Talk:Little 15
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
SUGGESTION FOR INCLUISION: While it is true that no remixes were released for the song when it was promoted as a single, there are now two official remixes of the song, the Ulrich Schnauss Remix, which is available as a track on the Remixes 81-04 compilation (although not available on all editions of the album.)as well as a track on some editions of the "Enjoy the Silence - '04" single. Also, the once unofficial remix by the Bogus Brothers, (a mix from 1991,originally only available on DJ compilations.) was made official in 2004 when it was included as one of 13 rare remixes available for Mp3 download through Mute (a companion promotion to the Remixes album. (catalog number ZMUTEL8; see http://www.depmod.com/albums/remixes8104.htm#A1535 for more information on this release)
Apart from the fact that this article demonstrates some questionable grammar, there are several errors of fact which should be seen to:
QUOTE: “while it's said that it was only released in France, it was in fact released in the UK, but not on the BONG label.” - There is no such thing as “the BONG label.” The contributor may be thinking of the catalog designation historically used by Mute in numbering Depeche Mode singles. For example, ‘Leave in Silence’, the band’s sixth single, is cataloged as BONG1. (earlier singles were given a more generic MUTExxx designation.) The single, ‘Little 15’ was released by Mute in UK, not by Virgin France as it is sometimes erroneously reported. The single was designated as LITTLE 15 rather than BONG15 (which it would have been) because of the special nature of the song itself (non-standard, cabaret torch song. no chorus. etc.). It was a “little” promotion in the midst of the myriad of singles and remixes spawned from the parent album.
QUOTE: “The music video for "Little 15" was directed by Martyn Atkins, who did photography work for previous Depeche Mode albums.” - Martyn Atkins did not perform any photography work for any “previous” DM album other than Music for the Masses. The previous albums, Black Celebration, Some Great Reward, Construction Time Again, A Broken Frame, and Speak and Spell were photographed by Brian Griffin. Atkins did design work on A Broken Frame, Construction Time Again, and The Singles 81 >85, but not photography. He did however go on to direct the video for the re-promotion of ‘Strangelove’ in 1988.
The “Chart Chronology” table is incorrect. The re-promotion of ‘Strangelove,’ known informally as ‘Strangelove ‘88’ is the follow-up single to ‘Little 15’. ‘Everything Counts (live)’ was released in 1989, not 1988..
Facts related to Depeche Mode’s discography may confirmed at the following locations: - Information on ‘Little 15’ : http://www.depmod.com/singles/little_15.htm#fra - Information on Martyn Atkins photography for the band: http://www.cerysmaticfactory.info/atkinsm.html o NOTE: interested parties can also simply check the liner notes for Depeche Mode’s albums to confirm what I said about his work as designer for the albums I indicated above. - Information on Depeche Mode singles release chronology: http://archives.depechemode.com/discography/singles/index.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depeche_Mode_%28singles%29
Other than this, I would suggest that this article be re-written to adhere to accepted conventions of English grammar. Jackbox1971 19:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I'll fix the grammar and some of the technical information later, but there's one point you claim is "incorrect" that I disagree with, that being, the "errors" with the chart chronology. First off, the table does accurately state that "Everything Counts (Live)" was released in 1989, and that should be the next single listed in the chronology, not "Strangelove '88." That re-promotion was not a UK release, and is already covered on the page regarding "Strangelove." As the band is British, I would not agree with including the re-promotion in the chronology. For the exact same reason, "But Not Tonight" should not be included in the chronology either, because it's covered on the "Stripped" page (note that the previous link redirects there). John5008 --- talk 01:03, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
- FROM ORGINAL POSTER: I see that article has been corrected. Nice job! The reason it is important to be a stickler about "Little 15", at least from a fan/trainspotter perspective, is that a lot of nonsense has been reported about the single (that it was originally released in Germany, that Virgin France was in love with the song, that it charted as an import in the UK, etc.) and it is difficult to get authoritative information about it. I appreciate that you are taking the time to update. REGARDING UK/US SINGLES: I am not sure why special privledge should be given to UK singles. "Strangelove '88", unlike "But Not Tonight", was strongly promoted, and, unlike "BNT," it actually chartered. Jackbox1971 19:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- Regarding the chronology, it's just my opinion that it would get far more complicated if US-only singles were included, and that it would be best in the case of a British band, to strictly follow UK releases. Maybe if "Strangelove '88" appeared on The Singles 86>98, my stance would be different, but it doesn't. If it must be included in the chronology at some point, the work around would be adding a second infobox to the "Strangelove" article, or creating an entirely separate article for the 1988 re-release (otherwise, one could only get to "Everything Counts (Live)" from the other direction (i.e. from "Personal Jesus"). These are just my two cents, but I would really like to hear what a lot of the other DM contributors think about the subject. John5008 --- talk 22:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- One other point that you are incorrect on that I wanted to bring up before making some changes. You state that "the single was designated as LITTLE 15 rather than BONG15 (which it would have been) because of the special nature of the song." It would not have been BONG15, it would have been BONG16. "Behind the Wheel," released about five months earlier, was BONG15. John5008 --- talk 15:31, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
- FROM ORGININAL POSTER: As a designated catalog number LITTLE15 could be the "little" single between either BONG14 and BONG15 or BONG15 and BONG16. The idea being that "Little 15" was an "annex" title, or an after-thought. I realize that this seems like worming my way out of an arguement but the idea the record company was going for was to recognize the special status of the single without giving it the sanction of the "BONG" designation. Jackbox1971 19:41, 25 January 2006 (UTC)