Talk:Trance Energy

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rave, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.RaveWikipedia:WikiProject RaveTemplate:WikiProject RaveRave articles

Dance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Dance and Dance-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DanceWikipedia:WikiProject DanceTemplate:WikiProject DanceDance articles

WikiProject Dance To-do list:

To nominate at WP:FAC:
To improve to Featured standard:
To nominate as a Good article:
To expand: 18th century dance - 20th century ballet - Bolero - Choreography on Broadway - Dance education - English ballet - Indian classical dance - Italian ballet - List of dance companies - Meg Stuart - Opera ballet - Sasha Waltz - Scotch reel - Set dance - Physically integrated dance
To cleanup: Contra dance - Salsa (dance) - Dandiya - Lead and follow
To unbias:
To check for copyvios:
To merge: List of dancers and List of dance personalities‎ as per AfD discussion
Substubs needing expansion: see /substubs
To destub: Amir Hossain Babu - Canada Dance Festival - Dance etiquette - Flash dance - more
Needing references: Chorus line - specifically verifying that each girl actually started out as a chorine
To create: Broadway dance - Country Western Dance International - Dance and cinema - Dance and society - German folk dancing - Latin swing - Post-structuralist ballet - Push (dance) - Salon dance - Shuffle dance - Swing boogie - World Dance Alliance - Xavier Le Roy - more
Wanted Pics/Graphics: Category:Dance articles needing images

Festivals

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Festivals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Festivals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FestivalsWikipedia:WikiProject FestivalsTemplate:WikiProject FestivalsFestivals articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Who Is Trying to Damage ID&T With Spreading Negative Rumours?

I notice this article is written from the standpoint of one person. It sounds like a big bulk of it in the 'Transition to Energy' section is written from the standpoint of a rival promoter trying to damage the event. I'm going to allocate more time to go through it and remove all the wild speculation and 'hate mongering'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danceking5 (talk • contribs) 04:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have looked at it, and don't agree with you. Buzz on this event was very negative with a lot of former partygoers who were very loyal to this event were obviously disappointed with the change. If you look at Energy's facebook page you'll see loads of negative comments and I really don't think they were coming from rival promoters. Energy's page in itself is filled with those angry comments. The negative buzz at least in the first year did exist and will be part of the history of this event even if it becomes very sucessful years from now.

If you look at what was written on that page, it is written that the buzz was very negative (it clearly was, go on facebook, go on the official page, it is not speculation), it is written that the organizer reported the party as sold out yet 20 000 tickets were sold. Given that the main stage was never closed during the night (fact ! I was there) it is clearly indicating that the party was NOT sold out. In fact it was very far from sold out.

It is then written that this was a commercial failure. Well if you are in business and one third of your ticket get unsold (which the 20 000 figure seems to indicate) you clearly lost money on the event. When this event used to be sold out or filled close to it's capacity it's a failure and very embarassing one (which is why they tried to hide it with the sold out panel which won't change their bottom line). I would not like to have to see my boss and say : "hey we had a wonderful idea this year, we changed something which used to work and earn a lot of money into something new which cost us a lot of money".

I think that ID&T has damaged itself with that change. It's a good company and they still organize a lot of sucessful events like Sensation. But on this one and for strange reasons, they messed up. Hope they do better next year.

Beside that you removed speculation about competition with other promoters. You were right to remove them since there are not enough clues to back them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.229.179.123 (talk) 18:00, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tried to rework what was removed to make it more neutral. As Energy and Trance Energy are two different events, may be using two different pages would be appropriate. Trance Energy will allways be remembered as a special festival by the trance community even if it does not return to it's former glory and keeping a page on that event would be justified as it had a huge influence on the trance scene. (In this case one paragraph about Energy announcement and failure at the end is enough).

On the other hand, if Energy is to be successful (and last more than one or two years), people might want to talk about this new event and not see pages and pages of story about a former event they probably won't like. (And in this case only one paragraph about the fact that the party was announced as the successor of a very successful event, that the former crowd didn't like it and a such first edition was fucked). We have to bear in mind that trance fans probably won't go next year so the event's mood might be better. (At least we won't see as much negativity as there was this year which is never good for party mood). It will then either be successful or fall into oblivion. (Unfortunately I don't beleive that ID&T will resurrect Trance Energy even if it would probably be a wise business decision since they used to make money with Trance Energy and did loose some with Energy. ).

I sympathise, but we need reliable sources, see WP:VERIFY and WP:RS. The article has been tagged since August as lacking sources, so I've removed a lot. Individual experience doesn't count here. And I've no opinions on this kind of music. Dougweller (talk) 18:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The failure of the first edition of Energy is fact

To Danceking and Dougweller (and to wikipedia editors if not settled).

As you probably know, the first edition of Energy was NOT sucessful. It is not slander a company to report that buzz on a new event was VERY negative. Especially when the source is the company's own official website : http://www.trance-energy.com/

You can also check the event's own facebook page : http://www.facebook.com/110826798977452/posts/159041614155970

I don't want to say the party was crap, but anyway a lot of people didn't like it and made their disappointment wide known on internet forum. This is fact. The buzz was VERY negative and there even was an official email from ID&T to try to estinguish the fire.

So reinstating a sentence saying that the new formula was "badly received" and that there was "negative buzz on the internet" for the first edition of Energy is fact. It is also fact that the buzz was negative before and after the event.

Now, for the commercial failure it is written on the Wikipedia page that attendence was 20 000 people for a party that used to bring 30 000 people and even sold out in advance. You may have liked the new formula, it may even be very successful in the future BUT having one third of the ticket unsold on the day of an event which used to be sold out IS a commercial failure.

If anonymous reviews have no point in an encyclopedia, mass criticism of an event is a fact. Everyyear, you found a few people saying that a particular edition of Trance Energy was shit and it never ended in wikipedia. What was special this year was that thousands of people complained and they mostly complained about the same thing.

Unless serious points are made on this comemnt page, I plan to reinstate some old version of the page. Wikipedia ought not to be an advertising page for fest organizers.

If you are a fan of the new formula of Energy, liked it and want to go again next year, don't be bothered by this page. It may be successful event after all. Not all first editions of successful events were successful and the organizer may make something more balanced. Please remember that after the public announcement it was probably too late for ID&T to make any adjustment to the concept (artists already booked) so they may have had no other option to watch the disaster unfold.

Now, if you work for ID&T and are just pissed-off that reputation for one of your events is going sour, then just try to announce something that will appease criticism for next year (perhaps apologies may be appreciated, because a lot of people were really pissed off). If the buzz is mostly positive for the second edition, and sales are good again, this will be a noteworthy fact and people will only remember that the first edition was fucked. This happens !

Addition as an arena at Tomorrowland 2017?

For weekend 1 of Tomorrowland in Belgium, it was announced that Trance Energy would have it's own arena at the festival. Shortly thereafter, the Trance Energy Facebook page began picking up in terms of activity.

Whilst it's still speculative that Trance Energy would be returning to standalone events at this point in time. Would it be appropriate to add this to the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.171.133.169 (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]