Talk:George Harrison

Find sources: "George Harrison" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images

Protecting George Harrison

I think this article should be protected,Harrison was a member of The Beatles, and [the article]is at risk for vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.101.25.149 (talk) 18:04, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

As Wikipedia is an open editing environment, protection is only given to articles once they have sustained a high level of vandal activity - and then only for as long as necessary. Should vandalism increase then consideration will be given to protecting it for a short period. LessHeard vanU (talk) 18:34, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Birthday

It has often been believed that George Harrison's birthday is on February 25th but he revealed in the 1990s that it was on February 24th. Mark Lewisohn and Barry Miles have also stated this in their book. He was born February 24th/1943 at 11:42 pm. Please allow me to change it and don't change it back because he was born on February 24th. His birthday on his birth certificate is inaccurate he was born at 11:42 pm so they wrote it was the day after it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.70.81.124 (talk) 02:04, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Repeated insertion of dubious external link

I (and four other editors) have been removing the repeated insertion of this link, and I have brought up the issue on the inserting editor's talk page. The link is to a broad collection of Beatles content, and the pages hosting the content claim that the content is CC licensed but since there are full-length movies hosted there, I tend to believe otherwise. I have asserted that the link violates several external link policies, including WP:ELNEVER #1 and WP:ELNO #13. The inserting editor responds that there are a "million reasons" to include the link. Thoughts? Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

After looking at the site IMO it adds little to the article and violates several EL policies as mentioned by OSS. It is also dodgy that an editor would thoroughly understand [1] wiki copyright and other assorted policies after four days of editing. It is possible that there is a COI as well but I didn't dig deep enough to know one way or the other. I support the removal of this EL. MarnetteD | Talk 00:16, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

• I contacted by e-mail with the owners of the resource and we discussed this topic. They agree to get rid of the full-length films (already it so), to successfully carry out its mission. I think this is the best compromise. We are all here to present information for the people, in compliance with the law. On their site basically everything legally now, including respect of DMCA policy. If not in this article, in the article The Beatles the external link is very appropriate. They registered in the Creative Commons as an educational organization currently - this link must be used in the article the Beatles, I think so.

See: ART OF THE BEATLES IN THE GLOBAL LIBRARY The cultural and educational project for free usage under a Creative Commons license. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron Halls (talk • contribs) 12:26, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of the legality of the content of the web site, this external link violotes WP:ELNO #4 (Links mainly intended to promote a website, including online petitions. See external link spamming) and #11 (Links to blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority.) Piriczki (talk) 13:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Notable Instruments

Please let me add the Gretsch Duo Jet and Rickenbacker 12-string to this list. George's duo jet was his earliest high-quality guitar, and continued to be one of his favorite instruments throughout his career. Gretsch recently commemmorated the contribution he made to popularizing this model by manufacturing a signature model. As for the 12-string Rickenbacker, George was the reason the Byrds began to use the instrument (he introduced the 12-string to them personally), and he received one of the first 12-string guitars Rickenbacker made. The sound it produced was crucial to the strength of the Beatles's rhythm guitar parts. These instruments have both significant places in Harrison's career and in the history of guitars and rock music in general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.227.22.85 (talk) 19:14, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

it is already mentioned in the "Guitar work" section below.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_Hey^{it's me}_{I am dynamite} 20:35, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Rolling Stone Greatest Guitarists

OK, before an edit war breaks out, both Domzmess and GoingBatty are correct.

This link: [2] lists him at #21, while this link [3] lists him at #11. Perhaps both should be mentioned in the article. 78.26 (talk) 04:03, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for providing this clarity and both of these links. It appears that the first link is David Fricke's picks, while the second link appears to be the official compiled list. Therefore, I propose we change this article to say he's #11 and change the reference to the second link. I also propose we make similar changes to Top 100 Greatest Guitar Players of all Time#Rolling_Stone. GoingBatty (talk) 04:12, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Since the reference in the article listed him at #21, and the article text was changed to mention #11 in the lede but still said #21 later on, I decided to clean this up right away. Therefore, I edited the article to use the second link above as the reference and made the second mention of the ranking also be #11. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Excellent work, Bravo! 78.26 (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Couldn't have done it without you providing the proper reference. Now to see how many other articles need similar fixes... GoingBatty (talk) 00:03, 2 December 2011 (UTC)