Talk:Nine Inch Nails

Singular vs. plural

OK, will everyone stop messing around with the verb tenses while we sort this out? People had been edit warring over verb tenses, leaving the article in a big mess, with some sentences referring to the band in singular and others in plural. This morning I fixed the article back to a single tense (singular) and three edits later its already back to a mix of the two.

According to American_and_British_English_differences#Formal_and_notional_agreement, referring to the band in singular is proper American English, whether NIN is a "project" or a "band." According to Wikipedia:ENGVAR we need consistency within the article (instead of the current mess) and since NIN is an American group, I chose American English (again per [[Wikipedia:ENGVAR]]) and moved the article into singular. We need to confirm this decision here, move the article one usage or the other, and then stop this half-assed "I'm gonna change the usage in a few places and leave the rest of the article in the other usage" edit warring that has left the article such a mess -- Foetusized (talk) 22:12, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Keep it consistent. Singular tense is the correct tense in this case, so let's just leave it that way. Drewcifer (talk) 22:37, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I wanted some confirmation before I made the changes again -- Foetusized (talk) 12:33, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Please, please, please stop reverting the article back to a bad revision with a mix of singular and plural verbs for the band. Even if you think the article should be in plural, an inconsistent mix of both AmEng singular and BritEng plural is obviously wrong, and labeling reversions back to that version as "correct verb usage" is just wrong. Please discuss these changes here, before reverting back to the singular/plural mismatched mess -- Foetusized (talk) 16:02, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

So, just to be clear, we've got a consensus to keep it as singular tense here? That's how it seems to me, anyway. MorganaFiolett (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

That's the way I see it. Singular follows the rules at WP:ENGVAR (American English for an article about an American subject) and no one has posted here on the talk page explaining their support of the use of plural verbs in relation to NIN -- Foetusized (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Electronic rock

How about adding electronic rock to genre section? It is quite a new term and Nine Inch Nails has been considered as one of the most important figures of that genre. --217.24.78.200 (talk) 15:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

If no one objects, I add this genre to the article. --91.188.44.47 (talk) 14:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The electronic rock article is a nice article about the history of synthesizers in rock music, with some original research claims that it makes up a genre. I don't think so -- Foetusized (talk) 23:28, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I object completely --TJMcDJ (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Dark Ambient

It has come to my attention that NIN had produced a bunch of Dark Ambient songs - and therefore the genre should be added to the wiki. Examples of Dark Ambient songs by NIN are: Corona Radiata and 999 999. Dark Ambient is primarily an electronic genre but it also has strong roots in metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.115.0.116 (talk) 12:15, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I also believe that dark ambient should be added to the genres. Apart from the dark ambient songs in The Slip (album), there is all industrial ambient album Ghosts I-IV, and many songs such as Just Like You Imagined or The Frail. Also regarding the numerous dark ambient soundtrack work composed by Trent Reznor, the genre should be added. — Myxomatosis75 (talk) 11:05, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I also agree. Reznor has been progressing in this very direction for over 15 years now: the popular/casual fan view is that he has been experimenting with dark ambient work since Ghosts I-IV recently in 2008. However a closer analysis would instead point evidence to the release of The Fragile in 1999, but in reality it all began on Reznor’s Quake score (under the Nine Inch Nails name, mind you) from 1996 makes for an interesting comparison with 2011’s The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo compositions - the use of anxious psychological soundscapes for mood generation is in high prevalence long before he teamed up with Atticus. And like TGWTDT, it opens with an incredible industrial scorcher (Quake Main Theme; Immigrant Song), before brooding back into an uneasy darkness throughout their entire respective albums. Add the Dark Ambient genre, I say. If no one objects, I will add this genre to the article. Ls883 (talk) 12:36, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Throwing Children

Is there a proper citation for the bit about Reznor throwing small children and animals into mosh pits in the live performances section? I've been unable to find anything, and the wording sort of smacks of trolling. Takerfoxx (talk) 06:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I haven't heard of him doing that. If you cant find a cite just delete it. nothing we cant fix if we find evidence later --TJMcDJ (talk) 16:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hell No!!!

