Talk:George Harrison/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Sideman to Lennon and McCartney?

I keep reading and hearing all over the place that George Harrison wasn't as developed a songwriter as his friends John Lennon and Paul McCartney...yes, but that's only true from a certain point of view... The man played lead guitar on pretty much every Beatles song, inlcuding your favorite solos that are like old friends when you hear them again. Now to me that says that he, and Ringo deserve a little more credit in this whole songwriting process. All four members of the group contributed in writing a song, and no single member meant more to the group than another. I've heard that Beatles songs were never as extravagant and polished during the writing process as they were on record, and that's pretty evident if you've ever listened to Anthology...that can be attributed to the fact that the others hadn't fully put in their musical input just yet. Although George and Ringo didn't come up with the original concept for most of those songs, they definitely helped make those song happen the way we hear it, and they wouldn't be possible without them. George Harrison, in some form or another, wrote - or rather, helped write, every single Beatles song he appeared on, if you take my meaning. I know crediting and copyrights and all that jazz will beg to differ, but just think about it...John and Paul didn't TELL George to play every last note he played. If you hear a song with four guys on it, then even if only one of those guys thought of the song, there are still four guys playing on it, and you know for a fact that song your hearing sounds the way it does, because of those FOUR guys. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.187.254.238 (talk) 09:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

I don't think you are saying that Harrison should receive a co-credit on Lennon/McCartney songs, but it's worth saying that the acativity you described is not considered songwriting. Solos and other guitar parts, even creative, well-played ones, follow the structure of the song and often either reference the main melody or counterpoint it. The composer(s) often do tell the other players what they are looking for, and may provide a demo or other guide. (Listen to the demo of "Come and Get It" that Paul McCartney created for Badfinger... that's an extreme example but Pete Townshend's demos for the Who were also pretty complete.) I am not saying that Lennon or McCartney provided such demos for their songs, or that Harrison had no input. I am not trying to bash Harrison (He became a competent songwriter, and wrote some great songs), but he didn't write the Lennon/McCartney songs and he wasn't their equal as a songwriter. The Beatles would not have been the same without George, he was a full 25% member of the band, and it's not a put-down to say Harrison wasn't the equal of John Lennon or McCartney as a songwriter. Those two were the best of their generation.

As an aside, if Harrison did get writing credits for his role in shaping songs, Eric Clapton would get a credit for "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" and McCartney would get one for "Something". (Just two examples)

One disadvantage fo Harrison was that Lennon and McCartney collaborated at least in part on most of their songs, and neither of them collaborated with Harrison (with a couple exceptions).

I added a response to your comment (almost 90-days old and probably forgotten) because I saw it just as I was going to add a comment on the current Overview section. That section begins, "During the Beatles' heyday, John Lennon and Paul McCartney were its main songwriters though Harrison generally wrote and/or sang lead on one or two songs for each album." IMO, it's wrong to start an overview of George that way. It should start with something about why he is notable, and something positively notable if possible. It can be completely neutral, maybe something like "Harrison was the lead guitar player for the Beatles, joining future Beatles John Lennon and Paul McCartney in an early incarnation of the band called the Quarrymen, ..." It should be balanced, but that doesn't mean starting with what is essentially a negative. I may have a go at this article at some point but in the meantime if someone can focus on it, please improve the Overview, and also try to provide some sorely-needed citations. John Cardinal 07:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Whether Harrison was as "developed" a songwriter as John Lennon and Paul McCartney is, of course, entirely a matter of opinion, and, as such, should not be attempted to be answered by the article. We can objectively say that fewer Harrison songs appeared on Beatles records and that the ones that did appear began to appear a bit belatedly. Harrison's relative age (he was three years younger than John Lennon) could conceivably have something to do with this, but that's conjecture. It seems to me that Harrison's "Something", his first hit single, and his "Here Comes the Sun" were the most popular Abbey Road songs--although I'm not sure I could establish this objectively--, which suggests (to me) that Harrison was coming into his own as a songwriter just as the Beatles were coming to an end.

John Cardinal above seems to me to be implying that there is something intrinsic to songs that makes their arrangements incidental, and I have to differ with him in this respect. Yes, there is a tradition in pop music of regarding arrangements as incidental, but this is either a matter of happenstance or, more likely, it is in some way connected with the tradition in pop music of limited compositional technique. To my mind, George Martin's contribution to "Eleanor Rigby", for example, makes him a co-composer. (I do agree with John Cardinal about the "Overview" section though.)

