Talk:It Is 'He' (Jai Sri Krishna)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Tbhotch (talk · contribs) 07:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I will review this in the next days. Enough time has passed since it was added to GAN. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 07:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking the review, . I was starting to think I'd soon be celebrating this nomination's one-year anniversary without having a review! JG66 (talk) 23:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The worst is that this was not one of the oldest articles listed at GAN. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 00:10, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:


 * General
 * one link needs an update.
 * Wow, that checklinks tool is great – I've not seen that before! I've checked all the links in the article and they're fine. It just seems that the program is detecting a problem based on the wording in those citations where an article is available (on subscription) at Rock's Backpages. The analysis reads "Redirect does not contain '.,?&'", but I can't see that that's got anything to do with much. Unless I'm missing something …? JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think it is because the article has the link http://www.rocksbackpages.com/article.html?ArticleID=9434 and the article is at http://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/george-harrison-idark-horsei/ ; and http://www.rocksbackpages.com/article.html?ArticleID=20410 with http://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/george-harrison-how-dark-horse-whipped-up-a-winning-tour/ . This is just a precautory change, in case the link goes to "Suspicious" or "Dead". ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 21:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't Category:Songs about religion be included?
 * I think not. I appreciate that Harrison's song "My Sweet Lord" is included in the category, but imo that's a mistake; in fact, I'd say that whole category is problematic. I have just added "Awaiting on You All" there, though, because that song does seem to be "about religion". I think "It Is 'He'", like "My Sweet Lord", would belong in a category such as "Songs about or addressing a deity", "Songs expressing faith in a deity" or something like that. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * George Harrison -> It should be removed, I was about to suggest George Harrison singles instead, but this song is not listed there. This doesn't effect this GAN, but "George Harrison singles" should be George Harrison songs, and all singles and songs should be included there.
 * Okay, it's gone. Btw, when you say the singles template "should be" a song template, where are you getting that from? I didn't know there was such a rule. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not a rule per se, but it is helpful for navegation purposes, for example Madonna songs or Michael Jackson songs. Previously, most of the time, only singles obtained articles as they were more notable than most non-singles, but as non-singles are getting articles, it is more helpful to have singles and non-singles in the same template. Rather than having George Harrison singles for singles, and George Harrison songs for non-singles, one template is more helpful. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 21:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Images
 * As a derivated work, File:RadhaKrishnaUdaipur.JPG requires another licence (a PD-old one).
 * Ah, well I might just remove the image, then. Would you mind providing a link so I can see what you mean? (In my ignorance no doubt, I follow the link to the Commons page and see an adequate licence for use here.) JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I was referring to include a pd-old in the image at Commons. In copyrights, although you take a picture of a 2D subject--drawing, photographs, paintures, graffitis, etc--the copyholder still being the person who painted the 2D subject. But, as that image was painted centuries ago, the copyright has expired. It has to be noted with the pd-old template, don't worry, I added it. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 21:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * File:Yamuna (Kesi Ghata).jpg and File:Sevakunja Vrindavan.JPG need a better caption.
 * Bit surprised you think they needed improvement/expansion, seeing as the heading for the subsection is "Touring Vrindavan's temples" and there's the box quote above it, which mentions "there was a moment when the atmosphere of [Vrindavan] got to me". No problem – I've reworded the captions to make them more directly relevant to the song. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Infobox
 * It mentions that it was published by "Oops (UK)/Ganga (US)" but there is no mention of it (excepting the category). It should be mentioned.
 * Have added mention at the end of Release. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * Can you link or name his autobiography?
 * Have to say, this is the sort of example that I've seen other editors wanting to not have a link, in the interests of avoiding over-linking in Lead sections. I have added one as you suggest, though. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Background and inspiration
 * his autobiography, I, Me, Mine, -> "his autobiography, I, Me, Mine (1980),"
 * Done. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "on the banks of the Ganges". The article about the river is at Ganges, so either, remove the pipe, or remove "Ganges" and leave it as "River Ganges".
 * Have gone with River Ganges. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Link Indian folk music.
 * Thanks – done. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Link Indian folk music.
 * Thanks – done. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Recording
 * "Harrison flew to Los Angeles", "Harrison flew to Los Angeles, California" -> Los Angeles, Texas exists.
 * I think it would be better as just Los Angeles (as with Paris, TX, I just can't see readers wondering where this particular Los Angeles might be …?) Never mind, I've followed your suggestion. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Critical reception
 * "this manifested as "outright hostility" from some reviewers, who saw it as "one Krishna paen too many"". -> as quoted, it needs attribution.
 * Again, I've had examples where that sort of second attribution would be seen as unnecessary. The sentence begins with "According to Simon Leng" and this comment is separated by a semicolon from Leng's first statement, on critical reception generally. I've done as you said, but I don't think it looks good! JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Link Rubber Soul
 * I'm sorry, I've got to disagree with you here. I know there's a requirement that says nothing should be linked in quoted material; I think that guideline's ridiculous, to be honest, and it's rarely followed anyway. But in an attempt to at least meet the spirit of the requirement, I take it that links in quotes should at least be used very sparingly. So in this one, I'm thinking McCartney and the song title are important, but a reader doesn't need immediate access to the parent album's article (Rubber Soul). Are you okay with that? JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ I didn't know that existed. It is really absurd. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 21:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ I didn't know that existed. It is really absurd. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 21:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Sources
 * Link Continuum (if it is Continuum International Publishing Group), if not, leave it unlinked.
