# Talk:Old Brown Shoe

Image:BalldofJohnandYoko singlecover.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 23:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Added/updated FU rationale. — John Cardinal 03:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Balladofjohnandyokocover.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 this Wikipedia article 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 ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Although Harrison claimed to have performed the bass part in his CREEM interview, Ian MacDonald says in Revolution In The Head  (p. 347) that Paul McCartney plays bass on the track. As most articles on specific Beatles songs rely on MacDonald's text for personnel, I believe it should be left as such. Here is the previous version of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Old_Brown_Shoe&oldid=479399925 Derekgbolton (talk) 21:31, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

If Harrison says he played the bass, then he played it; he was there, MacDonald wasn't. Radiopathy •talk•   23:45, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Lennon claimed in his Playboy interview that he wrote Two Of Us, but it's still accepted that McCartney wrote it and the page on the song reflects that. What I've read from Ian MacDonald and Mark Lewisohn, they both list McCartney as having played bass. With a lot of the bitterness that arose after their break-up, I tend to trust the leading Beatles historians over some of the claims they made about/toward each other. Harrison said that twenty years after the song was recorded. He may have been mistaken about a previous demo, or maybe he did play it. In the interest of keeping this article accurate, I feel it is better to cite texts than verbal claims. Additionally, if you read about the Beatles recording session on April 16th, 1969 it says that McCartney and Harrison added bass and electric guitar overdubs on track six doubling up the same riffs. It would be logical to assume that McCartney played bass and Harrison played guitar, though it isn't stated who plays which. If Harrison did play bass, then McCartney would probably be credited with playing guitar, but I've only seen one instance where he is, which was edited based on Harrison's claim to having played the bass part. Derekgbolton (talk) 11:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree. If you delete Everett it seems this is really an exercise in new research. If you read the interview carefully, Harrison is very cagey about saying he played bass. He says he played. This is consistent with him playing guitar in synchrony with the bass as Everett notes. Should include this: "Everett states that it was McCartney's jazz bass doubled in the bridge with Harrison's telecaster playing chromatically moving arpeggiations in a similar manner to the bridge guitars in And Your Bird Can Sing. Walter Everett. The Beatles as Musicians: Revolver Through the Anthology. Oxford University Press. NY. 1999. p 243130.56.71.197 (talk) 00:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
I have seen Old Brown Shoe#Personnel continuously being edited-sometimes it says George Harrison played bass and sometimes it says Paul McCartney played bass. But like User:Radiopathy said three years ago-if George Harrison says he played bass then he did. Even so, I read somewhere about this song that "all guitars including the bass were played by George Harrison" and if I knew the name of that sight I would use it as a reference. I also read (it may have been that same site) that "even though John Lennon played guitar in the song, it was removed from the final recording and replaced by the organ, also played by George Harrison." I do believe that George Harrison played bass in the song.--Kevjgav (talk) 21:05, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Update. I agree with Radiopathy's and Kevjgav's points on this and have changed (I'd say "corrected") the text as I've been expanding the article.
In reply to those who think McCartney should be credited, I say first of all that MacDonald's credits have been found to be incorrect in several Wikipedia song and album articles. I'd normally go with Lewisohn, who as a rule doesn't always list specific contributors (it's later writers such as MacDonald who go one step further and join the dots, identifying which Beatle played what but often demonstrating either a bias [eg if in doubt, it must be McCartney ...], or coming up with a scenario that more recent research has proven to be impossible). But even Lewisohn is wrong, very occasionally. His crediting McCartney for the bass on "Old Brown Shoe" is one example, I believe, and the piano credit for "Something" is the only other occasion that I've come across.
