Talk:Love Will Tear Us Apart

Source for date of song?

The first sentences of the article read:

"Love Will Tear Us Apart" is a song by English post-punk band Joy Division. It was written in August 1979, and debuted when the band supported Buzzcocks on their UK tour in September and October 1979.

There is no source cited for the date of songwriting or debut performance.

Amazon lists the Collector's Edition of "Still" with a live version of "Love Will Tear Us Apart" and a performance venue and date of "High Wycombe Town Hall 13 July 1979." That date is before the song was written according to the Wiki page. The performance date for "Love Will Tear Us Apart" that's given on the original release of "Still" is Feb. 20, 1980 (also at High Wycombe Town Hall).

Does anyone have a source for the August songwriting date and the September/October debut date? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.171.71 (talk) 00:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Accolades

I was reading last years WOXY 500 and the song appeared on the list as number one. Should achievements like this be mentioned? After all, the radio station is fairly important one.

--213.169.3.216 14:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

version used in donnie darko?

I only have the recording from Substance, which sounds different than the one used in the film. Was the earlier january recording used in the movie? it sounds newer or maybe more processed

From what I remember, it sounded like the Substance version to me --Surachit 14:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Apart.gif

Image:Apart.gif 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 Wikipedia articles 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.

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 19:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Added broken template

I added the broken template, the edit buttons dont display properly in firefox.Operating 12:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

2007 7" re-issue

The 7" reissue has another version of LWTUA on the b-side alongside "These Days". The side is 33 rpm, whereas the a-side is 45. I'm not sure precicely which version of LWTUA is on the b-side, so I haven't added it to the article yet. I'll flip through the versions in the boxed set and see if I recognise it. -- Jon Dowland 18:04, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, are there any other differences between the original and reissue? Drutt (talk) 20:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The original 1980 7" release also had the B-side at 33 rpm. Not popular with pub landlords when put on the jukebox.

The most popular Joy Division song

LWTUA is the most popular joy division song. It is referenced correctly at a reputable website (last fm). If you believe it isn't the most popular song, provide a reference that demonstrates this. Otherwise leave the reference. Operating (talk) 21:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's a verifiable source, but the opinion of listeners to one radio station in the world looks like a case of undue weight. Even with the polls mentioned under Popularity (NME's "best single" and JJJ's #1 on the Hottest 100) people are always going to have issues with this terminology. I'm quite sure it is the most popular JD song, but what's wrong with simply describing it as "a song" rather than as "the most popular song"? It's importance in their catalogue is surely apparent from the rest of the article without such blanket statements of what is, after all, a value judgment - no matter how many sources agree with it. My suggestion is that the intro describe it as "a song", and you mention the LastFM poll (clearly identifiying it as such in the paragraph) in the Popularity section. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia deals in verified and pertinent statements, not your value or mine WP:verifiability. Lead sections should and do point towards the contents of the article. The popularity section dictates it be mentioned in the lead WP:Lead. Operating (talk) 04:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Love Will Tear Us Apart is most likely their most popular song, but again, put it in the popularity section as Last.fm is also one website, there are other websites that claim Love Will Tear Us Apart is a terrible song, but that doesn't go in the introduction.67.71.21.116 (talk) 17:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Both of you have admitted that this song is their most popular and yet you still want to delete a reference that demonstrates this. That isn't logical nor adhering to the WP:MOS. The logical conclusion of leaving section details out of the lead is that the lead will say "This is a song" and nothing more. Operating (talk) 22:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes I admitted that I believe it is their most popular song, but that isn't up to us 3 or one website to decide, should I post links to reviews saying it's a bad song and add that to the intro of the article? Obviously not65.94.119.168 (talk) 04:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Do you know what WP:verifiability is? You can't find a reputable source which says LWTUA is a bad song. A reference demonstrating it is the most popular song is already in situ. So which do we leave? Not a difficult question to answer. Operating (talk) 05:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You can't source Last.fm for this because the link is not claiming that "Love Will Tear Us Apart" is the most popular Joy Division song, since the site's purpose is to only track plays by Last.fm users. WesleyDodds (talk) 11:57, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

You're right it isn't a difficult question, just like Wesley states, Last.fm doesn't even state it's the most popular song. Give it up man if you think Last.fm is the final say on popularity... 65.94.119.168 (talk) 20:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Covers

