Talk:The Unforgettable Fire

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

U2 (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject U2, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.U2Wikipedia:WikiProject U2Template:WikiProject U2U2 articles

Ireland Mid‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland 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.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

Change Track Title

In the tracklisting, can "Pride" be edited to it's proper, full title of "Pride (In The Name of Love)"?

According to the official site it's not just called "Pride" http://www.u2.com/discography/index/album/albumId/4006/tagName/studio_albums —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.170.19.148 (talk) 18:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong genre

Genre Grunge???? That's a joke in't it? I couldn't figure out how to change it though ... --84.159.52.97 01:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:U2vid tufc.jpg

Image:U2vid tufc.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 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 04:42, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:U2 Pride.ogg

Image:U2 Pride.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 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) 09:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:U2 TheUnforgettableFire.jpg

Image:U2 TheUnforgettableFire.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) 09:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rationale provided MelicansMatkin (talk) 17:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

A song from this album have been tagged for merging here. This article fails WP:MUSIC:

Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. A separate article is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; permanent stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album.

If 4th of July (U2 song) has charted, received any awards, been featured in major films or TV shows or anything else that makes them notable according to WP:MUSIC, please update these articles (with references) and remove the {{tl:mergeto}} tag. Otherwise, please merge them into this article for the album.

Could you please list the songs from this album that you would like to see merged? MelicansMatkin (talk) 16:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

4th of July (U2 song)--Rtphokie (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Post-punk?

This seems like the last album in U2's catalog that you can hear clear post-punk influences. "Pride" and "Wire" both have really hard-hitting guitar and that fast drumming that you hear in a lot of post-punk songs. Even "The Unforgettable Fire" has post-punk influences, featuring U2's most prominent use of synthesizer. I think it could be included as a secondary genre. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 20:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much every online retailer (Amazon.com, MTV, etc.) lists the album under "post-punk" (and many call it "new wave", as well). Since the band was already considered a post-punk band, wouldn't it just be reasonable to call this album post-punk as well? Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 04:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pride titling

My copy of The Unforgettable Fire lists its most famous track as simply "Pride", not "Pride (In the Name of Love)"; the latter title seems to be a later invention from what I can tell. Shouldn't the track list in this article reflect that? 69.154.185.205 (talk) 19:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope; the tracklisting on the single calls the song "Pride (In the Name of Love", and U2.com lists the track as "Pride (In the Name of Love)" in the lyrics section. It is also listed as "Pride (In the Name of Love)" on the Best of 1980-1990 and U218 Singles. "Pride" is simply a shortened version of the song name, much like how "Where the Streets Have No Name" is commonly called just "Streets" by fans. MelicansMatkin (talk) 21:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But that ignores the essence of my point. Whatever various later releases, or even the single, might call it, on the album this article is about it is simply "Pride". That is not comparable to fan-generated slang, it's as "official" as it gets. 69.154.185.205 (talk) 05:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC) Addendum: Also, I just noticed the page you linked to, on the band's own site, simply uses "Pride" as well. (And on the single sleeve, which does have the longer title, there are no parentheses. The streets may have no name, but this song seems to have at least three!)[reply]

Look at the tracklist; it clearly says "Pride (In the Name of Love". MelicansMatkin (talk) 23:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Ah, I'm sorry, I misunderstood your point. While the full name of the song is "Pride (In the Name of Love)", you are correct that the album's liner notes refers to it simply as "Pride". And yes, this track has been referred to in several different ways by the band in the past, including as "In the Name of Love." I'm changing the article now as per your observation. Apologies again for my misunderstanding. MelicansMatkin (talk) 00:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have the original vinyl LP as distributed in the US, bought at the time of its release, and it says "Pride (In the name of love)" on both the outer back cover and the inner sleeve and "Pride (In The Name Of Love)" on the record label. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:47, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, they must have changed it for the CD then for whatever reason. But as the vinyl release has precedence, I'll alter it back. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 23:51, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Info

[1] MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 02:06, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting enough - perhaps some of the stuff should be included. An anon editor added info from it, which i did not remove. But I must admit I wasn't sorry to see it removed by Crazyjoker. ON the other hand, perhaps it is correct - I'd just never heard that the Simple Minds album was inspiration for UF. I haven't listened to the album for years. THere's still plenty more expansion I'd like to do here, and I can consider this Pitchfork interview as well as my other sources. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 20:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some of it may be useful, but the edit I removed was hastily added in and would better have been served with a complete re-write instead of the massive copy-edit that it needed. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 20:10, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can Anybody...???

Can anybody edit the article, add some Trivia?? Not trivia, seems like useless... well the case is... No one told the part of the song The Unforgettable Fire when Larry said "Oh, Shit!"Ali Hewson (talk) 14:48, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keyboards?