As for the original question, "Sideman to Lennon and McCartney?", the answer is: Only if Lennon and McCartney were officially the group's leaders, which has nothing whatsoever to do with songwriting.TheScotch 08:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC) TheScotch 08:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

George Harrison's birth date

George Harrison's birthday is listed here as February 25; however, before his death George reported that he was actually born February 24, just before midnight. All his life he had thought it was February 25, just after midnight, but he says he found out somehow that that was incorrect. It is a subject of debate among his fans. Anyone have any thoughts on whether or not we should change his birthday on this page? -- HollyAm [02:09, 8 October 2002]

http://www.beatlesagain.com/breflib/georgebd.html if authentic, is compelling evidence for Feb 25. [10:34, 23 February 2004 203.220.140.54]

Perhaps a short bit about the debate between Feb 24th and 25th should be added rather than changing the birthdate outright? --Leerie [00:36, 17 August 2005]

• At the Smoking Gun, his released death certificate [1] says Feb 25. --Fallout boy 04:05, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

George Harrison went on record as saying the rumour about his birth date being the 24th of February was a fabrication of his own that had caught on. I think this can be found in the web chat he did (possibly with AOL?), but unfortunately I do not have the link. McGonicle 19:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Ok guys, I've just changed the birthdate to 25th February. It is without doubt his correct birthdate. Although I do not currently have a reference to the occasion on which George debunked the 24th February myth, the offical death certificate linked above should be satisfactory evidence of his correct birthdate, and until anybody can provide superior evidence to the contrary, it will ever be thus. McGonicle 23:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Well in that case it shouldn't say that he was "in fact" born on the 24th! I'll edit it now in line with the above, but I'm not taking a position on the matter. --kingboyk 21:48, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

So, if the 25th is settled on, why does it say the 24th?

For much the same reason why some people don't sign their posts; they tend to write what they feel is right without bothering to check. LessHeard vanU 13:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone changed it to the 24th because of that entry in the R'n'R Hall of Fame, but I changed it back to the 25th because a) it says so in his autobiogaphy (what better place for George to set things straight?) and b) check the official website: [2]. --84.142.216.35 (talk) 12:22, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

The citation:

Harrison started a rumor that he was born on 24 February as a joke. All reliable sources show his birth date as 25 February

needs more explanation. Since this rumor/fact started in the late 90s, all reliable sources would say the 25th. The source of that rumor needs to be noted before it can be a citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fuddle (talk • contribs) 16:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Concert for Bangladesh financial results

the concert for bangladesh actually did not raise any money, it lost money after expenses were factored in. this is documented in several places. George Harrison may have gave some of his own money to the the refugees as charity, but as i dont know for sure, I kept silent about that aspect.--- nibor [07:10, 5 June 2004 66.71.221.72]

The convert did raise money, but the fund was handled by Allen Klein and Abcko. As a result, the bulk of it, the earnings from the album and film, remained locked up for several years. Several hundred thousand was reportedly raised. I have never seen any source that suggests that no money was raised. As I understand it the actual concerts costs were kept to a minimum, all performers charged no fee and many of the staff were working on a voluntary basis. McGonicle 10:05, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

George Harrison and Aaliyah

I have added the fact about how the posthumous re-issue of "My Sweet Lord" replaced Aaliyah's "More than a Woman" at the number one slot, making them the only back to back posthumous #1 hits in the UK.

This fact has also been added to the article about Aaliyah.

- Rico [00:10, 30 January 2005 172.212.45.188 ]

We miss you

3 years on and we miss you still George. Whatever places your jouney has taken you, we wish you well. [19:45, 11 February 2005 128.206.137.226]

I love you George, you live on in our hearts. King of Jefflacia 07:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Reorg and 'Taxman'

I've reorganized by decade a bit better and added a lot of material about the 1970s period.

As for "Taxman", rec.music.beatles opinion is that Lennon may have helped out a bit with the words, but Harrison disputed the extent ... in any case, Lennon wasn't co-credited, so for the purposes of this article I don't think it's worth mentioning. --jls

As Taxman is credited solely to Harrison and neither have to my knowledge ever gone on record as claiming that Lennon contributed, it is conjecture and has no place in an encyclopedia. rec.music.beatles has lots of theories, but the bulk of them are just fans with no insider knowledge, or with anything in print. McGonicle 10:10, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, according to John Lennon in his final interview with Playboy from 1980 he said the following concerning the song "Taxman": "I remember the day he (George Harrison) called to ask for help on 'Taxman,' one of his bigger songs. I threw in a few one-liners to help the song along, because that's what he asked for." January 29, 2006. Peter.

