Talk:The Tragically Hip

Please go to

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 04:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The trivia section ends with a history of Christie Pitts Riots of 1933. Anyone know why this is placed here?--68.40.90.204 (talk) 18:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While not uninteresting, it has no clear relation to the rest of the article -- and even if it did, is full of uncited and NPOV material. I've deleted it. 172.136.135.80 (talk) 19:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone keeps posting an unsourced list of Tragically Hip singles. The problem isn't so much with the list as with the chart positions -- almost all the singles on this unsourced list mysteriously charted in the Canadian top 10. This list is wildly inaccurate, as a visit to the RPM charts site will easily verify. If I see this list posted again, I will remove it without hestiation (unless, of course, you can provide a verifiable source for it.) 172.130.82.241 (talk) 00:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 172.130.62.241 -- I've looked at the list and agree. While your list seems to be missing some singles (especially post-2000), the chart positions that are posted on the other list are completedly unsourced -- not to mention unlikely. Will whomever keeps posting this PLEASE explain their sources? Otherwise, your work will continue to be vapourised... Rudyardk (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The summary at the bottom is missing their first album "the tragically hip", probably because it was self-titled. Sorry I don't know how to add it. Canking (talk) 23:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To 216.221.90.28, be advised that a video you yourself created on youtube is not a valid reference. It seems you haven't added a single bit to any Tragically Hip related article that you haven't completely made up, and as such, I have undone most of your edits.

Per

Paul Langlois has produced a number of other artists, I'd have to find sources but perhaps his is fine as a separate, but the others I don't think so.Max.inglis (talk) 14:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Leave separate. When searching Wikipedia for a person, I expect to be pointed to a person page, not a band. Facts such as birthdays, origin, etc may not be relevant in the band page, but in the person bio they are. In this case, I know he was in the band, I am looking for more bio info. Last, merging may create a lot of unnecessary editing out there.Argolin (talk) 19:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think its possible to do them all...as mentioned above some have done substantial work outside the band, however i dont see merit in them being separate until the articles cover more info!!!...Moxy (talk) 17:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@Argolin - until there are third party sources covering Date of Birth, origin etc., there will be nothing in the article

about the individual anyway. Active Banana (talk) 21:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

We require actual sources to justify a separate article. A person isn't entitled to their own Wikipedia article just because they were part of a notable band, if we don't have any real sources that we can add to the article which are specifically about them. Granted, the band is famous enough that its individual members are likely to be independently notable — but what would make them notable is the actual presence of sources in the article, not just the fact that they're in the band. Bearcat (talk) 23:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I completed this task, and merge/redirect is done for articles on four of the band members as was suggested in the main article. There was actually very little to merge given the lack of sources, and that is the big issue. The fact that the four members did some things outside the band can be added to the history at the band article. --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 03:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone else think this could benefit from some organization? It seems to be mostly a random blast of factoids about the hip. Max.inglis (talk) 14:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do. Active Banana (talk) 16:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I'm downrating this from B-class to C-class. I don't know whether we were applying looser standards in 2007 when this was first rated, or whether the original rater was just being overly generous and proprietary — but there's just no way that this article, as it stands right now, is even close to meeting B-class standards. For comparison, the article that's listed by Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment as canonical B-class is Captain Beefheart — just take one look at that and you'll see why this isn't up to that level. You don't even need to read it in depth — just look at it. Bearcat (talk) 23:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm mid-rewrite on this article, please excuse the mess while I do so. Max.inglis (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the re-write is done for now, more sourcing and info could be added to the earlier sections, but I don't have time right now. If another editor chooses to take up the mantle, please try to keep material concise and sourced, since the previous iteration of the article was just a random blast of factoids, and I think we should try to avoid having it revert to that. I wonder if we can review the stub and classifications now. Max.inglis (talk) 17:02, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The following claim has been challenged and

• The band has had three of their songs—"New Orleans Is Sinking", "Courage" and "Poets"—chart on Billboard
  Modern Rock Tracks chart ^[1]
  .