The statement that New Order did not perform "Love Will Tear Us Apart" until 18 years after Curtis' suicide is plain wrong. There is a bootleg from May 18, 1983 (the third anniversary of Curtis' suicide), where the band plays it. Sumner asks the audience if they know what the significance of the day is. They don't, but the band plays the song anyway, with Sumner botching the second verse. Bootlegs and setlists available on many Joy Division/New Order sites show that the band played this song frequently throughout the 1980s--one of the few Joy Division songs that New Order played until 1998 and later. They also played Atmosphere frequently in the latter half of the '80s, but that's another story. :-) Leamanc (talk) 03:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Is it of interest to include cover versions of the song on this page? Susanna and the Magical Orchestra did an interesting version of it (album: "Melody Mountain" released 2006). Jimjamjak (talk) 12:30, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Nouvelle Vague and Fall Out Boy have both done pretty popular covers of the song —Preceding unsigned comment added by Namzie11 (talk • contribs) 01:58, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

'Just want to say, why is The Cure missing from this list? They covered this song right? Or am I mistaken? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.203.25.112 (talk) 20:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Human Drama covered it, too.--189.129.109.3 (talk) 05:48, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

• The first cover version was recorded by the Austrian band Chuzpe in 1980 (see their records listing). David Stifter 89.101.118.157 (talk) 16:43, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

As a general comment on including cover versions, I'd like to point out that including the publishing year or recording year of a cover would be of great help. There's an aweful lot of WP Articles ommiting that information. Since WP pushes itself into the top list of search results, it'd be nice to really find the information one is looking for. 93.200.46.111 (talk) 09:34, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

How does it "push itself into the top" exactly? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:27, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Love will tear us apart 95.jpeg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Love will tear us apart 95.jpeg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Love will tear us apart 95.jpeg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Music video

The colors in the video are not due to "poor production standards", it's an intentional electronic solarisation effect added in post for aesthetic reasons that was popular for music videos back in the early to mid-80s. While the "video" itself was definitely shot on 16mm, the effect was intentionally applied in post when it was edited on an analogue linear electronic video mixer or effect unit (you can tell it's not a photo-chemical film effect because of the electronic patterns of the effect, such as slight 50Hz color flicker, electronic noise, and/or artifacts due to it being performed not in the chemical CMYK colorspace, but the more limited YUV colorspace with electronic color subsampling). Even back then, it woulda been pretty easy to reverse the effect, even on a finalized tape copy, by turning the solarizing knob in the other direction, and you can still do the same today with just any ol' digital copy of the video in any digital bitmap or video editor.

Some videos by Adam Ant have the effect, as well as some by Visage, and, I think, also some by Depeche Mode. It's especially prominent in the video to Kill your ideals, a 1980s song by Phillip Boa, where the same clips are repeated alternatingly with and without the effect. You can also see in the video to Love will tear us apart that different clips from the same shot have the effect at times, and at times they don't, and in the beginning, the door opens several times, at times with the effect, and at times without, and it's always the very same clip, only repeated or played forward and backwards. --2003:56:6D1B:C680:89F0:9FDD:559E:5485 (talk) 04:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Love Will Tear Us Apart. 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.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/500songs/page/2
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.polygon.com/2013/6/3/4393306/will-love-tear-us-apart-transforms-joy-division-song-into-a-game
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131020025459/http://australian-charts.com/forum.asp?todo=viewthread&id=21533&pages= to http://australian-charts.com/forum.asp?todo=viewthread&id=21533&pages=
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cherryred.co.uk/books/indiehits/s.htm

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) 03:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Love Will Tear Us Apart. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160624045608/https://web.uniroma1.it/seai/sites/default/files/7%20-%20Translation%20and%20Cover%20Songs.pdf to https://web.uniroma1.it/seai/sites/default/files/7%20-%20Translation%20and%20Cover%20Songs.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140116124508/http://lwmag.co.za/absinthe-love-will-tear-us-apart-video-gig-guide to http://lwmag.co.za/absinthe-love-will-tear-us-apart-video-gig-guide

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) 11:40, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Cover by Broken Social Scene

Should the cover heard in The Time Traveller's Wife be included? 2001:4C4E:1C94:4C00:A991:537F:E5C4:B583 (talk) 18:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

The Captain and Tennille

I saw in a documentary, and I've read it somewhere as well, that Curtis was being a little ironic in the title/chorus of the song when he wrote it -- it was a take off on "Love Will Keep Us Together" by the Captain and Tennille that had come out in 1975 and was hugely popular for some time after. It's exactly the kind of song that probably gives the darker-minded folks gastric distress. Since "saw it somewhere and read it in some article" is not exactly solid sourcing, I won't add it, but if someone has a reference, I think it adds to the context of its composition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sychonic (talk • contribs) 13:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Umm... Fall Out Boy?

Can someone add FOB’s cover of the song. It’s the most infamous cover of this song out there, so why is it not on the page? (Unless it’s THAT bad.) KevinML (talk) 01:32, 5 April 2022 (UTC)