That is what Ian McDonalds say too. Anyway, it is menationed in the Taxman article and IMHO there is no need to mentioned that Lennon wrote a couple of lines of the song --Zoeds 19:57, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Did you know that Stevie Ray Vaughan recorded Taxman and can be found on the greatist hits. I seriously doubt anyone will want to put that on this page. But anyway this article is SOOOOO much better than it was last time I checked good work :.)

ISKCON wording

From the 'Early Years' section: "While, during his lifetime, Harrison had bequeathed to the society his Lethmore Heath ranch, located north of London, he redoubted speculations that he would leave ISKCON a large sum in his will: in fact, he left nothing to the organization." Is this supposed to be 'redoubled'? Monkeyman 13:26, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I guess. That whole sentence was a mess, I've attempted to fix it. Wasted Time R 14:44, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

This article is about the Beatle George Harrison...

I'm not going to change this, but I don't understand why "Beatle" was used in place of "musician". It seems a bit too specific. [17:19, 26 July 2005 The Computer Mutt]

• Yes, I agree with you. I think it would be much better to use "musician" instead of "Beatle". [18:59, 26 July 2005 Superior Interactive]

Main Image

The first picture of George playing his Gretsch Tennessean outdoors is reversed. George was a right-handed player.

Is there any reason why the all Beatles' main pictures have been changed to 1962/1963 era images? I don't think pictures from that era are reflective enough of each Beatle's life to warrant being the main image.

Bbsrock

it's because they are all free public domain images which we should use in preference to others. Arniep 16:40, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

AlvinMGO

...but isn't there a better one of George in the public domain? I'd look for one myself if I knew where to start. AlvinMGO 17:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

You can start here Wikipedia:Public domain image resources. :) Monkeyman^(talk) 17:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

...sure, catch me trying be lazy. :-( Thanx, Monkeyman. AlvinMGO 17:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Pseudonyms

Should the pseudonyms be removed? an anonymous user just took them out and i can't decide whether or not to put them back.

How do I get someone to talk about those "quirky" rock chords that George was playing in a rock r& band?

I have tried to play those diminishd ninths and given up. He played jazz chords in a rock band, making the songs open to much wider varieties of music.

George's middle name

This article originally listed George's full name as "George Harold Harrison." George's birth certificate shows no middle name. His father's name was Harold. Rich 21:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

The recent biography "The Beatles" by Bob Spitz gives his midle name as Harold. Is he wrong. Is there a copy of the actual birth certificate on the web? Sir Rhosis 22:14, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Bob Spitz' book contains a number of glaring inaccuracies and in my opinion should not be considered a credible source. 64.230.97.152 22:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, but I just read Pete Best's autobiography. Best says that when the Beatles signed a contract with Brian Epstein, they all wrote three names ("John Winston Lennon", "James Paul McCartney", "Randolph Peter Best") except Harrison, who signed it simply "George Harrison". Best goes on to say that as far as he could tell Harrison had no middle name. (Epstein, incidentally, never signed the contract himself.) TheScotch 09:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

When I first made the edit, I knew of a source for his birth certificate on the web, which I can no longer find. The closest I have found today is his death certificate, on which you can see that a dash has been typed in the space for "middle name." Here's the link: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/gharrisoncert1.html Rich 07:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Addition needing source

Someone added the following paragraph but it is not clear if it is original research or referring to an opinion published in a reputable source:

In early Beatles songs, Harrison's lead guitar parts were solid but unremarkable; he had yet to truly develop his own style. However, Harrison's guitar playing became more distinctive later in the band's career. His solos on songs such as "Something" and "Let It Be" (particularly on the album version of the song, which has a different guitar solo from the version released as a single) rank among his best, and are marked by an expressive and refined sound.

Arniep 09:57, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Wonderwall Music and Electronic Sound albums

I was vaguely aware of the above two albums, particularly the latter, but could not find them mentioned in the article. They are listed in the discography, where I learned that the former was the first solo album by a Beatle, and the first release on the Apple label. It also appears to be a Western rock/Indian music fusion recording, which may also be the first such.