Against Lewisohn, MacDonald and Everett's attribution of the bass, from books published in 1988, 1997 and 1999, respectively, we have Jean-Michel Guesdon & Philippe Margotin (2013) and Kenneth Womack (2014) who all credit Harrison. The difference with these last two works is that the authors take into account Harrison's comments about the song in his 1987 Creem interview. MacDonald – who appears to have taken anything Barry Miles passed on to him as gospel when updating Revolution in the Head in 1997 (in his preface to the revised edition, MacDonald acknowledges he's been influenced by Miles, who's authorised biography on McCartney was about to be published) – seems to be unaware of Harrison's statement. Any claim from McCartney, he usually takes as fact.
Another factor, I believe, is that it's a mistake to tar Harrison with the same brush as McCartney and Lennon. He most positively did not go about trying to grab credits or emphasise his contributions to the Beatles' work in the manner that Lennon did, usually through exaggeration, in his interviews from 1970 onwards, or in the way that McCartney did in what's recognised by most discerning biographers as a relentless campaign for recognition in the wake of Lennon's death – starting in about 1986 and most definitely including Miles' 1997 book Many Years from Now. You've only got to read Harrison's 1980 autobiography I, Me, Mine or his comments in the Beatles Anthology book to appreciate the difference between his approach and that of his two former bandmates.
Finally, it's not as if McCartney has ever said that he played bass on "Old Brown Shoe", whereas Harrison has claimed the part. The discrepancy appears to be in the paperwork – the session notes that Lewisohn had access to in the 1980s.
On a purely subjective level, I don't think the part sounds anything like McCartney's bass playing, anyway. The playing in the verses, in particular, is so understated, whereas McCartney's tendency (on any instrument) is to be busy and to dominate the performance. I appreciate it amounts to OR on my part, but the bass on this song is more in keeping with any number of Harrison bass parts – "She Said She Said", "Faster", "Wake Up My Love" and some of the tracks on Brainwashed come to mind, all parts that are very "tidy" and understated, with little in the way of embellishment. Put it this way, had Everett, MacDonald et al read the Creem interview and then actively listened to the bass on "Old Brown Shoe", I can't help thinking they'd have come up with a different credit. JG66 (talk) 04:22, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
I'd add to JG66's analysis that it's *extremely* unlikely that mccartney would've played a bass part that exactly follows the guitar part, which (in the harrison quote & just plain listening to the recording) is obviously what's going on. mccartney would either have written a complementary part or he would've plodded disinterestedly. while we're doing the OR thing here, the bass part sounds to me like it was done with a pick on a fender VI, & the instrument they had was a righty. macca was occupied with the piano part too.
also- my earlier edition of RITH (the macdonald 'bible' on beatles sessions) is wrong on the personnel for "she said" on 'revolver', crediting mccartney with bass on that, when he'd flounced after more "he hasn't done acid yet" teasing, leaving harrison to do it. there's a hint in most accounts of this of harrison exacting some sort of payback for the 'taxman' solo; I think it was more a case of needs-must.
just for a laugh, though, here's GH teaching them the song, apparently at the piano with PM trying to follow on the bass. the upside-down shuffle rhythm is already in place.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrvXGdDNYd4
duncanrmi (talk) 08:17, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

duncanrmi: I'm surprised to hear/read you say that "most accounts" suggest McCartney's "She Said She Said" walkout and Harrison's commandeering of the bass for that track was some sort of payback for the "Taxman" solo. I've read no end of material about the Revolver sessions, and maybe I've come across a writer speculating on this (it rings a bell, vaguely), but "most accounts" ... really? MacDonald altered the "She Said" credits for his final revised edition, btw. JG66 (talk) 13:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
Mark Lewisohn did state that at one stage, he found that the basic track to "She Said She Said" had two guitars, bass and drums, so perhaps Paul did play bass on the basic track of that song, but he walked out when they were recording the vocals.
Dave Rybaczewski's page on "Old Brown Shoe" reveals that it was in fact Paul playing the bass on the song, just as George Martin's handwritten notes reveal, and John's rhythm guitar contribution was actually not fully erased, according to a comment on Beatles Bible. I seriously doubt that George would've commandeered the bass duties on "She Said She Said" as "payback" for the "Taxman" guitar solo and neither his nor Paul's recollections support what Geoff Emerick wrote (he himself stated in 1979 that he had no memories of the "Taxman" session).
