Talk:Hit the North

“Lower reaches”

Smith’s disdain for the chart rankings is made clear in the sentence that follows. It’s also clear from the number that the song did not place highly, but “lower reaches” seems to be an over emphasis. I’m asking here first before removing because I know this is a delicate topic of late. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:06, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What are we talking about here, the top 100? If so then to me "lower reaches" would be "50 or below". Looking at the band article I see: "Telephone Thing" (no.58, 1990), "White Lightning" (no.56, 1990), "Free Range" (no.40, 1992) and "Why Are People Grudgeful" (no.43, 1993). Were there any others? If the main band article doesn't make a general statement about relative chart placings of singles, does this article need to? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; think it doesn’t. Just wanted to say something first. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:23, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Their chart placings are set out at The Fall discography. "Hit the North" reached no.57, which I would class as the "lower reaches" of a Top 100 chart. Two or three of their singles - notably their covers of "There's a Ghost in My House" and "Victoria" - reached the top 40, as (just) did "Free Range" (no article yet). So, I'm OK with taking out "lower reaches". Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:35, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think perhaps the main article could have a statement about low chart placings, perhaps with that Smith quote. No rush, of course. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In The Fall proper, I think, not on the MES page, if it warrants inclusion at all. My opinion. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:42, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I certainly meant The Fall article. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:45, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - did not mean to offend. Just thinking; wasn’t intending to sound condescending; hope I did not. Kafka Liz (talk) 13:52, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) The lead of The Fall article does refer to "minor hit singles in the late 1980s", without naming them all - though most of the most notable / highest charting ones are mentioned in the text ('cos I added them-ah). Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:46, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It should say "...and early 1990s.." Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:52, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. But does it say there were unwanted accidents? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]