I am slightly more familiar with "Electronic Sound", since I recall both the Zapple label stuff, but also that it was the first album to feature the Moog synthesiser as a primary musical instrument - rather than a novelty effect on otherwise traditional songs - and possibly qualifies as the first commercially released "Electro(nic)" album.

"Hello!?" These are groundbreaking recordings, and they are not mentioned in the main body of the article? Since his work since The Beatles is broken into decades, should there not be a "1960's" decade which could mention this stuff and anything else that can be found outside of his day job? I feel that there is a strong case for someone with more knowledge about this aspect of Harrisons career expanding this article.

Innovations by Harrison gets passed by, and Macca's Frog Chorus is mentioned? Lummee...LessHeard vanU 10:27, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

{{sofixit}} Before you get too carried away with superlatives you might wanna listen to it first :P (George's career glitters with diamonds as far as I'm concerned - more so than the other 3 - but Electronic Sound probably isn't one of them :) ) --kingboyk 19:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

As you quite rightly point out, I haven't heard either album, but I am not commenting on the quality or lack thereof - just that they were one of (if not the) first records of that type and are notable for that in itself. Since I have not heard them then I am not the person to write them into the article, either, as I would only be copying what is already in the discography section.LessHeard vanU 21:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Whilst I'm at it...

There are other bits and pieces about Harrison which may or may not be deemed worthy of inclusion;

Quips - At first Beatles recording session at EMI, George Martin "...and if there is anything you don't like, let me know and I'll change it." Harrison, "Well, I don't like your tie!"

Ken Dodd, interviewing The Beatles and referring to Ringo's name, "Can you think of a name for me? Rhymes with my name? Something earthy?" Harrison, "Sod?"

Concert for Bangladesh / Live Aid - I believe that Harrison was a "consultant" for distrubition of funds raised, since he had experience... he had already made most of the mistakes possible following the Concert for Bangladesh. I am pretty sure Bob Geldof approached him, amongst many others, when planning the concert.

Geldolf confirmed this in interview; he said that Harrison told him about planning for tax.

Lennon McCartney songwriting assists. In the film "Let It Be" McCartney is shown struggling with composing the song The Long And Winding Road. It is Harrison who suggests slowing the tempo, and as soon as McCartney (reluctantly) tries it it becomes the song we recognise. As this is an example of how The Beatles often worked in the studio, it brings into dispute the notion that other Beatles help in Harrison compositions should be recognised in the credits. Ringo Starr is not credited on the tracks Hard Days Night or Eight Days A Week, even though he is recognised as originating the phrases which formed the titles of the tracks.

Um... perhaps someone may take a more diplomatic view on the above?LessHeard vanU 10:51, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The first one definitely. That little retort has gone into legend, and it would be good to note that it was young Mr Harrison who said it. A comment from the other George would be nice too; I'm pretty sure there's an interview knocking around where Mr Martin (as he was then) has said that he wasn't terribly impressed by it! --kingboyk 19:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

George in America - 1963

George, accompanied by his brother Peter, visited his sister Louise and her husband in Benton, a town in southern Illinois in September 1963. He was the only member of the Beatles to visit the USA before the Beatles became famous in the USA.

George and Peter arrived in St. Louis on September 17, 1963 and stayed until October 3, 1963.

George's sister Louise knew Gabe McCarty who was a member of the Four Vests. The Four Vests were the most popular band in Southern Illinois. McCarty had heard the Beatles album Please Please Me at Louise's house (this was pre Beatles US invasion remember) and was impressed and would come by often to hear the album again.

On September 28, 1963 The Four Vests played a dance at the Eldorado, Illinois VFW (Veteran's of Foreign Wars) hall. After their first set, they invited George to join them onstage. George was reluctant, saying he wasn't sure he didn't know if he knew the band's numbers well enough. With some coaxing they got him on stage and he performed or accompanied the band on some Hank Williams, Chuck Berry and Carl Perkins tunes. This even would be the first time a member of the Beatles played live in the United State.

Reference: Book: "Before He was Fab: George Harrison's First American Visit" by Jim Kirkpatrick, published by Cache River Press, Vienna, Illinois

Category:Eric Clapton

I think George should be included in Clapton's category because they were very close (possibly best) friends for years, and Clapton was a guest performer on George's recordings and a sideman at many of his concerts for the entirety of Harrison's solo career, whenever it was possible for both. I think working with George made up a significant amount of Eric's career.
Keep in mind, I'm not proposing adding Clapton to Harrison's category, just Harrison to Clapton's. If you guys still think it's not enough to merit inclusion, I won't re-add it. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 12:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

What's your rationale for George to Eric's category and not vice versa? They were both quite important figures in each other's lives. That said, the reason I removed it was that I don't think their connection was sufficient to make logical sense. The only two people currently in Category:George Harrison are his wife and son (no John, Paul, George, Ringo, Ravi, Billy, etc). No persons other than Mr Clapton himself are in Category:Eric Clapton. I just don't think it makes sense to have George appear in Eric's category, nor the other way round.

