Talk:Nine Inch Nails discography

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured listNine Inch Nails discography is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 19, 2007Featured list candidateNot promoted
November 21, 2007Featured list candidatePromoted
July 23, 2008Featured topic candidateNot promoted
February 18, 2009Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured list

Preliminary notes[edit]

I made this page so that the detailed discography content can be moved off the main Nine Inch Nails, hopefully leading to better flow over there. Some notes on why I created the page like I did.

  • This page follows what appears to be the standard Wikipedia discography format (cf. The Beatles discography, David Bowie discography, Sean Combs#Discography). That's partially to get the article standardized, and partially because I wanted to switch around the categorizations of the releases without doing a lot of tables.
  • The singles are all together, regardless of whether they're haloed or not. There are notes to say which are promo-only, and a complete halo list below, so this shouldn't cause confusion.
  • A listing by Halo is seperate from the rest of the discography. I think this should be easier to understand for non-fans: we know which Halos are important, but it's not readily apparent where to look on the list if you're not familiar with stuff.
  • I explicity made the "Soundtracks" section apply only to songs with NIN recorded for a film. That's in anticipation of people adding to the list every time some TV show or movie decides to put NIN on a soundtrack.
  • The same goes for "Notable bootlegs." Boots of the demos, Woodstock, and important guests are worth noting, but this isn't the place for a list of every bootleg made.

So, that's what I was thinking. Comments, hate mail, whatever? -- Rynne 05:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"The Fragile"[edit]

How can it be double platinum if it's only sold 1,200,000? I think that needs to be updated. -- iguana_nirvana14 (talk · contribs)

It's a double album. See the RIAA database. –Pomte 03:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template[edit]

Would anyone mind if I added "Head Like A Hole", "Closer to God", and "Everyday Is Exactly The Same" on the template as remix albums, or should I make a section for remix EPs, or should I just keep them as singles. Thanks -- iguana_nirvana14 (talk · contribs)

It's ambiguous what distinguishes a remix EP from a single. Those are longer and have a bigger variety of songs, but Further Down the Spiral already serves as the remix album for TDS, and Trent did say that there would be no remix album for With Teeth. It's safe to keep the song-named releases as singles, though you're free to push for a new remix EP section if no one else objects. Related discussion: Talk:Every Day Is Exactly the Same. –Pomte 02:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think I should add Head Like a Hole to the Remix EPs. It's the longest remix release for Pretty Hate Machine and Trent hasn't denied that. Who's with me? -- iguana_nirvana14 (talk · contribs)(Please Sign "Support or Oppose"):

Support -- iguana_nirvana14 (talk · contribs)

Don't think so. It wasn't in that configuration worldwide, certainly; TVT only put all the PHM remixes to date on one disc as a cash-in. BotleySmith 01:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; agree with BotleySmith. The UK version of HLAH wouldn't be considered an EP. –Pomte 02:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reconsideration -- iguana_nirvana14 (talk · contribs)

An imaged table for primary releases[edit]

Doesn't the primary releases deserve a cover image?

  • No, it’s been hashed out on the WP:ALBUMS and WP:SONGS discussions that album-cover images should not be used in discography listings if the images are already avaliable on the recordings' individual pages. The reason is that over-use of copyrighted album covers may violate fair-use doctrines. -- Rynne 15:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MP3 Torrents[edit]

The MP3 Torrents claiming to be The Definitive NIN collections (Seed 02: The Singles, Seed 03: Deep Cuts, Seed 04: Quiet Tracks) appear to be fake. As of writing, there's no mention of such torrents on the [official site]. See discussion on Echoing the Sound message boards for further specualtion about their nature. I'm removing them from the page until someone can find a citation that they're official. - Rynne 17:11, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Though there is no direct proof (i.e. Trent saying, "I made them!"), there is significant circumstantial evidence that the Seed 02-04 torrents were part of a guerrilla marketing effort by Nine Inch Nails. These 3 torrents were originally uploaded to The Pirate Bay by the registered user "seed0" [1] [2]. This same user later uploaded soundboard-quality MP3 torrents [3] of the NIN radio performances, shortly after the ETS user "teitan" (generally acknowledged to be Trent Reznor's account) indicated that they would be forthcoming [4].  Tabanger  05:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Regardless, all information on Wikipedia must follow the guidlines set out in WP:V; particularly note:

    The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth.

