Talk:Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Neutral statements? 2 Massive Attack 'reunion' 3 NIN Reunion 4 Salvage "History" Section? 5 Stereophonics on 2005 Card 6 Possible vandalism? 7 The Last Three Paragraphs 8 List of Artists Who have Played More than Once 9 Removing 2007 Artists 10 Soulwax, or Soulwax Nite Versions? 11 Size down image 12 images 13 highlight 14 2008 Headliners 15 2008 Dates 16 Why are some performers in Bold? 17 Coachella 2008 Bands 18 Fair use rationale for Image:MainPostercoachella.jpg 19 Leaked bands for Coachella 2008 20 Goldenvoice 21 Length of article 22 Listen to artists to perform at Coachella 2008 23 April 25, 2008

[edit] Neutral statements?

The following statement "Due to the capitalistic nature of the musically arts, installation arts often receive a much smaller attention; nevertheless" isnt neutral and should be removed or replaced. Insanelyquiet 02:33, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Massive Attack 'reunion'

As with the Nine Inch Nails deletion from the reunion section, Massive Attack's Coachella 2006 performance was not their first US performance since 1998. They played two shows before Coachella, the first of which being in Seattle. An article about that performance can be found here: [1]. I am deleting them from the reunions section. Povvy 03:33, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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)

[edit] Salvage "History" Section?

There used to be a long section called "History" that has been removed. See the 22 September version(s) for that section. I think some of that could be salvaged. Although it wasn't really well-written, there must have been some information of interest in there. Davemcarlson 00:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stereophonics on 2005 Card

If I remember correctly, Stereophonics was initially listed on Day 2, but on the final lineup card, they played on the first day of 2005. Can anyone verify? Davemcarlson 09:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible vandalism?

I know absolutely nothing about this festival, but over the last few days there have been a lot of edits that look suspicious. If you're familiar with the topic, I recommend giving this article a very close inspection. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 14:55, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

You are correct to be suspicious. The lineup for 2005 has been deleted and various ridiculous fake lineups for 2006 have been cycled through. Honestly, though, I am less bothered by clearly fake jokes than by believeable but still unsupported speculation (e.g. the previously popular 2006 lineup with Depeche Mode and the White Stripes.) The last good version was "Revision as of 20:27, 18 October 2005" Mountmccabe 23:52, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Okay, I've reverted the article to that version. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 14:49, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

2006 line-up is still vandalized.

[edit] The Last Three Paragraphs

Looks like someone edited the page and changed the last three paragraphs in the main portion of the article so that they are virtually gibberish.

Does anyone know when the last good version of this page was made?

The last good version didn't have those last 3 paragraphs; I got rid of them. swidly 17:44, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Artists Who have Played More than Once

Does this page really need a list of artists who've played more than once? It's a bit trivial, surely? Also - 'Old timer british rockers' New Order aren't exactly rockers, nor are they especially 'Old Timer', given that they're still writing and releasing... Annihilatenow 19:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

• For the New Order comment, I completely agree with you, they're neither rockers nor old-timer. I've made the adjustments. For the list of multiple appearances, I'm sort of split. I think the discussion of the festival not booking too many artists multiple times is topical. I also think the list of performers who have played more than twice is worth salvaging, as it's interesting little trivia (yes, technically still "trivial") and it helps define the "flavor" of the festival (if you'd like me to elaborate, leave a message on my talk page). The list of two-time performers is long, and certainly not too useful. I'd like to see it replaced with a "list of artists reunited at coachella", or something similar. Davemcarlson 08:11, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removing 2007 Artists

Someone from Coachella keeps removing the confirmed acts for 2007, I protected the article. The following scripts keeps getting added: As with the tradition of Coachella since 1999, the promoters prefer to release the line up in it's entirety. They thank you for respecting this tradition and reframing from posting premature confirmations or rumors.

Does this sound ok? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by One0hseven (talk • contribs) 23:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

Sigh. Apparently it's not working, because it keeps getting reverted to that. This is a place for information, not censorship. I wish Coachella, or whoever, would stop doing that. We're trying to list artists who have themselves confirmed they'll be playing, for Chrissakes. (And if they're going to keep adding that script, I wish they would at least change line up to lineup, it's to its, and reframing to refraining.)

How do we protect it for real? Charolastra charolo 04:46, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Whats even worse is MSTRKRFT cant even come to Coachella so whoever is doing this has wrong information. MSTRKFT is on tour from away from CA.