There's certainly no philosophical objection from me. I understand that they interconnected in some substantial ways over George's life, and indeed afterwards with Clapton's awesome Concert for George. Bottom line for me: George in Eric's category and Eric in George's, or neither. I lean towards neither for reasons above. Other opinions please... ? --kingboyk 12:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, my rationale was that whilst working with George was a relatively large part of Eric's career, working with Eric was a relatively small part of George's. That's what I've always thought, anyway, and I assumed that was your reason for removing the category in the first place. I have nothing against adding both to both, it's just that I personally wasn't going to. MightyMoose22 ^{>Abort, Retry, Fail?_} 12:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Okie dokie. Makes sense. Let's see if anyone else will chip in. --kingboyk 12:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You may as well include both, since they both started off their careers clean-shaven and then wore beards later on... or to put it another way, whilst they were friends and shared a wife (at different times) neither was more or as important to the others career as other individuals. I see no reason for them to share categories. LessHeard vanU 13:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

George Harrysong

I noticed that there's an article for George Harrysong, supposedly an alias of George Harrison. I don't think that there's enough info on that article. I think that the info from that article should be inserted into the George Harrison article, and the George Harrysong page should be redirected to here. ([[User:Ibaranoffhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:George_Harrison&action=edit# --70.253.132.59 05:52, 23 June 2006 (UTC)24|Ibaranoff24]] 03:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC))

I agree with the comment that the George Harrysong article ought to be merged with the George Harrison one. As an alias of George Harrison, it ought to be mentioned in the George Harrison article--that is if there are even sources cited.

The "George Harrysong" article should be a subset of the "George Harrison" article, with more information about Harrison pseudonymns (such as L'Angelo Mysterio, etc.) Srsrsr 18:24, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The article has no incoming links except from here. Looks like fancruft to me. I support the merge/redirect proposal. --kingboyk 18:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Pseudonyms

Yikesorama! Do we really need articles on every pseudonym George ever used?! It's fancruft gone mad. I'd favour delinking all and merging or deleting. --kingboyk 18:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I've redirected them all here. If somebody wants to retrieve the text for each to expand the section here with specific details or create one overview article on George's aliases and work for other artists, you can find them in Category:WikiProject The Beatles merged articles. Please don't restore the individual articles as I'll be tempted to just delete them. It's fancruft in the extreme and not what WP:BEATLES was set up to achieve! --kingboyk 19:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Main Photo

I can't say that I was a close friend of George's, but I can say that I say I knew him. That main photo of him on this site is not very represenative of George. His long haired era was short lived, more of a fad than anything. I think something a bit more trim might better suit a photo memoriam of our friend.

It's recognisable though. It's more what we are allowed to use than anything else.--Crestville 09:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

--kingboyk 17:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

he kinda looks like Jesus in that picture. -Vladimir Lenin 20:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Plagiarism

None

Auto peer review suggestions

George Harrison

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.
• The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.
• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
• Per WP:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, soon and previous [day/week/month/year] might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.
• Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.
• Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm.
• Per WP:MOSNUM, please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.
• Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
• As per WP:MOSDATE, dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.
• Please alphabetize the interlanguage links.
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view. For example,
  • it has been
  • allege
  • apparently
  • is considered
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 22 additive terms, a bit too much.
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add {{Reflist}}.
• The article will need references. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information.
• Please provide citations for all of the {{fact}}s.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Mal 06:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Main Photo

I just uploaded a photo of George during the Get Back concert.What do you say we put this one as the main picture ? The actual "Jesus-like" picture is not very representative , I think.Anyways , my messages on wikipedia are often ignored , so I'll just wait a couple days and then do it myself, if nobody has an objection.

Harrison on January 30, 1969 , during the famous Rooftop Concert

I also uploaded this one Image:GeorgeGuitar.jpg , and put it as main photo.

