Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Nine Inch Nails tours

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by User:Scorpion0422 04:46, 12 June 2008 [1].

List of Nine Inch Nails tours

edit

A little more robust then most tour lists I've seen, so hopefully this list will set the bar a little higher. Though with more scope comes the potential for more issues, so I'm definitely open to suggestions. Thanks! Drewcifer (talk) 20:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Looks pretty good. I'd like to see a separate column in the tables for the citations, might look a bit cleaner, but otherwise it's very well done. GreenJoe 23:40, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added the grey areas to differentiate the headers from the main table. Usually the difference is fairly obvious, but there's alot of crazy merged-cell type stuff going on in the tables, so I thought it would be best to make them stand out a bit. And I don't think it hurts the list any. Drewcifer (talk) 08:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both sources are actually interviews with Reznor. So, like alot of interviews, the question part of the interview is just "Spin/Musician" asking a question, and Reznor answering. Nothing is really "written", so an author does not apply. Drewcifer (talk) 08:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose so (done). Drewcifer (talk) 23:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for your help and your support! Drewcifer (talk) 01:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not sure if I can express myself clearly but I'll try: I think the table may confuse a few people the way it is structured now, esp. the Year and Tour leg columns. When somebody sees that the Tour leg cell of the Sin tour is so vertically small, they may interpret it as meaning that the tour lasted for lesser time as compared to say Lolapalooza, instead of realising that a tour's cell height is solely dependent on the stacking of info in that row. (For eg: the Lolapalooza row is bigger because there are more bands in the Other acts section, hence occupying more space).

Another similar problem is that users may co-relate the position and height of a row with the corresponding year and assume that that particular tour happened during that time of the year for that long. For example, looking at the way the Sin tour is placed, people could misunderstand that it occured in December 90 and Jan 91. While looking at the bigger Lolapalooza row, assume that it stretches from February (immediately after the Sin tour ended) to around October 91, before the band immediately began the GNR tour. Another example, Fragility 1.0 happened for the whole of 99. I guess a solution would be replacing the Year column with a Duration column: like Feb 90 to March 90. indopug (talk) 14:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, interesting points. I follow you completely, but I'm just not sure if it's a big enough problem to rework the whole table for. Of course it's impossible to know how many people would be confused in such a way, but I just don't see a very reasonable solution. I could resize the cells to mimic the dates/times of the tours, but that would be a hugely difficult task code-wise, and would pretty much assure that only I could edit the article from now on. Furthermore, I don't know if I've ever seen an article or list at all in Wikipedia with proportional sizing. Maybe this one template? Not that that doesn't mean I couldn't do it, but I'd have no examples to work off of, so the results might not be as expected. I could add dates and what not, but the tables are already jam-packed full of info as it is. What about adding a little prose-based note/disclaimer? That would be simple enough, and hopefully address the problem. Or, a slightly fancier solution would be to add one or more time lines, akin to the time line I put in Nine Inch Nails live performances (towards the bottom). Either one for the whole page or one per-tour, detailing each leg and it's proportional length. What do you think? Drewcifer (talk) 16:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually there is no need of all that. Just have a separate Duration column with a different cell for each Tour leg. So for the Hate tour it would be August–October 1990 while for Sin tour it would be December 1990–February 1991. This column could replace the Year column. indopug (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Something like it is now? (Look towards the bottom) Drewcifer (talk) 23:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. I'd prefer full month names, but if it makes it too cramped and ugly, don't bother. I suppose you have difficulty finding durations for the earlier tours? indopug (talk) 18:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, full months names were kind of cramping my style, and they made some of the rows taller then they had to be. And as far as the earlier tours go, I don't think I'll have any trouble, but I guess I'll cross that bridge when I come to it. Drewcifer (talk) 07:25, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why not replace the lead sentence with "Nine Inch Nails is an American industrial rock act, founded in 1988 by Trent Reznor in Cleveland, Ohio." We already know its a list of NIN tours from the title. Nine Inch Nails as a live band → The Nine Inch Nails live band? "Skinny Puppy, The Jesus and Mary Chain, Peter Murphy, and Guns 'N' Roses." and "Unkle, Marilyn Manson, Atari Teenage Riot, and A Perfect Circle." why are these lists of names neeeded at all? If you want to bulk up the lead, maybe you can include stuff from its sister article about the difference between the studio and live sound, the elaborate stage set-ups etc.

