Talk:Dig It (Beatles song)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dig It (Beatles song) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

The Beatles Low‑importance

This Beatles-related article is within the scope of WikiProject The Beatles, which focuses on improving coverage of English rock band The Beatles and related topics on Wikipedia. Users who are willing to participate in the project should visit the project page, where they can join and see a list of open tasks.The BeatlesWikipedia:WikiProject The BeatlesTemplate:WikiProject The BeatlesThe Beatles articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

For WikiProject The Beatles

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles.
Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article
Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs
Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood.
Verify : Beatle wives
Other : Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here.

This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Do we really need stubby individual articles for every Beatles song, regardless of their notability (or indeed quality)? --kingboyk 02:52, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think that would make much sense. I'm going to propose that this article be deleted. --Cymsdale 02:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One After 909 is arguably worse. There's a debate going on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines/Songs, by the way. --kingboyk 02:58, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have promised myself eventually to get around to writing good articles on every Beatles song within Wikipedia. I do promise that this article is removed from its stubby nature eventually, but I'm going to write them all out of stubdom eventually. Bobo . 19:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Hark" vs. "All"[edit]

I originally thought Lennon said, "All the angel's come," but after reading Lewisohn ("Complete Sessions pg. 199) which quotes it as "Hark the Angels Come," I thought I had misheard. Listening with headphones now, I think he says "All the Angels Come." Someone with younger ears needs to listen to it very carefully. I am not going to change it either way because I don't trust my ears. While Lewisohn had access to high-quality session tapes, he may not have listened carefully. I think his quote omits a whole word. His quote: "That was 'Can You Dig It' by Georgie Wood, now we'd like to 'Hark the Angels Come'." I think it actually is "... now we'd like to do 'Hark the Angels Come'." If he missed a whole word, it's possible he wasn't paying as close attention as usual.

In any case, let's discuss this here and come to consensus rather than changing it back and forth. One easy solution is to quote both. John Cardinal 17:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Hark" is clearly the recognized version, as a Google search will show.[1][2][3] As for what it sounds like: to my "young ears", it sounds most like "hour [of] the angels come"; there's definitely an R in it, but I can't hear the K. However, since it's widely recognized as "Hark" (and since that's what it was, according to an anonymous comment in [4]), that's what Wikipedia should record. WP:OR and all that. --Quuxplusone 08:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're not serious about SongFacts, are you? That's worthless as a source. One comment there says it was Paul who said it, another says Ringo, Ugh. Wikipedia should reflect reliable evidence, which discounts almost all of the Google results. Still, your evidence argument applies, and all the books I have that mention it (Sessions, by Lewisohn, p. 278 and Revolution in the Head by MacDonald, p. 270) have it as "Hark", so unless someone finds reliable evidence for "All", I agree the article should say "Hark". Interestly, MacDonald has it as "to do", discussed above. Oh, and I don't think it's that important. :) John Cardinal 13:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't call SongFacts a "reliable source", no, but the comment I was referring to did flatly claim that there exists a song called "Hark, the Angels Come", and that the Beatles performed it during that jam session. I have no idea whether that's true — I kind of doubt it — but it does link the "Hark" version to a verifiable or falsifiable historical event, which is at least better than a bunch of people arguing over what the word sounds like. :) --Quuxplusone 03:23, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dig It (Beatles song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110708101056/http://www.brunchradio.com/Features/Articles/flyonthewall.html to http://www.brunchradio.com/Features/Articles/flyonthewall.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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:34, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]