Pink Floyd would never be an influence on Trent. Trent Reznor likes bands like the normal, Bauhaus, and (most of all) David Bowie! The industrial feel to the whole band is because of Gary Numans Advancement to Industrial. is anyone else on the same page with what i am saying? —Preceding unsigned comment added by TJMcDJ (talk • contribs) 20:07, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

No. The article cited, The art of darkness, clearly states "If there was a template in his head, it was the album which touched him most when he was younger: Pink Floyd's "The Wall".". Your opinion is not a valid reference for the article. If what you say is true, find a third-party reliable reference and cite it. I'm reverting your changes. Mindmatrix 21:01, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Im gonna start off saying, my little bro felt like writing that and he doesnt understand the wiki standards, but i will say the article source for that may be unreliable if not said by Trent. At this moment i can't look at the source but Trent has been in many acts with Bowie , Numan , and Murphy kinda meaning by De facto we can say "low" is more of an influence. And if you look David Bowie was a big influence on Trent. I will look more into this later thanks for noting me on this. My little brother has been messing up my entries. --TJMcDJ (talk) 16:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

BotleySmith has already done so. However, the source (see this copy) only states "At the time, both were heavily into David Bowie's Low album, and Reznor cheerfully admitted that Spiral was heavily indebted to the Thin White Duke and his producer, Brian Eno..."; that is, it doesn't specifically note the influence of Low. Mindmatrix 21:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

here is a bit of infor that might help... this interview shows trents thoughts... by the wat im TJMcDJ but i cant get onto my account this very second Trent's and Bowie's Interview —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.226.189 (talk) 01:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Concept albums

Currently the fragile article makes a unourced statement that album is a concept album. I have started a conversation about this [1]. 13:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Removal of audio samples

The article was littered with samples of audio with virtually the same licensing. That's fine and dandy, but mind you these are non-free soundclips, not decoration. All of them violate the very first line in their licensing. "It illustrates an educational article that specifically discusses the song from which this sample was taken. The section of music used is discussed in the article in relation to the song's lyrics, musical and vocal style, and may contain part of the song's chorus." In most cases, there were no mention at all of the songs let alone the content of the songs anywhere in the article. You cannot possibly say the use of the samples this way is rationalised. The samples were appropriately used in the musical style section. Fixer23 (talk) 03:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Columbine influence?

I remember reading that the two kids who committed the high school massacre at Columbine were heavily influenced by NIN... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.88.117.72 (talk) 01:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Only The Downward Spiral. An entry has been made on Harris and Klebold within that album's page, but there is no need to include such information on the band's page. Ls883 (talk) 01:49, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

EDIT: However... if a substantial amount of information can be formulated on the basis of NIN's controversy (read as: a couple of paragraphs -- for example, a size similar to this -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marilyn_Manson_(band)#Controversy ), not just one or two brief sentences, then I'd be willing to have it on the page. Ls883 (talk) 02:36, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

"Down In It" video

I propose that the entire section regarding the "Down In It" video and the resulting FBI investigation be removed from the main NIN page or replaced with the version of that story which appears on the page for the single. The version on the main page is a mess, even after I tried to rewrite it, while the other version is clear and features a direct quotation. The entire incident is also too much of a digression to deserve placement in the main NIN article when it also appears elsewhere.Fane1024 (talk) 06:05, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. Swapped text from Nine Inch Nails with text from Down in It. A\/\₉3r-(0la 00:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Nine Inch Nails - The Great Destroyer.ogg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Nine Inch Nails - The Great Destroyer.ogg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 3 December 2011 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 This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:10, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Alternative metal again