    It doesn't matter how much circumstantial evidence there is; if a reputable reference for a piece of information can't be found, then that information shouldn't be included here. - Rynne 22:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops. Just read this, after having added them to the Seeds section. Do I count as a reputable reference? Given that they were released by seed0, who also released the Closure and Broken DVDs recently, not to mention the mp3 torrents of the live collaborations during the last tour. It's safe to say they're official Nine Inch Nails releases, even if they may not be official Interscope Records releases. Leviathant 19:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, Levi, the test for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability. If it's published by a reliable source, then it can be cited and included in the article. So if, say, ETS were to publish an article saying the torrents are official, then it would be so.  :)  Tabanger  08:32, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Roger. I understand the guideline now. As soon as it is published/verified by a reliable source (and I know there is at least one out there), then it can be included. For now, however, regardless of its veracity, it cannot be.  Tabanger  09:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is nonsense, if wikipedia needed rocksolid proof, whole history articles, most astrology-related articles etc. would just have to go. There is nothing that speaks against formulations like "It is commonly believed that (...), although this is yet to be confirmed", more than a few other articles use a structure like this. By the way, sorry for anonymously messing with the "Seed Numbers"-section without consulting the discussion board, reverted all changes by now. 80.146.56.167 00:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you bother to read the discussion and policies? We don't require rocksolid proof, just verifiability from a reliable source Nil Einne 13:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And all that could have been[edit]

It isn't mentioned in this article that AATCHB is available as a DVD and as a CD. The still disc obviously only comes with the CD. But it's listed alongside closure (vhs only, no cd) in the "Live albums and compilations" section.

  • I made that section because I couldn't really think of another way to list those two releases. It's probably not the best way to do it, and if you have another way of listing them, feel free to give it a shot. I didn't note that AATCHB was released on CD and DVD because I didn't list formats for any other releases, except where they have different halo numbers. I basically only mentioned the limited-edition AATCHB because it charted higher than the standard version and it included Still. - Rynne 14:42, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halo?[edit]

Does anyone know why NIN decided to use the Halo system to order their albums and hits? If you do, or if you can find out, please add it to the article. - Bagel7 22:33, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if he’s ever given a reason for doing so. However, some fans have noted similarites between Halo numbers and the BONG designations that Depeche Mode uses for its singles (e.g., Leave in Silence is Bong1, Personal Jesus is Bong17, etc.).
Halo and Bong numbers aren't exactly the same: Bong numbers are only used on singles and weren't implemented immediately—the first five DM singles don’t have Bong numbers. Moreover, the Bong numbers seem to be the actual catalog numbers of the singles for Mute Records, whereas Halo numbers are separate from the catalog numbers and appear regardless of the releases' label.
Reznor has never said anything relating the Halo numbers to Bong numbers, so that's all just speculation, through it does seem like a possible influence. - Rynne 14:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And is it Wikipedia policy to change a redirect every time Microsoft announces a first person shooter video game developed by Bungie? It seems that Halo 1 through Halo 3 redirect to articles about Bungie games, while Halo 4 and up redirect to articles about NIN albums and singles. --Damian Yerrick (☎) 01:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's the right policy, being that "Halo X" is the official title of the video games, whereas the "halo X" designators for NIN releases are semi-formal at best. IMO, it was probably a mistake to make the halo pages as redirects in the first place--anyone who'd want to link to a NIN page via halo number will surely know the corresponding offical title for link-piping purposes. - rynne 17:26, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any specific reason why the halo numbers are spelled out here? Who refers to BYIT as Halo Twenty-Two instead of Halo 22? –Pomte 01:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I had no specific reason when I wrote the section. It was personal preference on my part, but there's no compelling reason they can't be changed to the numerals. Actually, I recalled that there was a specific reason: the halo numbers are spelled out on all NIN releases up until the With Teeth era. The Hand That Feed says "Halo 18" on it but And All That Could Have Been says "Halo Seventeen", for example. I went with the more common writing method for consistancy, but I'd have no objections if you'd like to switch to an all-numeral format. -- rynne 16:45, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're right, that completely escaped me. Maybe change to numerals starting from Halo 18. –Pomte 02:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Halo is a ring with a hole....a CD is a ring with a hole....ergo halo 1, halo 2, halo 3...etc