 * It is, yes, and it is [linked] now. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Link Omnibus Press, Ballantine Books, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, It Books, I.B. Tauris, Rolling Stone Press, Simon & Schuster, John Wiley & Sons, Chronicle Books, Abrams Books, Guernica Editions, Rough Guides, Penguin Group, Greenwood Publishing Group (Praeger), Hal Leonard Corporation, and McGraw-Hill Education.
 * All done. And thanks for compiling this list – saved me a lot of time. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Link Dale Allison, Alan Clayson, Peter Doggett, Olivia Harrison, Nicholas Schaffner, Ravi Shankar, Mat Snow, Bruce Spizer, Gary Tillery, and Bob Woffinden.
 * All done. Thanks again for the list. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * For copyright reasons, I can't access most of the sources, so I will AGF from all of them. However, I could access some of them, and I have a question for these:
 * In source 74, The Beatles Diary Volume 2: After the Break-Up 1970–2001, just a personal note. I don't know how someone can release a book without pages. Now. You should say it was released in 9 December in the US, and if possible 20 December in the UK.
 * Unless I'm missing something, the pages given for the book Here Comes the Sun: The Spiritual and Musical Journey of George Harrison (p. 302 and p. 312) don't match, 302 is a references page, and there is no page 312.
 * Surprised to hear you say that, because I did double-check all the references a month or so back. (One of the good things about having an article sit on the nominations pile for so long is you get a chance to revisit it with a fresh perspective, improve the text, etc.) I'll come back to you soon on this – and the point below – just have to attend to things RL for a while. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, you're talking about the online/eBook version of Badman's book? Yes, it's frustrating – hundreds upon hundreds of pages there without any numbers. I've added the UK release date, sourced to the same Badman page. (The 9 December US release is supported by Madinger & Easter p. 635, btw, so the citation placement is good.) JG66 (talk) 13:36, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Had a look at the situation you mentioned with Greene, but I can't see any refs in the article with those page numbers. If you're talking about ref #89, pages 212–13, that checks out fine. (Let me know if you want me to write out the relevant text here – I've got the actual book.) JG66 (talk) 13:45, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's the ref 89 source text, in fact: . JG66 (talk) 13:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "George Harrison, I Me Mine" -> George Harrison, I, Me, Mine
 * Done. In fact, the 2002 edition omits commas in the title, but I guess there's no harm in making all mentions consistent. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "Harrison contracted laryngitis during the weeks of combined recording and rehearsals in Los Angeles" (p. 58) -> there is nothing in that page about this.
 * Rodriguez pages 58 and 199 (which is in the cite too) do support the point that the combination of simultaneous rehearsals and recording wrecked Harrison's voice. You're right, though, that Rodriguez doesn't mention laryngitis per se. I was going to just insert a new ref after "laryngitis", to give the condition a name, but a couple of sources I've looked at say that Harrison already had laryngitis, and the weeks in LA compounded the problem until his voice blew out. Others say he contracted laryngitis while in LA … Anyway, I've reworked the text to say that he already had it, per Leng (who says Harrison went down with laryngitis in late summer 1974.) JG66 (talk) 14:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Here's the ref 89 source text, in fact: . JG66 (talk) 13:47, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "George Harrison, I Me Mine" -> George Harrison, I, Me, Mine
 * Done. In fact, the 2002 edition omits commas in the title, but I guess there's no harm in making all mentions consistent. JG66 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "Harrison contracted laryngitis during the weeks of combined recording and rehearsals in Los Angeles" (p. 58) -> there is nothing in that page about this.
 * Rodriguez pages 58 and 199 (which is in the cite too) do support the point that the combination of simultaneous rehearsals and recording wrecked Harrison's voice. You're right, though, that Rodriguez doesn't mention laryngitis per se. I was going to just insert a new ref after "laryngitis", to give the condition a name, but a couple of sources I've looked at say that Harrison already had laryngitis, and the weeks in LA compounded the problem until his voice blew out. Others say he contracted laryngitis while in LA … Anyway, I've reworked the text to say that he already had it, per Leng (who says Harrison went down with laryngitis in late summer 1974.) JG66 (talk) 14:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "Harrison contracted laryngitis during the weeks of combined recording and rehearsals in Los Angeles" (p. 58) -> there is nothing in that page about this.
 * Rodriguez pages 58 and 199 (which is in the cite too) do support the point that the combination of simultaneous rehearsals and recording wrecked Harrison's voice. You're right, though, that Rodriguez doesn't mention laryngitis per se. I was going to just insert a new ref after "laryngitis", to give the condition a name, but a couple of sources I've looked at say that Harrison already had laryngitis, and the weeks in LA compounded the problem until his voice blew out. Others say he contracted laryngitis while in LA … Anyway, I've reworked the text to say that he already had it, per Leng (who says Harrison went down with laryngitis in late summer 1974.) JG66 (talk) 14:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Rodriguez pages 58 and 199 (which is in the cite too) do support the point that the combination of simultaneous rehearsals and recording wrecked Harrison's voice. You're right, though, that Rodriguez doesn't mention laryngitis per se. I was going to just insert a new ref after "laryngitis", to give the condition a name, but a couple of sources I've looked at say that Harrison already had laryngitis, and the weeks in LA compounded the problem until his voice blew out. Others say he contracted laryngitis while in LA … Anyway, I've reworked the text to say that he already had it, per Leng (who says Harrison went down with laryngitis in late summer 1974.) JG66 (talk) 14:00, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

These are the issues I could find. Article on hold. ©  Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 00:10, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, everything has been resolved. I'm passing the nomination (finally after several months). Good work. ©   Tb hotch ™ (en-2.5). 21:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Great news, thanks so much. No doubt another of the (long) song articles I've written will soon take up residency at the top of the dusty pile of unreviewed "Songs" nominations! Best, JG66 (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2016 (UTC)