Talk:The Smiths

Are we not acknowledging this great album? 47.14.163.159 (talk) 02:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

In fact it's a compilation album, so in that case you'd need to write down the other ones. And yes, it's great. J. G. is a blonde freak (talk) 18:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

In the Members section, someone has moved him from the main members section to others. It's true that he's not usually considered one of the main four - and as the editor says, didn't play on any of their studio albums - and the main photo doesn't include him. But we now have the inconsistency of him being included in the info box as a principal member, while being treated as not principal elsewhere in the article. Can we get consensus on this? Mark and inwardly digest (talk) 17:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

I happenned to get an invite to the recording studios in early 83 and played the triangle on This Charming Man. No credit expected as I'm not a professional percussionist, but thought I'd let you know. Oh, and the Hacienda gig was a great start and meeting place

J.Quinn 2A06:5904:2E06:DD00:3852:F57A:1015:FB35 (talk) 14:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

Starting a conversation - should we keep this material in the article? My feeling is yes, as it was covered by multiple reliable sources, pertains directly to the Smiths, and Morrissey and Marr responded to them. The whole thing is part of their legacy and demonstrates their contemporary place in pop culture. I think the fact that the Guardian wrote that it presented an "acceptable" way to appreciate the Smiths amid Morrissey's dubious antics is particularly salient here. Popcornfud (talk) 21:10, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

All the facts supported by sources don't warrant an inclusion in an encyclopedia. Otherwise the length of this biography would be 1000 times bigger. Hence a needed selection. Mentioning a tribute band having a slot at a festival is Trivia : plus BTW those two artists didn't release any significant record influenced by the Smiths either. Valboo (talk) 21:27, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

You're edit-warring. Please follow WP:BRD and wait for a consensus to emerge. Popcornfud (talk) 22:35, 14 August 2025 (UTC)

Please stop your wp:POV for promoting a tribute act by including three long sentences about them whereas just one sentence mentioning them is enough. Valboo (talk) 00:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

• You're at 5RR already, which is blockable.

All the facts supported by sources don't warrant an inclusion in an encyclopedia. And how does that go then? This is how we work. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:27, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

That's inaccurate, that's not the aim of the encyclopedia. Otherwise we would include in the article all the facts that are mentioned in the multiple biographies published about the Smiths.

I just trimmed the long section about this tribute act; it was initially theee long sentences, I reduced it to one to let it appear it in the article. If wp:consensus is possible with certain people. Users are supposed to reach a compromise in discussion. Valboo (talk) 00:40, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Popcornfud: users are supposed to reach a compromise. I suggested to trim this section about this tribute act, from three sentences to one long sentence. This should satisfy everyone and help close this discussion easily. Valboo (talk) 00:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: a response from you and your view about this offer of compromise would be appreciated here too. Valboo (talk) 01:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

We work by WP:CONSENSUS here, rather than compromise. Your "3 sentences is too long, but 1 sentence is OK." is not a useful compromise, as it satisfies neither viewpoint. If a topic is worth covering, then it is worth covering competently. Which means enough detail to convey meaning. Cutting it down until there's too little left for anyone to notice achieves nothing useful.

I'm also puzzled by your repeated claims that they're a "tribute act" or that "not released means not deserving of inclusion". They're not a tribute act (This is Rick Astley we're talking about - he's pretty notable in his own right.) Also this was on a big stage at Glasto (are you familiar with Glasto? Are you in the UK?) That's much greater prominence than releasing a CD. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:29, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I note that you are stranger to wp:undue. My compromise was rather fair. You wanted to mention both the Guardian and Glastonbury and I let them in. Again do you grab what Undue implies. Following this kind of logic from yours that every single fact must be bloated with several sentences otherwise it would not be noticed, do you think we should expand the Legacy with three sentences per artist mentioned, and so explaining the influence of the Smiths for almost every single band appeared on the UK music scene after 1988 ? 3 sentences for Radiohead who are certainly a bit more influential on alternative rock that ex teenage pop Rick Astley ? Should we bring every quote Jeff Buckley said about the Smiths in Legacy, so including at least three sentences otherwise reader might not register that information too ? Really ? When someone suggests you a compromise to trim a part that is wp:undue; you prefer to stick to your guns and say no. Valboo (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

You are very quick to be judgemental about other's competence at editing here on WP and also at assigning motives to them. We do not all have the benefit of your decade of experience editing here, so please cut that out.

The point of this section comes down to the phrase in it "moral queasiness" (sourced literally) and the other phrase from the same ref, "everyone’s unproblematic faves; a guilty pleasure without the guilt." The elephant in the festival field is just that: the moral queasiness of listening to Mozza again. Now of course this isn't a universal concern, someone must still like what he's become these days, but it's undeniable that he's toxic (the Grauniad just said so). To the point that it would be impossible to put this gig on with him fronting it. That is the important concept to get across here, that's what the previous version did, that's what's sourced to the Guradian, and that's what's so obviously missing from your 'compromise' version. Which is why that is useless. That, the content-free version, is the one that fails WP:UNDUE. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:03, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Why do you digress about your love for Rick Astley performing the Smiths ? You are confirming you are editing for promoting Rick Astley and so you are pushing to include a long section about him. Morrissey usually sings 5 Smiths songs per concert these days and every sane person with a musical ear would always prefer to listen to the real thing rather than a pastiche made by a singer who is despised by everyone into alternative music. Your digression is out of place.

Whatever you didn't reply to any of the points I have adressed. No one will be surprised. Valboo (talk) 02:23, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

• Agreed. Much as many people at Glasto would have wanted to see Johnny Marr, the idea of Mozza getting a stage there is pretty far-fetched. I don't know where Valboo is from, but maybe you're not UK? Anyway, here in the UK, Mozza is 'pretty toxic' to say the least. He could fill a Butlins in Clacton for a Reform rally, but Glasto? Not going to happen.

Blossoms performing old Smiths songs is far from a 'tribute act'. It was a deliberate means of givign some old Smiths songs an airing in an atmosphere where they'd be welcomed, but wasn't going to happen otherwise. This was recognised at the time, and in the ample sourcing that's already here. It belongs in the article.

I'm sure Valboo will recognise this and self-revert, thus avoiding the need to 3RR them otherwise. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:31, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

You are doing wp:original research,. Your opinion as a fan is utterly irrelevant. You must base your editing on sources while sticking to sources.

See my previous answer below yours and reply to it. Valboo (talk) 00:46, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: discussion about the content of an article takes place at talk pages. We are waiting for an answer from your part here Valboo (talk) 01:20, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

• 6RR now, and no-one else here supports your cut-down version Andy Dingley (talk) 23:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

  Valboo, it's impossible to become interested in your arguments when you are repeatedly edit-warring against consensus. Popcornfud (talk) 08:48, 18 August 2025 (UTC)