"Appearances in films and trailers" deletion[edit]

I'm deleting this section because it's essentially a list of trivia. NIN has no control over which movies license its music for use in films or trailers, so this is not useful in an official discography. As seen already, this section quickly becomes listcruft. The discography already has a useful section for NIN songs which were specifically written or remixed for films; we don't need another section for songs that some producer decided to pay Interscope to let him use in a film. -- rynne 16:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The same reasoning should apply to "Landmarked bootlegs". –Pomte 02:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I dunno - TR technically has to approve uses of his music in major films. Also, those "landmark" RoIOs are of questionable status, but they must have been originally derived from somewhere legitimate, right? How else could they be of soundboard quality? BotleySmith 21:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably right about the bootlegs, though I think something like Purest Feeling at least deserves a mention here. That being said, I'd note that at least with bootlegs it might be of interest to some people because the boots do contain different audio than the official albums, while the music used in films and trailers is the same as what's already been released. But yeah, in general I'd rather keep the discography less cruft-y, so if you think the bootleg section should go, too, I certainly won't object. -- rynne 15:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Songs in album category[edit]

I've began removing some songs which have been misplaced in the category of Nine Inch Nails album. I'm not sure why they were there in the first place and thought maybe it was something to do with the halo numbers? Regardless, the songs should come under the songs category. Seraphim Whipp 17:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They were in Category:Nine Inch Nails albums because they are technically Nine Inch Nails releases that could be considered albums by some people. So yeah, all the halos were in there. Album says albums range from half an hour, and at least some of these "singles" last more than half an hour. Take Closer to God: if the article were solely about the song, then it would be called Closer (song). I'm not endorsing putting them back into the category, by the way. And how come you didn't take out "The Perfect Drug" Versions? –Pomte 19:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Think I must have missed that one. I agree with you on some points but at the same time, they're still just songs. It can seem a tad confusing that a song is placed in an album category. I think if someone wanted to devise a category of some kind that divided all their releases into halos then that would probably work better. Although as it stands, there seems to be a section under the discography which divides 'em all into halos. Hmm. I do think some sort of halo category could work though...who knows. Lol.
Seraphim Whipp 13:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)Seraphim Whipp 13:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I remember why I didn't take "The Perfect Drug" Versions out. Classed as an EP.
Seraphim Whipp 13:31, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Anything not classified on nin.com as an "LP" or by the RIAA as an "album" of any kind (ie, anything other than Pretty Hate Machine, Broken, The Downward Spiral, Further Down the Spiral, The Fragile, Things Falling Apart, And All That Could Have Been, With Teeth and Year Zero) should be taken out of this category. In fact, I'm going to do that right now. Fixed (album) should also be renamed to Fixed (EP). BotleySmith 21:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With Teeth is a Gold record[edit]

Go to the RIAA database. Search for "with teeth" in the title field. This will tell you that it is a Gold-selling album in the United States (designation: G). We should consider any other claim unverifiable until a better source is provided. BotleySmith 16:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

update[edit]

this page needs Survivalisim, year Zero, and Capital G on it, but I don't know how to do that myself —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.244.174.89 (talk) 01:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Already there. –Pomte 02:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Year Zero[edit]

year zero sold over 500 000 copies.do you know if it received the gold certificate ?