I know it was discussed before, nevertheless it seems like it didn't reach to a consensus. Allmusic lists them as an alternative metal[2][3] band and my opinion is that it should be also listed as alternative metal in the main infobox.Myxomatosis75 (talk) 17:26, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I'm happy for this to go ahead. Ls883 (talk) 12:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support Well the consensus is currently for alternative metal to be added, so i'm adding it I call the big one bitey (talk) 8:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Just to play devil's advocate, isn't five genres in the list a bit excessive? Isn't including industrial rock, industrial metal, alternative rock and alternative metal a touch repetitive? Now that the more general alternative rock and alternative metal are included, can the more specific industrial rock and industrial metal be removed? -- Foetusized (talk) 12:23, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion, five genres are OK, considering the bands eclectic style. Also why should industrial metal and industrial rock should be removed? They're usually recognized as the first band which brought the industrial music to the mass audience (with their music containing elements from industrial, heavy metal and alternative rock) and industrial rock/metal labeling is highly notable in this case. Their removal would only cause vagueness of genre identification. Myxomatosis75 (talk) 19:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Genres

When did Dark Ambient get added to the genres? Ridernyc (talk) 04:34, 27 January 2013 (UTC) Also for the record I think listing both rock and metal genres is the height of redundancy and not needed. Ridernyc (talk) 04:40, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Dark ambient was added in March 2012, discussion is here: Talk:Nine_Inch_Nails#Dark_Ambient. I brought up the duplication in alternative/industrial rock/metal in the section directly above, but the only response was pro-redundancy -- Foetusized (talk) 13:55, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Well you can put me down as officially opposed to both the redundancy and the addition of Dark Ambient. My goal however is accomplished I just needed to make sure we had consensus when reverting changes made by Genre Warriors. Ridernyc (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

If you want to be more constructive than the "genre warriors", dont reduce a recording act to specific genres through some silly consensus (WP:GENRE#Behavior pattern and motivations). If the genres are unsourced to begin with, you cant blame the presumed genre warriors from making their edits. If the album article has any notability whatsoever, there should be at least one article or review discussing its music, which should be cited. Dan56 (talk) 22:46, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

If you want to be constructive you need to discuss your changes and reach consensus. Not simply hide behind sources which we all know are notoriously bad when it comes to genres. I see you rolling back other peoples genre changes constantly, you know how the process works. Now would you like to make a case for why you feel The Fragile should be listed with a different set of genres? As you can see I don't agree with how the genres are currently listed but I'm not going to change them without consensus. Ridernyc (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

"Notoriously bad"? That sounds like you "believe that reliable sources are wrong and professional music journalists know nothing about music compared to them". Seriously, stick the most reliable source available on the topic. Dan56 (talk) 00:33, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

The conversation has moved to The Fragile talk page. You can continue essay flinging there. Ridernyc (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

WP:STICKTOSOURCES and WP:NPOV are guidelines, not essays, genius. Dan56 (talk) 00:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Beside You In Time?

When looking up NIN songs on Billboard, "Beside You In Time" showed to have charted at 86, but I'm not sure what chart... I know there was also a Live album of the same name, but I think this is referring to the song. [http://www.billboard.com/song/nine-inch-nails/372909/beside-you-in-time <-He's the link. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 00:13, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Two things...

On genres - possibly relevant to add "Synthpop (early)" in a similar fashion to the Ministry page? Should be noted that this is a genre for both Pretty Hate Machine and Purest Feeling.

On associated acts - A Perfect Circle and Jane's Addiction are there. With the recent tours, should Queens of the Stone Age and Soundgarden be added? It would seem particularly the former, as TR has collaborated with them.

Swim Jonse (talk) 13:11, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Influence and legacy section

The "Influence and legacy" section only mentions the influence NIN had on other bands, however shouldn't it include too who they were influenced by? A bit like it's done on The Beatles article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles#Influences

Nine inch Nails doesn't mean anything?

The name of Nine Inch Nails does't mean anything it cames just beacause it was easylly abreviated?, My god, who is going to believe that a band's name comes from nowhere? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.73.167.155 (talk) 21:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

FAR?