MrGater 19:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I have inlined the images on this talk page because, according to item #9 on WP:FUC, unfree images are only allowed on articles. I hope you understant, thanks. --Abu Badali 00:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, there's a problem with the first image. It's a screenshot, and we can only use unfree screenshots to talk about the movie, and not about the person depicted. You may want to read WP:Fair use. --Abu Badali 00:32, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Right. When I just saw your edit summary I thought "oh no, yet more overstrict application of the fair use rules" but, nope, you're right. We might be able to use a picture of George in the Get Back film when commenting out about his appearance in the film, but using it as the lead image isn't really on. What was wrong with the original image and can somebody restore it? --kingboyk 23:50, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

The previous main was Image:GeorgeWithGuitar.jpg, but it got deleted after the uploader failed to provide evince the image was free. --Abu Badali 00:10, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I am just curious as to why there is a picture of George that is obviously mirrored. Just gives, well, a false impression. Great picture though and hey, I'm no wikipedia expert but y'know.. *dust* - sudhra 13:23, 9 September 2006 (AEST)

It's a pretty crap picture isn't it. It's a free pic though, which gives it a lot of extra weight on Wikipedia. Are there any other free pics to choose from? There must be! --kingboyk 10:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

Would anyone argue if I changed the infobox from Guitarist to Template:Infobox musical artist? It has the same information as guitarist plus he has his own solo albums where he does more then play guitar including his first experimental solo album. Andrzejbanas 19:34, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

The guitarist box is currently under expansion to better cover artists like Harrison who's resume is broad. Musician box is perfect for Lennon, McCartney and Ringo. But Harrison deserves the more unique infobox related to his special skills. Anger22 21:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

but the current music infobox has a space for specific instruments, why not use it? Andrzejbanas 07:59, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Infobox redux: instrument list

The current (2007-12-28) infobox lists every instrument George ever held in his hands. (An exaggeration, but you get the point.) I think it should be reduced to those where he had notable skill or where his playing the instrument was notable. So, for example, piano and tamboura would be removed because he was not particularly skilled on those instruments and his playing them was not notable. Sitar would remain; he was not particularly skilled on that instrument compared to Shankar, etc., but Harrison was notable for having played the instrument on a Western pop music album prior to anyone else.

If we applied such rules (notable skill or notable for other reasons), the instrument list would be shorter and IMO, better. John Cardinal (talk) 18:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

You need to refresh the page... the current infobox only lists "Rocky" and the Rosewood Tele. The could be an arguement placed to include the Country Gent or Tennessean models (which ever one it was?) He did for Gretsch what Keith Richards did for the 58-60 Les Paul. 142.167.95.209 (talk) 21:29, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

No, I don't need to refresh the page. I made the comment based on the then-current article. The next change trimmed the list down by a lot, and based on the edit summary, the change was in response to my comment above. Also, the current list includes only instrument names, not nicknames, manufacturer names or models. — John Cardinal (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

This might be a problem if editors of other articles choose to list all instruments that musician has ever played (and they probably will). If that's the case, we're actually selling Harrison short. Couldn't we have the 3 you've narrowed it down to but with an "and others" addendum? --kingboyk (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Kingboyk --Spiby (talk) 19:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Stabbing incident

Uhm, is it just me or is this not very encyclopedir or NPOV (or is this called "weasel words".. not sure about that). Read along with me: (emphasis mine)

"In late 1999 Harrison survived a horrific knife attack by an intruder in his home, which nightmarishly mirrored John Lennon's murder." ... "a psychopath (has he been diagnosed??)," Michael Abram," ... "Harrison was understandably traumatized"...

Agreed to edit this? Jumpingshark 16:33, 12 October 2006 (CEST)

Good points. Be bold and edit as you see fit. If people disagree than they can edit as they see fit. I would comment that "traumatized" is a medical term, and unless it can be shown that this is a diagnosis it should also be removed (and it uses the American spelling - so it would have needed to be changed if it were kept).LessHeard vanU 08:07, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

I just added a fact that I'd known for awhile about George and the Wilburys... Jeff and George remastered the first album just months before his death, there are finally a few sources on Google News reporting this. I don't know how to cite on here, but I did add it to the article. Olivia's latest press release confirms this.

Attention?