It isn't in the RIAA database, so I'd assume it hasn't —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.252.201 (talk) 21:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Y34RZ3R0R3MIX3D[edit]

This is correct OFFICIAL name for year zero remixed, tried to change link name, but action was un-done. Anyone know why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheepdean (talk • contribs) 10:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mainly because Wikipedia has a naming convention (here) which states: "Do not replicate stylized typography in logos and album art." But, just for clairity, I believe Y34RZ3R0R3M1X3D does redirect to Year Zero Remixed.Drewcifer 17:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's basically the same case as with Ministry's album, ΚΕΦΑΛΗΞΘ. On Wikipedia it is referred to as Psalm 69: The Way to Succeed and the Way to Suck Eggs which is its alternative name. Both articles refer to their actual name within the first paragraph. So we're covered. Xe7al (talk) 23:29, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sales figures[edit]

  • PHM: 3,000,000 + [5]
  • Broken: 645,000 + [6]
  • TDS: 4,000,000 + [7]
  • Fragile: 892,000 + [8]
  • With Teeth: 1,100,000 + [9]
  • YZ: 445,000 + [10] (same source as for With Teeth)

The sources for The Fragile and TDS were from an earlier revision of the article. The only problem I can see is that the Broken source is pretty dated, being from 1994, but it's all I could find for it. Also, it's possible that a more recent sales figure for Year Zero appears somewhere else, as it is still a relatively current album. --Brandt Luke Zorn 05:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm honestly not sure if this stuff is worth including. All of the numbers seem extremely dated (especially The Fragile), and they're approximate dates of publication vary so much that each number means something completely different. Any thoughts? Drewcifer 10:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that most of these articles are in the 2005-2007 range (except for the source for TDS, which is from the still fairly recent 2003, and the Broken one which is more outdated at 1994) I think that they're all worth including. These statistics are meant to be more like "this record has sold at least this much" then "this record has sold exactly this much," hence the "+" after each number, so it doesn't hugely matter how old the source is so long as it is the most recent source available. --Brandt Luke Zorn 21:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

EDIETS Music Video[edit]

According to Every_Day_Is_Exactly_the_Same (and from my nin.com recollection), there was a cancelled video for "Every Day is Exactly the Same". Could someone add this to the videography section? StevePrutz 00:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • My inclination is that there's no reason to include it. If footage for it ever shows up—like the first MotP video eventually did—it could be added, but raw footage that the public has never seen for a video which was never completed doesn't strike me as worth mentioning on a discography. -- rynne 15:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There is no footage available for it, official or unofficial or leaked. --  Tabanger  04:21, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discipline has a music video, and it should be added to the video section. It can be found here http://youtube.com/watch?v=I1ZMKfFHU3U and it was posted on the nin.com homepage for several days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.84.210.242 (talk) 05:41, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a joke, not an official video. It was originally posted at The NIN Hotline. Drewcifer (talk) 07:25, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources[edit]

At least one of the "NIN Hotline" links are broken, perhaps all of them.

My issue though is about reliable sources. What exactly are "NIN Collector" and "The Nin Hotline"? Are they authorative and if so why? It might be wise to annotate these references because they don't jump out at me as being from reliable sources. --kingboyk (talk) 12:53, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discipline and YZ pt 2[edit]

Is there anything to support the Halo numbers assigned to Discipline and Year Zero part 2 on this page? Looks like someone guessing to me...194.66.67.222 (talk) 17:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quake Soundtrack?[edit]

'Sorry if this has been discussed, but I grokked through and couldn't find any discussion. The original Quake computer game from Id Software is also a playable CD of NIN music, which also happens to be the soundtrack to the game. This shows up under Trent Reznor's discography and there gives NIN co-credit. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Reznor_discography. Being a NIN Noob, I'm not comfortable editing the actual wiki, but it looks like an oversight and I'll leave correction, if appropriate, to those who know what they're doing.

