen Roll   (Exchange words)  09:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 17:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on His Band and the Street Choir. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071018101648/http://ivan.vanomatic.de/shows/1970-04-26_regular.html to http://ivan.vanomatic.de/shows/1970-04-26_regular.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915180211/http://www.rickmcgrath.com/morrison2.html to http://www.rickmcgrath.com/morrison2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:29, 7 January 2018 (UTC)