Does anyone know why this was marked as needing attention? I mean, it DOES need attention, but I was wondering why someone set that flag in the WikiProject Guitarists banner. --Aguerriero (talk) 17:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

====================--217.110.124.98 09:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

"Harrison was not a virtuoso guitarist, especially in the early days of the Beatles' recording career. His earliest recorded electric guitar solos tended to be clunky and unimaginative, especially when compared to legendary rock 'n' roll guitarists like Scotty Moore, Cliff Gallup or even his idol, Carl Perkins. Several of Harrison's famous Beatles guitar solos were recorded under specific directions from Paul McCartney, who on occasion demanded that Harrison play what he envisioned virtually note-for-note." - Who wrote that? If you listen to the solos of "Till There Was You" and "Don't Bother Me" (a Harrison song) from With the Beatles (1963!), you hear an accomplished, imaginative guitarist already who knows something about solo architecture. It must be doubted that Paul McCartney "wrote" these solos - McCartneys well-known solos ("Taxman", "Good Morning, Good Morning") are far less melodic and structured than anything Harrison ever played.

I think George himself should be the best source

Hi,I started reading and discovered at least two topics in which George himself told things in a different way in the Anthology dvd series.I'm talking about how he first discovered the sitar (In the set of the film Help!,he said)and where did he buy his first one (In a shop in London called "Oriental... i can't remember the rest right now) --Aristarco de Samotracia 12:36, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

The best thing would be to cite both. Wikipedia does not attempt to only publish what is true, but what is verifiable. Also, George's memory was probably like most peoples - fallible. LessHeard vanU 14:09, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

O.K,so if his own memory is "fallible",what makes the opposite stories told in the text,coming from an unquoted source,being so "verifiable",then? --Aristarco de Samotracia 11:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

That is why I said "cite"; if it can be referenced to a good published source then Wikipedia will allow it. It doesn't matter what I, you or George thinks/believes, it is only what we can prove. If George's published recollections are the only available, then just Georges is fine (as long as it is properly cited). LessHeard vanU 20:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

O.K.Thanks.i think that´s fair play.I´ll have to re-view my Anthology dvd set and book in order to get the exact quote.--Aristarco de Samotracia 12:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Rumored 'Final Meeting' with Paul McCartney False

Despite what this wiki says, George actually had made peace with Paul years before his death. Paul actually frequented George's house several times a year for dinner, and to see the family. An easy citation for this statement can be found heard on the introduction of "Something" on "Concert For George." Paul recites one of his many past experiences with George, eating dinner, at his house.

The previous false statement that I removed probably stems from the original Lennon/McCartney arguments that went to Lennon's grave. Harrison was infamous for playing slide guitar on the song "How do you sleep" with Lennon. Years later, during Anthologies the two worked alongside with Ringo on the anthology project. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.58.70.42 (talk) 22:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

See my comments on the section above; by all means cite it. However, if reputable authors/publishers have books which say something else then they too can and should be quoted. LessHeard vanU 20:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: "Harrison was infamous for playing slide guitar on the song "How do you sleep" with Lennon."

Only among simple-minded McCartney idolaters, I should think.

Re: "The previous false statement that I removed probably stems from the original Lennon/McCartney arguments that went to Lennon's grave.":

When Playboy asked Lennon in 1980 whether the Beatles were the best of friends or the worst of enemies, Lennon answered, "Neither," and continued to recount how McCartney often dropped by his place. Lennon and McCartney ceased to perform, record, and write together after the Beatles disbanded, but they never ceased to see each other socially. Harrison was on public record as strongly opposing the "Anthology" project, at least the part of it that entailed the group attempting to reform, but was eventually dissuaded, possibly for financial reasons. That doesn't make him reconciled to McCartney, and, conversely, professional differences wouldn't necessarily preclude his meeting him socially, especially if it were merely a matter of his graciously receiving McCartney when McCartney elected to drop by.TheScotch 08:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

there seems to be a problem

everytime I search for george harrison I get this page and not God. Can anyone fix this? 71.62.10.130 05:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

That's because 'God' properly redirects here. --SigPig |^{SEND - OVER} 05:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

the guitar player

It would be a good thing to write something about George Harrisons guitar work, his equipment and so on. His melodic approach would be important as a guitar player, his songwriting - his solo work in contrast to Lennon -McCartney. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.166.91.11 (talk)

Fair use rationale for Image:BanglaDeshCover.jpg

Image:BanglaDeshCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Added/updated FU rationale. — John Cardinal 03:30, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

"...an Academy Award and Grammy Award-winning..."

