a recording of the concert is not the same thing as the concert itself.
I can see the logic to the “only add the most specific” principle.
These are the kinds of relationships that linked data makes more explicit. MusicBrainz publishes linked data (via LinkedBrainz), but so far hasn’t adopted the linked-data approach to the extent that Wikidata has in the UI.
It’s a shame because the explanations above really make sense.
On the first issue of the recording location, adding Karlsruhe as a recording location is incorrect because the DM-Arena is not located in Karlsruhe city but in Rheinstetten, which is a city in the suburbs of Karlsruhe, but is not part of that city.
By adding an additional “recorded in” relationship, you imply that the concert was recorded at several locations at the same time. Some concerts such as “Live Aid” are indeed multi venue and recorded at several locations. But it’s not the case of that Baby Man concert in DM-Arena.
Karlsruhe may also refer to the Landkreis (district), which includes both cities of Karlsruhe and Rheinstetten. So the tour organizer were correct to refer to this location as “Karlsruhe”, referring to the district.
We could improve the MB data by adding this “Karlsruhe (district)” in the area data. This way the location would be displayed as:
dm-arena in Rheinstetten, Karlsruhe (district), Baden-Wûrttemberg, Germany.
On the second topic, an event is indeed not the same as the recording of the event … The tour is a series of events, not a series of recordings. It’s a lot of work to properly set this up, so the right approach would be to enlist other editors to set-up this tour data of Peter Gabriel.
Editing data in MB can be long and frustrating at times, I’ve experienced it on other topics, but we should try to keep a constructive mindset, as we have a great community here, trying to get all this music data as good as possible.