220.245.23.160 (talk) 01:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

I have also seen a lot of disputes about the Organ-some sites say it was George Harrison and others say that Billy Preston played organ. Honestly, I don't know which site to believe, so I am not going to edit the "band lineup" section and will just leave that section "as-is" unless I find out for certain that it was Billy Preston. I know Billy Preston played Hammond organ on "Let It Be" and Fender Rhodes Electric piano on "Get Back" "Don't Let Me Down" and the "Let It Be...Naked" version of  "The Long And Winding Road" but those are different songs altogether.--Kevjgav (talk) 18:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
According to George Martin's production notes, it appears that both Lennon and Harrison overdubbed the organ together, so should that be used as the source, since they were written at the time of the recording?
60.240.8.249 (talk) 20:49, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

The sites that say Billy Preston played organ are the same sites that say Paul McCartney played bass. Those sites have the following band lineup: George Harrison (lead vocals, guitar) John Lennon (backing vocals) Paul McCartney (piano, bass, backing vocals) Ringo Starr (drums) Billy Preston (organ) but "The Beatles Bible" has the same band lineup as this article: George Harrison (lead vocals, guitar, bass, organ) John Lennon (backing vocals) Paul McCartney (piano, backing vocals) Ringo Starr (drums) and it appears that George Harrison played organ and Billy Preston didn't record on this song.--Kevjgav (talk) 18:54, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
That seems.........unlikely. If George Harrison says that he played bass on this song then he did. I suspect that the sight that says that Paul McCartney played bass made an error. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 08:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
If you look at the "bass dispute" thread, you will see that it was Ian MacDonald who said that McCartney played bass, but George Harrison said he played bass, and Harrison was there and MacDonald wasn't. Though I believe that the organ part on this song may have actually been Billy Preston as this song was recorded around that time. If Billy Preston did play organ on this, can anyone verify that?--Kevjgav (talk) 10:46, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
I doubt that Billy Preston played organ in the song because the only songs he participated in were the ones recorded in January 1969 for Let It Be. Old Brown Shoe wasn't recorded until April. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 09:26, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I just read http://www.thebeatlesbible.com/songs/old-brown-shoe/ and it says that it was George Harrison who played organ in the song, not Billy Preston. This information is consistent with old Brown Shoe#Personnel. I think that The Beatles Bible is a pretty reliable source of information about who played what in a Beatles song.--Kevjgav (talk) 13:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I haven't really seen The Beatles bible before, but I trust that it is a reliable site with accurate information. -- C.Syde (talk | contribs) 01:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't really trust everything that Ian MacDonald says about the band lineup on Beatles songs because he erroneously showed the following band lineup for this song; George Harrison (lead vocals, guitar) Paul McCartney (bass, piano, backing vocals) John Lennon (backing vocals) Ringo Starr (drums) and Billy Preston (organ) but The Beatles Bible (and all other sites) are consistent with this article: George Harrison (lead vocals, guitar, bass, organ) Paul McCartney (piano, backing vocals) John Lennon (backing vocals) and Ringo Starr (drums) and I think The Beatles Bible is right and that Ian MacDonald somehow made an error.--Kevjgav (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Also, Ian MacDonald is mostly the source for The Beatles Bible, but I know that Paul McCartney didn't play bass because George Harrison said that he played bass. I also know that Billy Preston didn't play organ because he only participated in the "Let It Be" sessions in January 1969 like you said, and this song was recorded after the "Let It Be" sessions. I don't know why MacDonald listed McCartney on bass and Billy Preston on organ because all other sites say that both these instruments were played by Harrison.--Kevjgav (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Honestly, Ian MacDonald's book should just be disqualified altogether, because it clearly is not a reliable source, and he would routinely take claims from Paul as fact. None of their memories were 100% infallible or perfect and George may have been referring to the demo when he stated that he played the bassline, not necessarily the final mix.