The first sentence mentions that he is "an Academy Award and Grammy Award-winning" musician, but nowhere in the article are there any further details given (or at least in the current version as I read it). Evil Monkey - Hello 07:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

A bit of surfing the net shows he shared an Acadamy Award with the other Beatles for Let It Be, with the Beatles he won numerous Grammys. When I find a good reference, I'll try and add to the article - unless someone else is volunteering... Apepper 12:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Hare Krishna?

I don't think he was acctually a member of the faith, but the mantra is mentioned in many of his songs. Should it at least be mentioned that he followed the sperituality of Hare Krishna at some point in his life? I'm more of a writer of Wikiality than Wikipedia, otherwise I'd find a way to fit it in.

thanks,

Harlan C.

His attraction and involvement with the spirituality is mentioned in the article, right in the overview, and in the forth section about his time spent in The Beatles. Or are you proposing the addition of an entire section about his spirituality, which would also mean clean-up of other sections of the page in order to avoid redundancy. And just for clarification... Hare Krishna, also known as the Maha Mantra, is a mantra practiced by followers of Vaishnavism... it is not a spirituality in itself. ArleneElizabeth 19:29, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

1987 article in "Guitar" magazine

Can anyone help me find the article in "Guitar", which was a title piece aimed at promoting Cloud Nine? I seem to have misplaced mine, and I need it as a source for some quotes. Jtnet 10:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Sitting round a table at Friar Park...

I understood that the Anthology shots of the the three Beatles round the table was at Paul's, the shots in the garden at George's. In the Simpson's commentary about when Paul appeared in Lisa the Vegetarian the show's producer said that he met Paul & Linda in the same room and at the same table. Apepper 16:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Best selling album?

The statement that "All Things Must Pass" is the best-selling album by an ex-Beatle is referenced with an obsolete link. I find it difficult to believe, not least because it is an expensive triple. Surely "Imagine" or "Band On The Run" sold more copies? Could someone verify this fact? MegdalePlace 22:30, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

All things must pass sold 6x platinum according to RIAA at http://www.riaa.com/goldandplatinumdata.php?resultpage=3&table=tblTop100&action= I couldn't find any Lennon or McCartney records with a higher grade --Spiby (talk) 10:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

One thing to keep in mind is that double albums get 2x credit in RIAA calculations, and so on. Thus "All Things Must Pass" sold about 2 million copies, for a 6 million total. "Band on the Run," for example, sold more units but was a single disc.208.120.226.72 (talk) 11:06, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.163.16.30 (talk) 11:15, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

It sure is. But next time, YOU Google it!208.120.226.72 (talk) 15:43, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

POV city

Re:"Along with the John Lennon/Plastic Ono Band album and Paul McCartney's Ram, All Things Must Pass is generally deemed one of the three finest solo efforts by the ex-Beatles.":

By whom? (In my opinion, All Things Must Pass may well be the third best ex-Beatles record, after Plastic Ono and Imagine. Ram and Flowers in the Dirt are McCartney's best--still in my opinion--, and I don't see that Ram is any better than Flowers.)TheScotch 12:02, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Needs improvement

This article needs great improvement. So many unreferenced portions and a lot of heresay. Sounds like a lot of stuff "someone heard" and is reporting about George Harrison. Also the tone in many places sounds opinionated because of this fact. This article needs to be completley referenced and only verified facts listed. (Posted by 70.226.23.243)

Who is this masked man that feels this is so? Yes, he/she is right, but let us consider this one point: let him/her actually do something to improve this article before complaining. --andreasegde 18:05, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

George's Full Ancestry

I know George had Irish root that were "deep" *eyes roll*, but as his paternal surname, grandparents' names indicate he was mostly of English ancestry. Why hasn't this English lineage been documented?

HEHE!

This guy ish the coolieoist of them all!

like snow white peeps! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.117.14.108 (talk) 00:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:George Harrison/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

WPBeatles: There is no official "References" section, and few, if any, in-line references, but the article is very well-rounded. It covers George's entire life: early life, life with the Beatles, and life by decades after that. It has a few pictures, mostly of him, but a few more wouldn't hurt. (Maybe some on the left side of the page?)--Gordon (2 April 2006) Needs inline citations (probably shouldn't be an A without them, as it wouldn't get GA). --kingboyk 11:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC) I've started to fix the referencing issue (it had gotten better since 2006 anyway) and I'm trying to get this to GA to get a GT. Dendodge TalkContribs 09:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 09:17, 16 November 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 20:27, 3 May 2016 (UTC)