Talk:Solsbury Hill (song)

Misplaced Discussion

The following exchange in italics was on the discussion page for the article about the geographical Solsbury Hill in Somerset. I've moved it here as it seems more relevant.

This is a beautiful song, one of my favorites. Has anyone any idea as to its meaning?

Evidently, it is a song about a spiritual experience or epiphany had while out for a walk, and the realization that one could not explain it to others as they would think one is 'crazy'.

From "Peter Gabriel" by Armando Gallo (1986)

PG: "It's about being prepared to lose what you have for what you might get, or what you are for what you might be. It's about letting go."

That's Gabriel's official "vague" explanation...however, most listeners, and even former bandmate Tony Banks acknowledge that it's about his decision to break ties with Genesis, or that was the main inspiration of the song, but it can be applied in a broader sense to Gabriel's explanation.

Gabriel himself has never really stated much specific about the meaning of the song.

There's another explanation here at:

http://www.solsburyhill.org/solsburymarsh.html

http://www.solsburyhill.org

Doonhamer 02:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relevancy of YouTube video

This "mash-up" of "The Shining" and the song on YouTube isn't exactly of note. Methinks somebody's looking for hits.64.114.95.43 17:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible the song is used for "cheerful" trailers, it was also used for Obama's parody trailer "The President's Speech." ---Ransom (67.91.216.67 (talk) 19:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Erasure cover version

As part of a mission to update/fix entries for Erasure, I've added track list details pertaining to their single release of the song. This has involved a little re-structuring, including adding a more specific sub-section for the Erasure release (for consistency, might be good if someone can do the same those artists I've now put in section 'other cover version's), as well as re-positioned info boxes to align with corresponding entry. I've also done this for the 'Solsbury Hill' Live info box. Opwerty (talk) 17:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Erasure single solsburyhill.jpg

Image:Erasure single solsburyhill.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 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 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) 06:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Solsburyhill gabriel.jpg

Image:Solsburyhill gabriel.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 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 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) 10:32, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cover Versions

I don't believe that SR-71 ever recorded a cover of this song. Perhaps whoever wrote that confused this with SR-71's cover of "In Your Eyes" ? For now I've removed that mention. Alistic (talk) 01:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable calls for citations

I didn't write the article, and I have no idea who did, but I find myself feeling slightly defensive of their work. Just look at youtube, you can see that the song has been covered by quite a few bands. How do you cite a youtube listing? Just listen to the song, you can plainly observe the 7-4 timing and the 4-4 timing at the end (although I wouldn't have noticed that interesting tidbit if the article hadn't mentioned it). If you did come across a piece of sheet music in a music store, and the interpreter made this observation, how are you going to cite that? Should the article about the song cite the song itself? Wikipedes need to quit putting "citation needed" on things that are just a matter of observation, things that are easily verifiable by the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.141.57 (talk) 16:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Time signature doesn't display in the sidebar box

The time signature in the sidebar doesn't display on the actual page, hence it's not mentioned in the article at all until the mention that Erasure changed the time signature for most of their cover. This seems like a counterintuitive way of doing things, and probably unintentional. 192.42.92.110 (talk) 14:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]