220.245.23.160 (talk) 01:39, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Please stop changing the band lineup to "Paul McCartney on bass." If George Harrison says he played bass in the song then he did.

George Harrison - Lead vocals, guitars, organ, bass guitar
Paul McCartney - tack piano, backing vocal
John Lennon - backing vocal
Ringo Starr - drums
That's right, so leave it.--Kevjgav (talk) 22:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Old Brown Shoe. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.creemmagazine.com/_site/BeatGoesOn/GeorgeHarrison/Interview001.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:39, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

File:George Harrison's guitar solo from "Old Brown Shoe", April 1969.ogg 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 this Wikipedia article 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 non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure 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 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
-- Marchjuly (talk) 04:17, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Old Brown Shoe/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Moisejp (talk · contribs) 15:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll review this article. Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 15:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
Comments:

The main text states explicitly "The line-up on the basic track was Harrison on lead guitar, Lennon on rhythm guitar, McCartney on tack piano, and Starr on drums." But later, in the Personnel section, we learn that there's dispute about who played drums. Maybe acknowledgement of this needs to be given earlier. A minor suggestion, but I also wonder whether it'd be an idea to change "(check out Ringo's raucous drumming)" to "(check out [the] raucous drumming)"—which would still be an accurate quotation, but would possibly lessen confusion for the reader. Moisejp (talk) 18:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
You know, it absolutely floored me when another editor added the Abbey Road 50th anniversary credits late last year. So many writers have studied the Beatles' recordings and extracurricular activities, to an obsessional level, yet suddenly in 2019 we learn that Ringo Starr was away filming Magic Christian on 16 April.
Aside from the wealth of literature stating that he did attend the session for "Old Brown Shoe" (eg, Lewisohn, who wrote his book from the EMI session notes and tape documentation), there's the breakdown of contributions to "Something", which the Beatles recorded straight afterwards. In The Beatles Anthology, Starr talks about being absent from recording "The Ballad of John and Yoko" two days before, but says nothing about missing any other session. I don't have the 2019 Abbey Road deluxe edition (or whatever the box set's called) so I haven't been able to read the liner notes myself, but I really wonder about their accuracy. Credits and recording information given in a Byrds box set came to mind – in that they're seen as incorrect. In my ears, I hear Starr on OBS (which means nothing, I realise), and it seems others do also. Given the amount of rehearsal that the Beatles gave the track in January and the comment about Starr finding that pattern on the off-beat, it makes it doubly hard to treat the 2019 credits as authoritative. Unlike Ballad of J & Y, they rehearsed this song as a group – I can't see them thinking they'd do it without him, or even thinking it could be done without him.
The view I took is that the new credits refer only to take 2 of OBS. Perhaps Starr arrived late, contributed to take 4, and then to "Something" later in the session – it does allow for that scenario. Does that sound plausible in terms of what we could live with here? My feeling is these 2019 credits are so marginal relative to the range of reliable sources that, if the new credits belong at all, they belong there under Personnel rather than influencing or (especially) dictating the description that many writers have provided over decades. And all these writers are well aware of Starr's commitments to The Magic Christian, incidentally, because it was always there as the end point of the Get Back/Let It Be sessions. JG66 (talk) 16:36, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
I looked at the article's history and saw your back and forth with an anonymous user at the end og last year. I found these images on Discogs but they are super small. If you've got amazing eyes, maybe you can find something useful in here: (click More Images and then navigate to the couple of images with the liner notes) [[1]].