Sorry the "totally unrelevant crap" thing came out when I was creating sections and moving stuff around at the beginning. It wasn't meant to be POV, I had meant to remove it during the re-write, and the things there didn't seem relevant to the article. Max.inglis (talk) 20:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I hadn't checked the link to see if it actually verified the claims when I put it in the lead. I had moved it because if true/verifiable it would have seemed to fit the criteria of

WP:LEAD: showing why the subject of the article was notable - having multiple charting singles. Active Banana (talk) 21:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

In case you're still looking, "

Canadian Content chart.^[5] "Poets" also did not make Billboard charts, but reached at #4 on the RPM Top 100 and #1 on RPM's alternative chart; references forthcoming. -M.Nelson (talk) 23:54, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

• PS, Billboard didn't run a Canadian singles chart until 2007---the statement discussed may be referring to the RPM (magazine) charts (at least one of which was eventually replaced by Billboard). -M.Nelson (talk) 00:04, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know this is a kind of old discussion, but the reason the Billboard link is broken is because Billboard redesigned their site and their internal links. Allmusic, however, has the information here: http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:gifixqr5ldse~T51. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 18:32, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

per

Would you please list the articles in question? I strongly oppose deleting (or merging and redirecting) any of The Tragically Hip's albums, and I'd take songs on a case-by-case basis, but if the articles can be improved then we don't even need to have this discussion. -M.Nelson (talk) 23:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I take it Active Banana your not to familiar with the Hip..it is a shame this articles are so bad and mislead readers in the bands significances to Canadian music. Most album articles do have this references now.[1]... I would like to point out that all the Hip albums (not EP) have debuted on the Canadian charts at number one or two if i am not wrong. All have reached Platinum status including the new one . Not sure what more you need to be notable then Platinum status in its home country, if Canada only has articles for its diamond-certified albums the album category would only have 60 albums with most not even Canadian:( (Ps the Hip have 2 albums listed as diamond-certified and are list in The Top 100 Canadian Albums for 3 separate albums). This albums may have not done well internationally, but have done extremely well in Canada and have been recognized for this with the following "Winning Junos" Canadas highest "Music" honors....

• 1989 Up to Here (album) - Certification Diamond
• 1990: Most Promising Group of the Year - for - Road Apples (album)
• 1991: Canadian Entertainer of the Year - for - Road Apples (album)
• 1993: Canadian Entertainer of the Year - for - Fully Completely (album)
• 1995: Entertainer of the Year - for - Day for Night (album)
• 1995: Group of the Year - for - Day for Night (album)
• 1997: Group of the Year - for - Trouble at the Henhouse (album)
• 1997: Album of the Year - for Trouble at the Henhouse (album)
• 1997: North Star Rock Album of the Year (Trouble at the Henhouse)
• 1999: Best Rock Album - for - (album) - Phantom Power
• 1999: Best Album Design - for - (album) - Phantom Power
• 2000: Best Single ("Bobcaygeon") from - Music at Work (album)
• 2001: Best Rock Album - for - Music at Work (album)
• 2006: CD/DVD Artwork Design of the Year - for - Hipeponymous (album)
• 2006: Music DVD of the Year - for - Hipeponymous (album)
• Albums not mentioned all were nominated for Junos and have reached Platinum status is Canada.

At the Canadian music project we have a loose rule of thumb for importance levels -- ..."Top important articles" would be the main articles (perhaps 6) this would be.

The articles in question would be the majority of those listed

Main article: The Tragically Hip discography

And articles for Canadian albums and singles are required to meet the same criteria as any other albums and singles (or other articles): that they have recieved significant coverage by third party sources. A single source indicating chart position does not meet

WP:MUSIC - there has to be third party sourcing to allow an article that consists of more than a track listing and chart position. Active Banana (talk) 01:33, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

So your talking about the 6 songs listed? Since most of the albums are notable, they just need a few more refs right - your ok with the Canadian Recording Industry Association ref?. Anyways we will work on the tags you have posted on the articles..Thanks for your concerns.........and pls stop deleting pages and making them redirects!! Moxy (talk) 01:48, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking that they meet

WP:MUSIC "an article that will be more than a stub with track listing and chart position". Active Banana (talk) 14:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

At this point not much more can be said ...2 of us have add references to the albums and songs pls see example here -->Up to Here. The rule you keep referring to states notability as "Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country."...all this albums are Platinum status and references added. Your saying the same thing over and over and we have fixed the problem!! Moxy (talk) 16:37, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for starting to add sources instead of simply removing tags. I have not yet had a chance to review the content and sources that have been added, and so I have provided a response to the question asked. And in response to your statement about Certified Platinum, I will keep repeating (because you seem to keep not hearing) from

WP:MUSIC "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting." and "Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." Simply because it meets the bare minimum of the notability requirements does not equate to an iron clad position that Wikipedia is better off with a stub article than it would be with a redirect to a more complete article that has actual content. Active Banana (talk) 16:51, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I find this view puzzling, who are you to decide a stub will never grow! We create stubs in the hopes they will be expanded upon and in time will end up a great article! We dont go out of our way to impede the progress of articles by blanking the pages! Pls see -->perfection is not required and Try to fix problems...Moxy (talk) 20:26, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with your logic at all. A stand alone stub article is no more inviting for an editor to add content than a small section within a more complete article which in time may grow to the point where the content can be moved to the redirect when it meets the

