Take Back the City
2008 single by Snow Patrol
"Take Back the City" is a song by Northern Irish alternative rock band Snow Patrol, released in different regions on different dates in October 2008 as the lead single of their fifth album, A Hundred Million Suns (2008). The lyrics were written by Gary Lightbody and the music was composed by Snow Patrol. The song has positive lyrics, and is about Lightbody's love for Belfast. The song has been officially remixed once, by Lillica Libertine, and it appeared as a B-side to the single.
The single received mixed reviews, and was generally not considered Snow Patrol's return to form. Critics were generally displeased with how similar the song sounded to the songs on the band's previous album, Eyes Open (2006) when the band was claiming that the new album was a departure from their earlier work. The lyrics, though, were praised for their depth. The single was quite successful in the charts, charting in the Top 5 in Ireland and Top 10 in the UK. The single also appeared in the Top 40 in a further five countries. Furthermore, it topped the Triple A chart in the US, a feat which would later be achieved by "Crack the Shutters".
Background
At the time of the release of the album, SP.com posted a section featuring lead singer and lyricist Gary Lightbody discussing the new songs, which was initially a Lightbody interview to RTÉ. About "Take Back the City", he said that though the song was inspired by Belfast and Northern Ireland in general, it applied to every other city and the relationship its inhabitants have with it.
The public source identifies “Take Back the City” as 2008 single by Snow Patrol. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Take, Back and City.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Take Back the City”, the useful work is to connect “2008 single by Snow Patrol” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 21, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2604754. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2008 and 2006.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Take Back the City”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Take Back the City primary sources, Take Back the City archive and Take research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Take Back the City”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Take Back the City” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.