Another idea: You could keep the sentence in the main text describing the line-up on the song with Ringo included. Then you could have a footnote there saying "Most historians who have written about the 'Old Brown Shoe' sessions agree that Ringo played drums on the song.[1][2][3][4] However, in the Abbey Road Anniversary Edition (2019) liner notes, the authors claim that Ringo may have been away filming The Magic Christian for at least some of the takes of the song; these liner notes credit Paul McCartney as playing drums on the alternate take 2 of the song, released on the Abbey Road Anniversary Edition." Maybe that would be enough to give acknowledgment to this marginal source, while also implying that Ringo's involvement could conceivably vary by take. Maybe then you could even get rid of the mention of this in the Personnel section. Moisejp (talk) 15:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Or maybe, on second thought, it'd be easier to keep the Personnel section as it is now, with the alternate theory included. That might lessen the chance of the anonymous user coming back and disrupting the stability of the article. But you could still add my idea above of the footonote, of course. Moisejp (talk) 15:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Funny, I was just about to say that: with these Beatles song credits, it's the Personnel sections that are a beacon for what one might call hit-and-run edits – made with no appreciation of what is stated in the prose. I think that option's the most sensible one; will add the note as you suggest under Recording.
I couldn't make out anything in the Discogs images, unfortunately, and there's nothing up to date at AlbumLinerNotes.cm either. I'd rather splash out on the White Album 50th box set, but I'm just about crazy enough to consider tracking down the Abbey Road 2019 release also ... The situation intrigues me, and it would be nice to know for sure. If it was Mark Lewisohn writing the liner notes, that would be convincing, and I think most people would consider new credits per Lewisohn to be definitive. Kevin Howlett, I'm not so sure about (he's a former BBC radio presenter, I gather). The further issue, though, is that Howlett's credits list the overdubs (eg, organ) and they also differ in contributions such as piano – so it's not just the Starr/McCartney drums dilemma. Again, I'd really like to read the liner notes, not just that particular page but the whole thing, to get a feel of how authoritative they are from start to finish. Thing is, the Beatles didn't carry out any overdubs on take 2. So, trying to work with part of Howlett's contention, I wonder whether Ringo came to the session late (missing the first couple of takes; it's inconceivable that McCartney played drums on "Something"), but the liner note writer seems to have taken it upon himself to provide a full list of contributions based on that alleged absence.
Thanks for your engagement with this issue. It's really an example of how having dozens of authors (no exaggeration) dedicated to documenting a subject in great detail doesn't necessarily bring us any closer to the truth! JG66 (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I've added the note under Recording to introduce the issue early on. Had more there originally, to establish Lewisohn's credentials (and his book's full of recollections from EMI engineers, copies of session documentation, notes from archive tape boxes, etc.), but thought better of it. JG66 (talk) 03:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
"George Harrison began writing "Old Brown Shoe" in late 1968 on a piano, rather than guitar." Maybe something like "guitar, his main instrument" for clarity. I'm not sure the most elegant way to say it. The point is made clearer in the block quote, but if you think of the block quote being independent of the main text, it's probably better to clarify this in the main text as well. Moisejp (talk) 16:31, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Good point, thanks. Perhaps I'd assumed the lead's mention of "the group's lead guitarist" might carry through. Will add clarification. JG66 (talk) 17:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 Done JG66 (talk) 18:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
"The 16 April session was the first at EMI Studios for the full group since October the previous year, when they completed recording for their self-titled double album (also known as the "White Album"), and was given over entirely to songs written by Harrison." When I read this I was curious what other Harrison songs were attempted on this day. Would it be worthwhile to include? Moisejp (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
Sure. The other song was "Something" – I'll add mention of that. JG66 (talk) 17:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 Done. Okay where it is, do you think, or perhaps deal with the Harrison-exclusive point at first mention? Compromised in terms of finding the right place early on, because the return to EMI/Abbey Road seems quite significant ... or perhaps I'm just allowing it to be an issue. JG66 (talk) 18:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Is the image in the infobox the one talked about in the main text that has a dark brown shoe in a bush? I can't make out any shoe in it, but I presume that's likely because the picture is small and dark. Moisejp (talk) 15:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