Snookerdoodle (talk) 14:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is mentioned in the Soundtrack section. Drewcifer (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Top importance for Ohio?[edit]

Umm, I think this clearly isn't top importance for Ohio... not even NIN is let alone the discography page. I wouldn't even consider it high... maybe mid... but the importance of NIN has little to do with Ohio despite where they are from. Not an overly important issue. Great article, by the way. gren グレン 08:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian chart positions[edit]

Bot report : Found duplicate references ![edit]

In the last revision I edited, I found duplicate named references, i.e. references sharing the same name, but not having the same content. Please check them, as I am not able to fix them automatically :)

  • "guinness" :
    • {{cite web | title = Chart Stats - Nine Inch Nails | publisher = Chart Stats | url = http://www.chartstats.com/artistinfo.php?id=595 | accessdate = 2007-09-28}}
    • {{Citation | date = 2006 | editor-last = Roberts | editor-first = David | title = [[Guinness Book of British Hit Singles & Albums|British Hit Singles & Albums]] | edition = 19th | publisher = [[HIT Entertainment]] | isbn = 1-90499-410-5 }}
  • "Bleak" :
    • {{cite journal | title = Rock's outlook bleak, but this Nail won't bend | last = Soeder | first = John | journal = Cleveland.com | date = [[2000-04-09]]}}
    • {{cite journal | last = Soeder | fast = John | title = Rock's outlook bleak, but this Nail won't bend | journal = Cleveland.com | date=[[2000-04-09]]}}

DumZiBoT (talk) 02:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halo 00[edit]

There was a Halo 00, released in 1988. It had two tracks; Suck, and Supernaut . I had one for a while and I still know where it is. I will try to get hold of it to enter the info here.Capt3 (talk) 06:53, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://the--undertow.blogspot.com/2008/06/nine-inch-nails-suck-halo-00-1988.html Capt3 (talk) 07:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's a bootleg, not an official release. link. Drewcifer (talk) 07:15, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to add that Halo 00 is usually the designation of the NIN demo album (but that is unoffical). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.153.83 (talk) 04:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

US Mainstream Rock Chart[edit]

I noticed that a while ago it was cut from the list.Almost all NIN singles charted...i think it's one of the most important charts and it should be put back again —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.114.7.166 (talk) 12:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have never even edited this article. Why do you now all of a sudden care what happens on it? Editors Wikipedia-wide, at least in the past few years, have used WP:DISCOGSTYLE as a style guide. While never adopted as a formal policy, it is still a guide most go off of. I also hope you realise MOS:ACCESS comes into play with more than 10 columns present, as the information, on some devices, squashes (and thus becomes smaller and harder to read) to accommodate the more columns there are. I don't see why we need two US rock song charts when, as I said, the Modern Rock/Alternative Songs chart has more and higher peaks. As I also pointed out, the Mainstream Rock chart was added later as it was still not formatted correctly. It was clearly added by a user using Visual Edit, hence the different lines between where the Mainstream Rock peak was added versus the two before it and the rest after it. I'm aware of the importance of consensus, but I really don't think I should need to get consensus to remove something that should never have been added in the first place, and to bring the discography in line with what is now followed on the majority of discographies on Wikipedia (the 10 column limit), in addition to data that essentially is very similar to a column that was already present. Ss112 07:59, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Yes, I hadn't edited this article before but it wasn't my first NIN-related edit, see https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch.py?name=FMM-1992&page=Trent+Reznor (since February 2020) and https://sigma.toolforge.org/usersearch.py?name=FMM-1992&page=Atticus+Ross (since April 2020), also creating c:Category:Nine Inch Nails logos on 11 November 2019‎ (its history), this page has been in my watchlist since 6-7 years ago and sometimes if I get time I do check its changes.

WP:DISCOGSTYLE shows:

This proposal has become dormant through lack of discussion by the community. It is inactive but retained for historical interest.

§ Ignore all rules

Every artist is different, and therefore no two discographies will be exactly the same. Therefore, if there is a reasonable justification for deviating from the above guidelines to most accurately or appropriately document an artist's body of work, then ignore all the rules and go with what's best for the article. It is our goal to provide information in the best way possible, so a strict adherence to the guidelines listed above may not always be the best way to accomplish our goals. In an ideal situation however, any deviations from the guidelines should be with a clear purpose that is unique to the particular artist and situation in question. See WP:IAR for more information on ignoring the rules.

MOS:ACCESS comes into play with more than 10 columns present, as the information, on some devices, squashes (and thus becomes smaller and harder to read) to accommodate the more columns there are. ........ (the 10 column limit)

I couldn't find anything about it at MOS:ACCESS and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial or Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style.