WP:N criteria. The gazillion stand alone album and single article stubs that stay unsourced for years and years and years is proof that their existence is not an effective way attract sourced content- it just encourages more editors to create more unsourced stubs. Quantity over quality is vain goal when one is trying to create an encyclopedia.Active Banana (talk) 21:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Do what you like..all i can hope is one-day you will actually take the time to help find references and not spend your time tagging as many articles as you can in a day....Its not to hard to help!!...Moxy (talk) 18:47, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I hope that one day you begin to see that unsourced cruft is not worth saving and learning to appreciate having content that is of high value. Active Banana (talk) 20:45, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quit arguing you two, everyone contributes in their own way.Max.inglis (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The introduction could use a few added details, like a list of 2-3 of their most famous songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.22.7 (talk) 16:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to call to question the origin of the band's name. The article claims it came from Elephant Parts. I have found a copy of the movie and saw no reference to the supposed scene with the name in it. I was told by my music history professor, who holds various degrees including a doctorate in musicology, that the name comes from a line in This is Spinal Tap where someone mentions an old folks home for retired musicians called the Home for the Tragically Hip. After doing my own research on this, I could not verify either claim. I inquired about this with my professor and he says that Gord Downie told him this way back (but he has never verified himself). I am continuing to look for evidence of the origin but others should look into it as well. The band does not have a good history or biography anywhere. One source (Hip FAQ on HighwayGirl) gives the Elephant Parts explanation and credits Tales from the Hip, Winter 94-95 No.1 as its source. I have been unable to find this document.

Unless this can be verified I think that it needs to be removed or made clear that it is a theory or rumor.Mattkickbox (talk) 19:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The only reference to The Tragically Hip that I know of is from the Elvis Costello And The Attractions song "Town Crier" off of Imperial Bedroom. The lyric is "Other boys use the splendour of their trembling lip/They're so teddy bear tender and tragically hip." I always assumed this was where the band got their name. 19 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.46.177.48 (talk) 03:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I went to Queen's University in Kingston and graduated in 1979. I remember going to Hip concerts during that period - in what sense did they start in 1983? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.231.6.65 (talk) 22:15, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gord Downie was only 15 in 1979, I highly doubt you went to Hip concerts back then, unless you had a time machine, I don't think they started doing concerts until the mid 80s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.118.151.182 (talk) 15:07, 18 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was one year ahead of Rob Baker and Gord Sinclair at KCVI (I have the yearbooks to prove it) and even jammed with them. I was the MC of the KCVI Variety show in 1979 so I know the two performed as The Rodents. I still have the playbill. Gord Downey did not attend KCVI when I was there but he might have been there when Rob and Gord were in grade 13. Rob and Gord were finished high school in 1981 so the band did not form at KCVI in 1984. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Harrisgrb (talk • contribs) 19:53, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070312022640/http://www.gcal.ac.uk:80/politicalsong/news/2005.html to http://www.gcal.ac.uk/politicalsong/news/2005.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018.

• 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. —

https://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tragically_Hip

Can you tell me how to link up this Esperanto page to the 8 languages in which the page is now available? (German, Spanish, French, Italian, Dutch, Russian, Simple English and Swedish.)

Espgreg (talk) 20:35, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done. It's a

WikiData matter that was slightly more complicated in this instance than it usually should be, for reasons I'm not too clear on, but it's linked now. Bearcat (talk) 20:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Perhaps this billboard article may help.--Moxy 🍁 20:35, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Although that dispute has been resolved with the introduction of a reliable source that confirms those numbers, that Billboard article could prove to be useful for similar statistics. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 15:19, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m just going to state flatly that this article is a terrible shambles of unsourced fan fanaticism. And that’s coming from a rabid TH fan of over 40 years. There are so many unsourced claims made in this “article” to be beyond embarrassing. Somebody needs to fix this because this “article” does utterly NO justice to the memory of Gord Downie. 73.61.18.221 (talk) 05:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is your source that Up to Here, a 43 minute long recording is an EP and not a full length album? Are you perhaps conflating it with the 1987 self-titled release, which is an EP? Multiple reliable sources, including the CBC, Global News, The Chicago Tribune, and Exclaim!, describe Up to Here as their debut album, not as an EP. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 23:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]