It is indeed, and you're right on the second point too. The shoe's pretty clear in the image reproduced in Spizer's book, but not in the low-res version we've got in the infobox. JG66 (talk) 17:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Should refs 31 and 32 be combined? Moisejp (talk) 15:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
I think not because ref 32 is referring to two distinct points on pages 290 and 291 of the S&S book. Ref 31 covers text that falls over the turn of those same page numbers. I'll check again to make sure (I'm writing this now assuming that was the reason for the difference, anyway). JG66 (talk) 17:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Besides the infobox image, are there any images it'd be worthwhile to add? Moisejp (talk) 14:25, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Ah, I wish. Speaking as a Fender Telecaster player/devotee, I guess we could find a guitar image. Harrison's model was so particular, though, and I can't help thinking it might come across as inadequate, somewhat gratuitous. (You know: here's a Fender Tele, kinda but not like the guitar Harrison used on the recording ...) I'll give it a go if you want, but having had a [home recording image removed at McCartney (album) (which I though was perfect in the context of that article!), I guess I'm slightly wary. JG66 (talk) 17:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
A guitar image could be fine, even if it's not the exact model. Or my idea, even if they are a bit generalized and not 100% related to the particular recording/release of OBS could be one or two images like this: [[2]], [[3]], [[4]]. Or a Bob Dylan photo (an influence on the song), or an EMI/Abbey Road Studios photo? Possibly a photo of someone mentioned in the Live version and posthumous tributes section. Moisejp (talk) 14:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Added the 1968 Wonderwall image, Tele image, and 2002 shot of Gary Brooker. To my way of thinking, the Telecaster is the only one that actually adds something, because it is such a guitar song; but as with most guitar pics, it's hard to place within the text because of the dimensions. Further to what I was saying before, I'm concerned that the additions are somewhat gratuitous (MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE: "Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative.") I'm all for including them where they work, and I think about the positioning of quote boxes and, as in this article, song samples with an idea of the visual aspect. Just not sure how effective these are. The Wonderwall image might raise questions for the reader, for instance (he's struggling to get his songs accepted but he released a solo album in late 1968), and the artists are shown in the infobox image anyway. JG66 (talk) 17:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Just binned the Wonderwall pic after all. I appreciate you were offering a range of suggestions (and thank you for that) rather than proscribing that each one should be included. JG66 (talk) 17:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi JG66, those are all my comments. I've also spot-checked several online refs, and they all seem good. Moisejp (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Moisejp, fabulous – merci bien. Replies on their way. JG66 (talk) 15:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi JG66. Everything looks good and I plan to promote this tomorrow. It's gotten a little late here tonight and so I hope you don't mind if I wait till then. By the way, how would you feel about combining footnotes 4 and 5, which both talk about Starr being away to film The Magic Christian (and just above this in the Personnel section there is another mention of this)? If you combined footnotes 4 and 5, you could segue Starr's being away for BOJ&Y on 14 April with the Abbey Road 50's claim he was still away two days later. Moisejp (talk) 05:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
Very well written, and follows MOS.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
The sources are reliable, and spot-checked a few sources for accuracy.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Good breadth of coverage.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 
Neutral, no biases.
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 
Stable, no edit wars.
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
Two Wikimedia commons images—appropriately licensed; one non-free image—appropriate FUR.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

This photo is indeed Brooker, but is not from the Concert for George. In that concert Brooker wore all black and no jacket, unlike this pic Ralphie72 (talk) 00:21, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

The mystery of the most mysterious Beatles instrument line-up gets added onto by this. https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/discussion-the-beatles-old-brown-shoe-paul-or-ringo-on-drums.889603/page-126#post-33456482
Obviously as it's just a forum entry at this point, we can't cite it (hopefully Kenneth Womack will publish it in a book we can cite). But apparently Mal Evans wrote down this line-up:
George Harrison - piano and vocals
John Lennon - guitar
Paul McCartney - bass
Ringo Starr - drums
This makes some sort of sense, since George wrote the song on piano and it's the driving instrument. On the other hand, there is no bass on Take 2, which means it was overdubbed later - begging the question why Paul sat out the basic track and also why George would later claim it's him on bass. But at least it's another source for Ringo on drums. Jules TH 16 (talk) 10:15, 21 February 2024 (UTC)