An editor has suggested that this article may need to undergo a featured article review, citing issues such as the prose quality and the lack of an Influences section. Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/Nine_Inch_Nails/archive1 is currently on hold to allow interested contributors to try to address these concerns. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm very much fond of the "on hold" period (which precedes the FAR if I understand correctly). I'm willing to put all I've got into saving this article, I think it'll fun and rewarding. However it's sort of bad timing for many of us, with the holidays and all. I'll be on wikibreak this Thursday through Sunday and the same the week following. Then New Years... anyway I'll do what I can! Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 05:12, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, MusikAnimal, for starting the work and being willing to help. I'm going to spend some time reading through the article and maybe we can develop a worklist in a new section here on the Talk page to capture what needs to be done. --Laser brain (talk) 14:55, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. I've created at to do at Talk:Nine Inch Nails/to do — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

I've scratched off all the to do's I could come up with, and added some more content in the process. Unfortunately I could not find a copy and transcript of the BBC Radio interview where Reznor apparently revealed many influences, but I was able to find some well-established influences through other sources. I've turned all the list-style facts into prose to the best of my ability, and as far as I can tell the article is now well-sourced. Finally, I ran AWB on the page to apply general fixes, but the software reported no changes were needed, which I find hard to believe. I never use AWB so I probably did it wrong. WikiLaurent / anyone, is there anything else you notice with the article falling short of FA criteria? Thanks — MusikAnimal ^talk 03:37, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Nikkimaria You mentioned at WT:FAR that there are inconsistencies in reference formatting. I'm happy to fix this, but I'm not exactly sure what is wrong. Could you be more specific? Is there a tool we could use automatically fix them? Thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 01:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

First you want to make sure all citations are complete and correct - no bare URLs or dead/broken links, page numbers for print sources, etc. Once that's done, similar sources should be similarly formatted. For example, consider your Rolling Stone citations - even looking only at the web ones, sometimes they're italicized and sometimes not (should be italicized), sometimes there's a publisher included and sometimes not (either is fine as long as consistent throughout), sometimes wikilinked and sometimes not (again pick a consistent formatting rule), sometimes you have Rollingstone.com and other times just Rolling Stone... Nikkimaria (talk) 02:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: Okay! I've gone through all the sources and ensured the links either still work or added archived versions, checked for consistent formatting, and tried to address print sources without page numbers with websites containing copies of the text. I could easily be missing some, though. Let me know if you see anything else that needs to be done. Many thanks! — MusikAnimal ^talk 02:30, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey MusikAnimal, nice work so far. I'm still seeing an inconsistency in whether or not publishers are included for periodical works - could you make a decision either way, and then I can help with formatting? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: To be completely honest, I'm not certain what should constitute a publisher and what shouldn't, etc. For the {{cite web}} citations I reserved the publisher field for the original source of information. Usually they are the same as the website, but where they are not I would additionally use the "website" field to denote wherever the content is hosted. I believe this to be consistent with the documentation for {{cite web}}. So I guess I'm going with publisher as the standard for this article. Hopefully that makes sense... Thanks for the help! — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:12, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

So if you find that you're wanting to italicize something in the publisher parameter, that probably isn't a publisher. I've made some corrections to the citations, but they aren't consistent with what you suggest the standard should be - please check. Also, I've added a number of page-needed tags. Finally, can you check "Brit bands rock Kerrang! awards"? This citation has the same URL has the one immediately preceding it, but different citation details. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:54, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Your usage of the citation templates is surely more inline with what is expected of a FA. Verifiability has always been important to me but I'm certainly no expert on formatting ;) There were three "kerrang!" citations, one of them had the details of one ref but the URL of the other – presumably a mistake, so I just removed it. I'm not sure what to do about the missing page numbers. For me, a trip to library is unlikely... so I'll opt for attempting to find alternative online sources. — MusikAnimal ^talk 00:40, 16 January 2015 (UTC)