Talk:Asylum Tour (Disturbed)

Set-list

We don't seems to have a consensus here. Point out to me what's wrong with how I've written it. I certainly have several problems with your style. For instance:

1. I don't think I've ever seen someone link a song without an article to the album it came from. Normally with a tour set list you would make a note in parenthesize which album the song came from ("Voices (from The Sickness, 2000)").
2. I don't see why the notes section needs to be in small text. Please explain.
3. I can't see what you have against having the list hidden.
4. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles) applies to the written form. This is a list.

Address these before you edit the article WickedKnightAlbel (talk) 05:25, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

1. Yes, I've seen that too. That format can easily become too cumbersome however if the artist changes the order of the setlist frequently or if, for example, the medley on the Uproar setlist featured songs from different albums. Linking songs to its respective album is not the most intuitive approach, I agree, but I still feel that it adds value to the article and that the reader will understand its purpose.
2. These are typically minor points of (a) section(s), which may only be informative to a select group of readers, thus the small text.
3. Never stated I had a problem with a hidden setlist, but I only find this necessary when there are a significant amount of multiple setlists of which, currently, there is not. What are the advantages of having the setlist hidden?
4. There does not appear to be a consensus on songs and singles in a list style. If you could point that out, please do. I still feel the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles) guideline applies to this case; using quotation marks for songs and singles is fairly standard I would think. Most track listings on album pages (e.g. The Sickness, Ten Thousand Fists) feature its songs in quotation marks, and these are also presented in a list style. (Freak.scenery (talk) 15:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC))

1. So basically, this won't be a problem unless the band makes any changes from the set (which they rarely do) or unless they play a new medley for a different leg. In the face of such a problem we generally head the set with "Typical setlist" with occasional variations noted, and with a massive-sized tour we do like the Metallica tour articles: we list how many times each song was played during the course of the tour. I think we can leave that as is.
2. If you don't think it'll be of interest to the majority then I'm satisfied with that.
3. I think that lists in general should be hidden if possible since they're not likely to be very important to the average visitor; this article started as a listing for tour dates in the first place.
4. I read through several pages trying to find a rule for quotation marks in lists and haven't seen one yet. Looking at the sets for Iron Maiden's tours, with the exception of The Final Frontier World Tour, none of them have used quotation marks. Honestly, it's just a personal opinion that they make the list look ugly. And with that I have to wonder, what point do they serve? WickedKnightAlbel (talk) 22:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

1. I would prefer the setlist without the featured album in parentheses; I feel it clutters up the list. It also seems unnecessary in this case as most of the songs have their own page already.
2. Cool.
3. I don't necessarily agree with that, if people are interested in the tour and the article, it's likely they would have interest in the songs being performed. It is not as if the page is bursting with information already, on the setlist or otherwise. So I still don't see the advantage for condensing the setlist, unless there are a number of variations on the setlist. If the setlist were to be posted without the hidden parameter, I do agree that the fact that it is a festival setlist would have to be emphasised more than what I had posted previously.
4. I don't know the exact reason, I figure it is simply the standardised way to identify what is and what is not a song. Many style guides state that titles of songs should be enclosed in quotation marks whereas, say, the titles of albums, are italicised. Best to follow these standards for uniformity and clarity.

On the same note, if the setlist does end up changing frequently, as it did on the last tour, then this section may have to be removed. There's no primary source to reference the setlist variations, not even a secondary source (that I can find) to reference the main Uproar setlist. setlist.fm is not a suitable source for referencing setlists. (Freak.scenery (talk) 15:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC))

1. Then what would work better? Would you like them gone? As long as we don't do something as confusing as linking non-singles to their respective album.
2. If that's your opinion then we're at an impasse. I've always seen this wiki follow the ideology that less clutter is better and that average readers should be put first. If someone is interested in the set they'll open the condensed list.
3. Personally I'd like clarification from an expert on the policy for lists and quotes, but until we can get such clarification we can go with the quotation marks (but I still don't like how they make the article look or see what they add).

May I ask what the wiki's attitude towards setlist.fm is? WickedKnightAlbel (talk) 23:27, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

1. Yes, I'm willing to settle with the non-singles being unlinked.
3. I have updated the setlist to something we might agree on. I have kept it hidden but removed what I thought was an ugly purple header and made the fact that it is a festival setlist more prominent, leaving it open for updates when the band begin playing non-festival shows on this tour. Let me know if you're satisfied with these changes.
4. You could open a discussion about that at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(titles) and get back to me if an expert says different.

Since setlist.fm is an open wiki, using the website for sources appears to contravene the WP:NOR and WP:SELFPUBLISH policies. I'm willing to leave the setlist section as it is for now, but eventually it will have to be verified by a reliable source. (Freak.scenery (talk) 01:58, 20 September 2010 (UTC))

1. I'd say that's settled then.
2. You found the purple header ugly? I personally thought it looked better for the page. Well I'm not about to get bogged down in personal opinion. That seems settled too.
3. I don't have the patience for that; no one ever responds to those anyway.

I think the sourcing behind the set should be left for another discussion. I don't think I've ever seen any other source that records set lists.WickedKnightAlbel (talk) 06:22, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Korn, Disturbed co-headlining Music As a Weapon V

I would not put Korn as an supporting act for Disturbed. It IS Disturbed's tour but Disturbed have agreed to respectively co-headline the tour with Korn - in other terms, Disturbed will headline the first show in Bloomington, IL and Korn headlines the next show in Des Moines and so on. And this has been confirmed by Jonathan Davis of Korn on Korn.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.224.87.198 (talk) 02:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I've adjusted the article accordingly. (Freak.scenery (talk) 15:12, 6 January 2011 (UTC))

Thanks! I think fans are going to be a little surprised to find out that Disturbed is alternating with Korn on this tour. I don't think it was publicly noted in the press release but Jonathan Davis reiterated 'switching off with Disturbed' in Korn.com's live chat in early December. Things could change though. 72.224.87.198 (talk) 05:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Yakima wa concert

I was at that concert and korn was the last one to play I don't get why people keep changing it to say that the didn't play last. Sportsmen4920 (talk) 14:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I checked reviews of shows on the tour online and it looks like I listed the rotations of Korn and Disturbed incorrectly. Thanks for pointing that out, my bad. (Freak.scenery (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC))

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Asylum Tour (Disturbed). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101011075947/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com:80/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=147395 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=147395
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100830072335/http://www.kerrang.com:80/blog/2010/07/disturbed_to_headline_taste_of.html to http://www.kerrang.com/blog/2010/07/disturbed_to_headline_taste_of.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100801133843/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com:80/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=143735 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=143735

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 11:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)