In the third paragraph of the "Recording and Production" section it states "Keyboards were used for the first time on a U2 album, with a Fairlight CMI used to work up a number of songs, the textures of which were later filled out with strings and other orchestration." However, keyboards were used on at least one other previous U2 album, in "New Year's Day" from War. Am I misinterpreting the sentence? I don't really want to make a change yet, because I feel that the person who wrote this undoubtedly knows more than me about this topic, and I might be missing something. Norah (talk) 04:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the writer meant "sampling" instead of "keyboards"? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 15:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cover photo

I had always assumed that the cover image was an infrared photograph - it has the black sky, glowing foliage - but the article mentions a "polarising filter technique", which wouldn't be appropriate for infrared. There isn't a reference either way. Is it an infrared image? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 15:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The section about the cover photo currently says that Anton Corbijn used the same "solarised filter technique" that Simon Marsden used for the cover of "In Ruins: The Once Great Houses of Ireland". Photographers who are familiar with black & white techniques may notice that neither photo appears to use a "solarised filter technique". Rather, it appears that Marsden used infrared film, which makes green foliage appear unusually bright. It's possible that Corbijn also used infrared film. However, it's possible that Corbijn used a red filter instead. The grass is notably darker in Corbijn's photograph than in Marsden's, suggesting that it may not be an infrared photo. The band members appear to be overly bright in Corbijn's photo, which may be an effect of infrared film or overexposure. Either way, neither photographer appears to have used solarization. Examples of solarization are shown in Wikipedia's article on the Sabattier effect. 69.114.93.199 (talk) 03:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. We don't have a cited reference saying exactly what technique was used, but we don't have to put "solarized" in there when it is plainly wrong. So I made it more general, removing the solarization bit. Binksternet (talk) 04:27, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox for the video collection

Include? I am in favor of keeping an infobox for the video collection. User:Merbabu is opposed. I'm sure that he and I would both be willing to explain further if anyone is interested. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I`m not a merger but the way i see it the video collection is an entire different entity, no reason why it shouldn`t have its own box. Zidane tribal (talk) 22:05, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An info box should be for an article - not different topics within an article. If the video is noteworthy enough to have it's own article, then fine - of course it can have an info box. But, personally I'm not even sure that the video is even notable enough to have it's own section within this article. Previously, the now Feature Article Achtung Baby had a separate section for it's equally non-notable accompanying video release and an info box. It's long been consensus (and may have been specifically confirmed at the FAC - I cannot remember) that a separate info box in that article (a much better article than this one) was of no benefit. Indeed, in this article it is large, pushes blocks of text down the page exposing white space, draws undue attention to relatively trivial release, and is generally ugly. These points far outweigh any benefit a clickable "chronology" may provide (the chronology falls over anyway by the end of the 1980s and how do we know if it's used anyway?). All the info is repeated in the section anyway. It seems really odd having an info box mid article. --Merbabu (talk) 01:08, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really see the display problems that Merbabu mentions in his comments, nor do I feel that the video collection is non-notable. I actually don't have strong feelings for or against, but I don't see a compelling argument here for removing the infobox. If a compromise needed to be reached, I think that a clickable chronolgy would be acceptable - but I don't see where this discussion has reached that point yet. Just my 2p. Radiopathy •talk• 02:55, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, same here; I don't see any particular need for the infobox, but I certainly don't see any reason to get rid of it. Merbabu, having an infobox mid-article is actually quite common. In particular, songs which have been recorded by multiple artists, where more than one version is notable, typically have infoboxes for each notable version. (After all, having separate articles for each version would be unwieldy and confusing, but the need for an infobox for each version is as strong as if they all did have separate articles.) I've seen the accompanying video for an album have its own infobox on more than one occasion, too.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:23, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tone issues

Explanation needed I removed {{Magazine}} because I didn't see what the problems were with the article as it stands. Feel free to explain any tone issues here and I'd be happy to help address them. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in The Unforgettable Fire

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of The Unforgettable Fire's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Christgau":

From Born in the U.S.A.: Christgau, Robert (June 26, 1984). "Consumer Guide". The Village Voice. New York. Retrieved July 8, 2013.
From The Joshua Tree: Christgau, Robert (5 May 1987). "Christgau's Consumer Guide". The Village Voice. New York. Retrieved 27 May 2013.
From Here Come the Warm Jets: Christgau, Robert. "Robert Christgau: CG: Artist 190". robertchristgau.com. Retrieved 21 December 2014.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:04, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on The Unforgettable Fire. 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:

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:14, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on The Unforgettable Fire. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.u2faqs.com/geography/%231
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.irishcharts.ie/search/placement
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120604151751/http://www.musiccanada.com/GPSearchResult.aspx?st=the%20unforgettable%20fire&ica=False&sa=&sl=&smt=0&sat=-1&ssb=Artist to http://www.musiccanada.com/GPSearchResult.aspx?st=the%20unforgettable%20fire&ica=False&sa=&sl=&smt=0&sat=-1&ssb=Artist
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060314214953/http://www.ysnews.com/stories/2004/08/080504_hiroshima.html to http://www.ysnews.com/stories/2004/08/080504_hiroshima.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:53, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for File:Tuf sample.ogg

File:Tuf sample.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) 05:33, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]