This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.Alternative musicWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative musicTemplate:WikiProject Alternative musicAlternative music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Punk music, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Punk musicWikipedia:WikiProject Punk musicTemplate:WikiProject Punk musicPunk music articles
I don't want this to be a long and padded out article; it is what it is, and in the context of the nr of copies it sold, should be short and (bitter)sweet. For eg the background is largely fine as is...Hanley went on leave, Brix took over, she basically plays bass lines on guitar but they are friends now and he speaks warmly of her in his autobio. The end. Similarly, the album should be seen in the continuum of their constant and demanding recording/touring workload, and not as an event. So there is no "aftermath", or even "legacy" -ie the album is a snapshot of the song they happened to be writing at at the time, although given it was her first shining moment, its more coherent than most of their others (first album syndrome)
I tend to agree about trying to keep excess fat trimmed. Reception-wise, tons of consensus that "it was relatively accessible, but still weird", and hard to say much more. I also agree "Legacy" is probably the wrong word—too grandiose and Sgt. Pepper's-y for an album like TNSG—but "Influence" might be better? There are many musicians who have cited TNSG as a special favorite. But yeah, in the slipstream of the band's history it was just another timecard dutifully punched for MES & Co.
Workshare....I am already spending quite a bit of my allowance from wifey on subs to jstor and achedimia.com, so can't splash out on rocksbackpages etc, but have a bot of books, so suggest that - broadly, while building it up- I focus on background and music/lyrics, and you look after assessment. Alternatively, you could copy paste the better articles into a sandbox. I would be especially interested in Pouncey, Edwin. Sounds, 28 September 1985 and Haslam, Dave. City Life, 18 July 1986
I agree this is a good general split. I do have a paperback copy of Brix's book on-hand, so I can cite to that by page number (looks like you may be citing to an ebook edition). I have free access to Rock's Backpages via the Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library (btw you should seriously consider applying for the Wikipedia Library, you should be eligible [over-qualified, even] and the base membership gets you access to JSTOR and way more for free, some additional databases like Rock's Backpages require further applications but it's an amazing program).Re: Dave Haslam in City Life, there's a scan at TheFall.org; I've cited it in the article.Unfortunately, the Sounds review is absent from Rock's Backpages, and there isn't really much else pertinent to TNSG that I could find there. Looks like the Sounds citation was added fairly recently by Holiday56—Holiday, do you have the Sounds review text for This Nation's Saving Grace? Would be super helpful here :)
I'm finding the lead increably difficult to write, can you take a look please. It might be worth mentioning that it was a (relatively) breakthrough in the US, and they toured to larger crowds after
Happy to do so, though I usually prefer to write the lede last, once the article body is more settled. Related: seems like quite probably a good idea to add a section on the tour/promotion.
We have a mixture of citation styles - ie articles cited using templates (blz) or hard coding (me), suggest we move to snf, as used on Spiderland. Thats a big job, so lets agree here first
I agree—I've found that style to be more organized/easier to manage tbh. Cuts down on I'm happy to make the switch too, as I know you find the template coding tedious (and don't fault you one iota for that), while I find that sort of chore enjoyable in an oddly Zen way.
I only have "The Rise, The Fall, and The Rise" on kindle so no page numbers. I gather you have a physical copy, so can you add page numbers pls.
Aye aye! I've been meaning to get around to this.
Thats it, all seems to be going well so far, nobody messing up the paintwork. Ceoil (talk) 11:12, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Smooth sailing so far! One last note, relating to TheFall.org: I came across an MES encyclopedic entry, published just two months ago, in the Oxford National Dictionary of Biography (another database I've got access to via the Wikipedia Library, btw). It's a nice-enough bio, but what I found most immediately interesting is that its bibliography cites TheFall.org. My gut feeling is: sure, it's a "fan site" at first blush and theoretically anathema to Wikipedia—but if it's good enough for the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, surely it's good enough for Wikipedia? I mean the parts of the site like its discography, gigography, news updates etc. Further endorsements of its institutional nature and reliability come courtesy of Record Collector magazine and the academic anthology Mark E. Smith and the Fall: Art, Music and Politics (2010). I think it'd be fine to cite to it attributing Stefan Cooke and Conway Paton as the editors. I'm not champing at the bit to cite to any particular page right away, but figured I'd run this by you as the de facto founder and presiding officer of the surreptitiously organized The Fall WikiProject—could be useful elsewhere too. —blz 2049➠ ❏ 08:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
there is also this which he has been publishing piecemeal on his website and will soon be a book. It’s by far the best analysis have read so far and will start adding from soon. Ceoil (talk) 10:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Major break in the case: a Fall fan posted Chris Roberts's Sounds review on Twitter. I've also gone ahead and transcribed it—check the hidden code between the two dividing lines below. —blz 2049➠ ❏ 23:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
MES praised the TheFall.org a few times in 2000s interviews, chucking at their guess as the lyrics, unusually a bit flattered at the hardcore-ness (see also interview with Stewart Lee), and I suspect leading expert Steve Pringle was a driving force there. If you bear with the threads, those guys go deep, require sources, and I reckon have a fairly heavy moderation policy, ie back up what you say or we will tear you apart. But its not good enough for us @ FAC alas as they are not proffessional editors. I use it for direction, believe it about 95%, and its excellent for pointing towards the orig sources. To reiterate again, the FALL in Fives is way beyond the best analysis have read, and now that he has been endorsed by the Hanley Brothers and Brix, its a new dawn in explaining why they was so important. Ceoil (talk) 22:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