If deleting one column is necessary, it should be "AUT" not "US Main. Rock", the "AUT" column has only 3 entries and all of them are the low charting (41, 87, 63), so it has no/low importance. -- FMM-1992 (talk) 03:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Ss112 that there really is no need for Mainstream Rock in this case. Per the Alternative Airplay article: "Alternative Airplay ... ranks the 40 most-played songs on alternative and modern rock radio stations." As a modern rock sub-format, Mainstream Rock is in effect a component chart to Alternative Airplay. If this is just gonna lead to nonsense though, I'd instead suggest removing Sweden from the singles section, since the band only achieved 2 entries on that chart. You could choose from almost any of the international charts, though. Aside from "Closer" in Australia and "The Hand That Feeds" in the UK, they were really never a particularly big singles act outside of North America anyway. Homeostasis07 (talk/contributions) 01:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also agree with Ss112, I don't see the need for three US charts and the Alternative Airplay makes more sense to keep in my opinion, since it has more and higher chart positions. OBLIVIUS (talk) 10:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This One Is On Us[edit]

Should TOIOU be included on this page? I know it isn't official but it was practically sponsored by Trent. Just food for thought. Xe7al (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it would be wise to set that precedent. Unofficial or fan release albums shouldn't be included.----–m.f (t • c) 14:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, just thought I'd bring it up for the record. I agree that it sounds extremely iffy. Xe7al (talk) 16:24, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hurt music video[edit]

For some reason the music video section lists Hurt as unaired and unfinished. I assume theyre talking about a different music video that really was unfinished but there was a Hurt music video that was in HEAVY rotation at the time the album was current (1995 or so). It was a live video of the band in the shadows performing while film footage of things decaying and the aftermath of war was projected on a big screen. All in black and white, although it changes to color at the end when the distortion hits. Its even included on the music videos compilation Closure (aka Halo 12). At least I assume the Hurt (live version) on that release is the same one I remember. I havent seen Halo 12 myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.68.153.83 (talk) 04:46, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Came Back Haunted charts[edit]

Some random IP added that "Came Back Haunted" reached 58... when it never passed 109. Be on the watch for random IPs updating the charts. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 23:59, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recoiled[edit]

So, a company in the UK is releasing the Coil/NIN remixes... it is going to be 5 tracks... here is the info: http://coldspring.co.uk/discography/csr193cd/#.UtheDbSnLTp ... as far as I know this is not a bootleg, but it is not a Halo or a NIN released product... it is a series of NIN remixes acquired by the company legally (I hope anyways) and is recovered work that Coil did for Trent in the mid-90's. As these are NIN songs being remixed... I imagine they belong somewhere on here... but where? DMighton (talk) 22:43, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added it under EP's... I figure it is the same idea as Fixed for the most part... decided to be bold about it after seeing it available internationally and domestically on Amazon. DMighton (talk) 02:39, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Fragile & With Teeth Instrumentals[edit]

Both the Fragile and With Teeth have been released (on Apple Music) as instrumental albums a few months ago. Should those go under remix albums or a separate section? RF23 (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Nine Inch Nails discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:10, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Less Than music video[edit]

Hello, I was wondering when Less Than would be added in the music videos section. I would do it myself but I don't really know much about tables. It would say Less Than - 2017 - Brook Linder - (empty). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brodyargo (talk • contribs) 17:07, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Halo 31: Add Violence (2017) actually Halo 30?[edit]

Seems to be a mistake as the preceding album "Not the Actual Events" is Halo 29. Dosen't seem to have a direct source to the halo label system.

Trent Reznor appears from nowhere.[edit]

In the introductory comments, the first time he's mentioned he's just called Reznor. Surely there should be some sentence along the lines of "NIN frontman Trent Reznor..." or similar? For those of us who are just coming across the band for the first time.

31.48.151.122 (talk) 12:10, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nine Inch Nails discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:00, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nine Inch Nails discography. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nine_Inch_Nails_discography&oldid=1195539154"