Talk:Coachella

NIN Reunion

This is totally messed up. NIN's first show in five years wasn't at Coachella but at Fresno, CA on March 23rd, 2005. (Source: Mukul R. Dwivedi)

highlight

its my belief that users that actually went to the event should have say regarding "the point of the view". that is to say when i personally highlight lcd soundsystem for 2007, in my opinion that is fair. i base this judgment on concert reviews published in the LA times and personal first hand experience. TomSkillingJr.

oops, then again maybe we are only techincally highlighting headliners TomSkillingJr.

2008 Dates

The dates have been posted on The Desert Sun website. It is the Indio local news paper.

Why are some performers in Bold?

Are they special? I don't get it.

• I think that they are the headlining band for the given day. Trassin 17:14, 18 July 2007

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Coachella which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 12 February 2024

Coachella (festival) → Coachella – The festival is the primary topic of "Coachella". The disambiguation page only lists two complete title matches, Coachella (festival) and Coachella, California; the rest are partial title matches that are rarely used without a qualifier, so we can disregard them. In terms of pageviews, the festival dwarfs the city 13 times; in terms of long-term significance, the festival is one of the largest, most famous, and most profitable music festivals in the United States and the world, according to the article itself. This is comparable to Stanford, where the university receives nine times the nearest full title match; and Woodstock, where the festival receives seven times the nearest full title match. Ngrams show more hits for the festival than the city, and it's not even close. Google surfaces info and results for the festival. The festival also receives six times the number of attendees than the city's population. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 17:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

• There was a discussion on this topic just a month ago, and the consensus was oppose. I don't see how anything has transpired since then that would warrant reconsideration. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 03:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  Consensus can change; the fact that a previous RM ended with oppose has no relevance unless I'm simply repeating the same arguments, which I'm not. The previous RM was weakly argued, based solely on pageviews. I think I've presented a far more convincing case here. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

• Support. This is basically the same case as Woodstock, with the festival being more notable than the town nearby and for which it is named, and more notable than any other subject by the same name.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:42, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose per consensus at Talk:Coachella#Requested move 4 January 2024. 162 etc. (talk) 17:00, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  Consensus is not permanent and does not preclude future RMs. The previous RM had a weak rationale and little participation. Unless you have an actual position on the proposed title, this !vote is a classic WP:LASTTIME argument and doesn't mean anything. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  See WP:DPT and WP:NOPRIMARY. 162 etc. (talk) 20:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  What about them? You can't jump drop links to certain guidelines and be done with it. WP:JUSTAPOLICY. Surely you realize I have closely examined all relevant guidelines and responded to them at length in the nomination? InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  As your nomination itself states, Coachella, California is also named "Coachella". It also has more long-term notability than the Coachella festival. Therefore, Coachella (festival) is not the primary topic.

  I also think that it is very bad form to bring forward this nomination only a month after the previous one, especially given the "Not moved" consensus. See WP:THREEOUTCOMES. 162 etc. (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  Can you explain why you believe a town with six times fewer inhabitants, virtually unknown to anyone outside of the region, and with zero practical significance, has "more long-term notability" than one of the largest and most well-known music festivals in the world? Also, it is not bad form at all to start a new RM when a previous RM was argued solely based pageviews and closed with weak consensus based on three editors' opinion. InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:34, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

• Weak oppose per previous RM, as noted it might be better to move Woodstock and Stanford to the base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

  Crouch, Swale, I actually did read the previous RM and made sure to provide counterarguments to each of the objections (namely, it does have long-term notability, and it doesn't just "barely" meet PT1). Do you remain unconvinced? InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

• Can someone please relist this? InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:44, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. The festival is not the primary topic by long-term significance.  — Amakuru (talk) 15:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
• Support. Festival is the primary topic of note. Flabshoe1 (talk) Flabshoe1 (talk) 02:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Relisting per request, and for clearer consensus. BD2412 T 17:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

• close no new evidence presented from last RM—blindlynx 17:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

  There clearly is, and that's not how RMs work. If you have an actual opinion on the matter, you are welcome to leave a meaningful !vote or comment. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:58, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

  The last RM was two months ago and people thought it didn't meet WP:PT2---which is your argument here. So you're reopening a discussion without presenting anything new just to get a different result?—blindlynx 01:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

  I'm starting to doubt you actually read my nomination if you think I "didn't present any new evidence". The previous RM was initiated by an inexperienced, now-blocked user who only cited pageviews and nothing else, which is weak evidence, so I am not surprised it failed. By "people thought it didn't meet PT2", you mean three people, two of which were weak/leaning !votes. The fact that the festival literally has 6x more attendees than the population of the small town itself easily quashes any doubts about PT2, and I've presented plenty of other evidence such as ngrams and similar articles. Coachella is quite literally the largest and most well-known festival of the music industry; if the Grammys are the Oscars of music, Coachella is the Super Bowl of music. "Per the previous RM" is not a valid rationale here, so unless you have an actual reason for opposing or supporting this RM, your !vote (and 162 etc.'s) is meaningless and should be summarily discarded by the closer. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

  from WP:THREEOUTCOMES While it is usually bad form to re-request a move if consensus is found against it (until and unless circumstances change) [...](Successful move re-requests generally, though not always, take place at least three months after the previous one.

  You have not presented a evidence that anything has changed since the last RM and are disagreeing with close on the grounds that it meets in fact WP:PT2—blindlynx 20:00, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Support per nom. I'm only read vague and unsupported assertions from opposers. We are talking about navigational functions—readers are looking for this page, much more often than not. Aza24 (talk) 20:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)