(←)The list of other bands was in an attempt to summarize the list as best I could, per WP:LEAD. So, I tried to have every column of the table(s) represented in some way, and the "Other acts" column is best summarized through a short list of the most notable acts that have been associated with NIN tours. As far as describing the band as "NIN as a live band" vs. "The NIN live band", it's a tricky situation semantically, since both the studio and live incarnations are known by the same name, but are inherently different. It's a tricky word game, but I think the way it is right now works best. As for the lead, I've reworked it a bit to reflect your suggestions, including redoing the first sentence, and using a bit of stuff from the NIN live performances article. I'm hesitant to include too much from the other article, especially stuff like visual elements and the like, since it doesn't really apply to this list. So, the main thing I included from the other article is a clearer explanation of the NIN in-studio vs NIN live thing. Let me know if you think its alright. Drewcifer (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is that image free? It has an OTRS tag but it has a fair-use license (I'm quite confused actually). If its not free, it doesn't satisfy fair-use criteria; you'll have to remove it. There are pplenty of free NIN pics, and any one of them can be used. indopug (talk) 22:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm actually not 100% sure. The pic itself is GFDL, but technically it's a picture of a copyrighted poster. Do you know how that kind of thing works? Drewcifer (talk) 22:41, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why not use that picture of Reznor from Lollapalooza? It's from a notable tour the group did, after all. WesleyDodds (talk) 22:51, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, for the time being I've swapped them as you suggested. However I'll check with WP:FUC about the posters pic, since I'd much prefer having that one up. But the Reznor Lolapalooza pic will certainly do in its absence. Drewcifer (talk) 03:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I asked about the photo, and got these responses Wikipedia:Media copyright questions#Photos of copyrighted material. So, looks like it's cool to use. I've swapped the posters photo back. Let me know if there's still any concerns with it. Drewcifer (talk) 05:22, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Great job. More importantly, a model article we can all rip off :) indopug (talk) 08:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help and your support. And by all means, steal away! Drewcifer (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Matthew

Comments

That's WP:POV and is unacceptable. =)
That would be the Hate and Sin tours. Do you have any suggestions to make this clearer? I could put something like "Pretty Hate Machine tour – Sin tour" I suppose. Drewcifer (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm assuming "Self-Destruct", "Fragility", etc are the names of the major concerts, but this isn't clear
Those are names of entire legs. Drewcifer (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, given that they are the section titles, is it necessary to repeat the same in the header of the tables? REMOVED
  • Perhaps the columns titled "Location(s) (dates)" should be "Location(s) (number of dates)" or "(# of dates)
I'd rather keep it as is, as I think it's pretty self-explanatory, and I'm not a fan of putting symbols in column headers. Drewcifer (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I only clicked on one, but the references don't reflect the names of the tour legs. For example Performance 2007's "European tour" - it isn't called that in the link, and it seems odd that as the other is the "Summer/Fall tour", this isn't the "Spring tour". How did you come by the names?

That's all I got. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 07:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the names are the official names of various legs (ie. "Fragility 1.0", "Sin tour", etc). But there are others that are discreet legs of the tour, but lack an official title. So for those I just named them something descriptive based on when/where the tour was. ie "Summer international tour", since it was during the summer and was international. Is this not clear? Do you have any suggestions to make the difference clearer? I could put the official titles in quotations, but I'm not sure that's the best solution. But you're right, they were a tad inconsistent, I've tweaked a few of the names to hopefully fix this. Drewcifer (talk) 20:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More I still like this list so I want to support except for the following remaining things regarding references

  • The LS goes into a lot of detail regarding the band lineup and how much it has changed over the years, and yet none of the tables' references that I clicked on had anything to verify the lineup.
  • Good point, good point. I guess that means that I'm going to have to import a ton of citations from Nine Inch Nails live performances. I'll start on that right away.
  • Do references 3, 5, and 6 have authors that can be attributed?
  • All of these are interviews by the publication in general. So "Spin" (or whatever magazine it is) "asks" a question, Reznor responds, and then the magainze asks another question. So there's not really author per se (or at least they're not acknowledged).
  • Do references 3, 5, 6, 7, and 9 have internet links?
  • Yes and no. They're on The NIN Hotline, but they're technically copyright violations, so I can't link to them.
  • This is a pet hate of mine, so its up to you, but ref links in tables that are next to words without punctuation (such as "Nights of Nothing tour[9]") are ugly. Can reference columns be created instead?
  • I could go either way, but with your above point in mind, and the fact that the refs are going to be increased dramatically, I think a separate column might be called for now.

That's it. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 04:52, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oh, and just to be clear: intstead of having a million repeated citations in each row, I tried to just cite changes in lineup. Hence, there's more citations when a change occurred, rather then for tours where the lineup remained the same from the previous tour and/or remained the same for the next. Hope that makes sense. Drewcifer (talk) 06:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Meets all criteria. I really like this one. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs · count · email) 06:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks alot for your help and suggestions. Drewcifer (talk) 06:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • It's "Guns N' Roses"
  • You don't need "See also" since you've already linked to that article

Gary King (talk) 04:15, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed both. Drewcifer (talk) 04:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed Remove that section header called Tours, and make the various tour sub-sections into section headers. Its like how discographies don't have a Discography section under which there would be albums, singles etc. indopug (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. Fixed. Drewcifer (talk) 19:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_Nine_Inch_Nails_tours&oldid=1084312479"