They are only on tour until March 31 according to their website. Coachella is in April. See lineup: http://www.coachella.com/poster/web480.jpg

I agree with the Coachella people. We should be sure a band is actually playing at the festival before posting their name in "confirmed acts". It is an article about Coachella, so the organizers should have a big say. Randomfrenchie 22:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Randomfrenchie, I'm definitely on your side, but Wikipedia is encyclopedic, so companies and orgnaizations should not generally control information on Wikipedia that is about them. Davemcarlson 06:14, 22 August 2007 (UTC) (see my comment below)

Although I think it could be useful to compile a list of "possible" or "confirmed" acts, this isn't the site for that. Wikipedia isn't a news site, nor for speculation. Although Charolastra's argument about WP being a place for information is true, Wikipedia can be a "place of censorship" in order to protect copyrighted information (which the event organizers may have with regards to this info), and also to prevent original research, speculation and "news" related information. It's okay to post cited criticism of an organization or group, but posting potential or "confirmed" acts for a future Coachella doesn't qualify as appropriate criticism. For now, since the copyright status of distributing the Coachella lineup is unknown (and may even be a "trade secret" under contract law), We have 2 options

• One thing that we could do is mention somewhere that "Prior to each festival, there is considerable activity in music publications and online to compile lists of 'confirmed acts' prior to the official release of the lineup card." and then somewhere have a link to an external site listing this information. This would require perhaps creating a new section about the online culture surrounding Coachella, or making major adjustments to the existing text.
• Otherwise, if you can't find a creative way to present the information in an encyclopedic fashion (not news or buzz or speculation or original research or anything that breaches copyrights or trade secrets), it's best to just leave the Coachella people's statement (with Charolastra charololo's corrections): As with the tradition of Coachella since 1999, the promoters prefer to release the lineup in its entirety. They thank you for respecting this tradition and refraining from posting premature confirmations or rumors.

P.S. I'm not with Coachella. I'm a fairly experienced (3500+ edits) Wikipedian and someone who happens to love Coachella (and this page: I completed many of the historical lineup lists, and added the "Artists who have played Coachella more than once" section), so as someone who is a dedicated Wikipedian and Coachella fan, I don't think I have a conflict of interest. We just need to make sure that we don't do anything unencyclopedic nor dictated by public interest. Find a common ground. Davemcarlson 06:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Soulwax, or Soulwax Nite Versions?

I know the official lineup lists "Soulwax Nite Versions" but it looks like it should simply be "Soulwax". Nite Versions is their album. If you change it to simply "Soulwax", then the link will work.67.79.16.18 18:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Size down image

Can someone please make the image appear smaller. I don't know how. Randomfrenchie 22:05, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks to whoever did it. :) Randomfrenchie 01:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

You bet! Forgot to say done here. The resize code's simple, just one extra attribute on the image tag (the px). But you can see that in the "diff" link in history if you're interested. Ah... looking forward to this Friday at the festival. --Justin 03:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] images

Free images available here Flickr - CC-Attribution and Flickr - CC-SA. Mahanga^Talk 01:52, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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.

[edit] 2008 Headliners

Wheres the verification for this? The name Pink Floyd came out of nowhere, I have no clue where this was heard. Can anyone clear this up?

AnthonyMDOB 21:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I want verification for all these huge, unlikely (nigh on impossible) reunion claims too. Pink Floyd? The Smiths? Zeppelin even. These need to be sourced or deleted, because it's both highly improbable, unsourced and damn cruel. Amphetachronism 22:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 Dates

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

[edit] 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

[edit] Coachella 2008 Bands

The unconfirmed bands for 2008 were added again by 74.71.106.251 without a reference. I removed her post and added a level 1 vandalism to her talk page. Trassin 17:18, 18 July 2007

74.71.106.251 added the unconfirmed bands again. Thank you Thelma.6 for removing them. I added a level 2 vandalism to 74.71.106.251's talk page. Trassin 02:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:MainPostercoachella.jpg

Image:MainPostercoachella.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Leaked bands for Coachella 2008

I didn't want to add a "Confirmed" section due to the official release not being available yet. However, I believe that the last news item on this article by Spin.com [2] is sufficient to have Portishead listed as a "Leaked" band. --Trassin 08:02, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I really don't know. However, I have been trying my best to keep anything that cites Myspace, youtube, or uncited off the page.-Carados (talk) 04:34, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Self-published too. -Carados (talk) 05:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

since when is a band's myspace not an allowed source? 76.199.13.188 (talk) 20:37, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Only allowed in articles about themselves. See WP:SELFPUB. Wwwhatsup (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Goldenvoice

I find it odd that there is no mention of Goldenvoice in this article. Or that there is no article at all on the history ofthe company, a significant cultural force in SoCal. I'm an early worker so I have a COI myself. Wwwhatsup (talk) 10:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Length of article

Is there any support for the idea of moving previous years to their own articles with brief summaries on this one? Wwwhatsup (talk) 01:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Listen to artists to perform at Coachella 2008

Here is a playlist that allows you to stream every artists to play in Coachella 2008:

(external link removed) Dreaded Walrus ^{t c} 18:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Why does this get taken down in the 'external links' portion of article? It's directly related and helpful to the entry...plus I spent a lot of time on it!

 —Preceding jonfredric comment added by 67.88.219.227 (talk) 18:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 

[edit] April 25, 2008

Any reason why the lineup was removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AllTheBrightness (talk • contribs) 09:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)