This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
10,000 Days (Tool album) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 9 March 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Hi, guys! has the genre been discussed? maybe it ain't much to discuss, but maybe 'art rock' would appropriate alongside the obligatory progressive metal? the whole 10,000 days epic, the lipan conjuring and lost keys interludes, intention and right in two are particularly artsy, what say you? Revan ltrl ( talk) 20:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Some additions to the article have been regarding the backmasking of "Listen to your father, stay in school," etc. in "Intension." I've listened to the song backwards, and it's absolutely there -- it's not one of those suspicious backmaskings that obviously were not intentional, like Satanic messages in Beatles songs. However, I'm hesitant to allow its mention in the article, because it seems like it's verging on Original Research. I was hoping some other people could chime in so that we have a consensus about what to do with it when anons add it in. Kane5187 17:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
It's there, I added it to the article without reading this, hope no one cares too much. -- xxsquishyxx
I was wondering..., does this track actually have lyrics? Is it something hidden; is it something only on specific versions, for example only US or something? According to [1] and [2] (probably copied from eachother) there are lyrics. I tried slowing/speeding up and reversing (because I was bored) but with no luck (it's funny that reversing the track doesn't really sound like anything special but also doesn't sound very distorted).
[1] http://lyrc.com.ar/en/tema1en.php?hash=ecc2f8f4840b5c0201473cbe438a2e0a [2] http://www.lyricsmania.com/lyrics/tool_lyrics_1951/10,000_days_lyrics_28301/viginti_tres_lyrics_309720.html
[1] http://randomnous.iamthecheese.com/id/black/c4.html [2] http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread88890/pg1
Hi guys, I just thought this is something that you might think should be on the album's Wikipedia page. Basically, "Wings for Marie (Part 1)" and "Viginti Tres" are the same length as "10,000 Days (Wings, Part 2)" (11:13). Play them together and they synch up. Go here: [ [1]] to read more. Stuart mcmillen 07:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
AVC: Some people think there are three tracks on 10,000 Days that supposedly form one hidden track that's the key to the whole album. It's as if people want to believe there's going to be some ultimate aesthetic payoff.
MJK: [Laughs.] We can barely decide whether we're going to do a baseball cap or a beanie. You know what I mean? Now, granted, if you subscribe to the whole spiritual, energetic level, when you get into that weird, meditative state… I'm trying to think of the word… Sufis? I don't remember—the whirling dervishes. When you get into that weird state, at some point, your body clicks out, and you have a weird out-of-body experience, and so you can tap into those things unconsciously. So if people are reading into those kind of things that basically had nothing to do with us, that are just us clicking in a moment and being true to that whirling-dervish process of emoting with each other, some of that stuff just might naturally, accidentally come out. But it's not in any way a product of our design.
I find that in synchronizing the songs you should play Viginti Tres first then Wings For Marie (Part 1), at the same time you are playing 10,000 Day (Wings Part 2).
I too find this much better than the other way around. 85.225.146.128 ( talk) 04:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I analysed all tracks: wings for marie pt 1 is a different bpm to wings for marie part 2. This therefor makes it impossible to mix the tracks together without inconsistencies. Unless you were to alter the bpm as they do when they play electronic music in a club, perhaps they could go together - but that would also alter the time of the song and then it wont be exactly the same length as pt1. So, there ya go - I dont think this was something they set out to create, its just a fluke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.109.169.45 ( talk) 13:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Anyone else have any theories about who (if any one person) "The Pot" is about? The more I listen to it, the more I think it's directed towards Rush Limbaugh over his Oxycotin scandal. ("Who are you to wave your fatty fingers at me? You must have been out your mind"). So far I haven't found any corroborating theories on this, but even the idea that it could be directed towards Limbaugh brings a smile to my face. Anyone have any other theories on this? - Y2mckay 22:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I just think the song is about hypocricy. It's been claimed many times and apparently by Maynard James Keenan himself. Who who's the hypocrite? Hm... YesMapRadio
From what I know the song is speaking to the injustice of the Kangaroo Courts for marijuana trials that were unfair and speedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.238.189 ( talk) 20:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that there's far too many professional reviews on this page. Is it really neccessary to have more there than just the usual reviews (Rolling Stone, AMG, etc.). I get the impression also that some of them aren't really professional. hellboy 01:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I was at the toolband site and on the left arm like thing by the tv I found a hidden link talking about filming the Rosetta Stoned video outside area 51, If anyone can confirm this, i cant figure how to get back. Gothmog1114 21:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
two pieces of foolishness have no place in the wiki.
"Another fan noted that jambi is also Finnish for iamb, a metrical foot where an unstressed syllable is followed by a stressed one, and that iambic meter is used in the lyrics of the song."
that is idiotic, and highly characteristic of tool fans. BLAIR's response in the newsletter clearly RIDICULES the idea that the finnish connection was intentional. in English there are two simple foot schemes (among others): IAMBIC and TROCHAIC. there are millions of poems and lyrics that use an iambic form. it's probably the most common foot scheme in English.
the morse code connection is even more idiotic. music uses rhythms. morse code is an alphabetic code using short and long blips. if you wanted to you could find all kinds of ridiculous "write-outs" by taking a morse code pattern from the rhythmics of any song ever recorded. you have to stop and ask yourself whether the phrase "3, 2, 1" could have any possible meaning whatsoever. the answer of course is no.
it's laughable that people find the need to reduce everything tool does to some pointless, incoherent, ridiculous puzzle or cipher. is the music somehow not good enough in its own right? you could find the exact same useless "messages" and connections IN ANY SONG EVER performed, if you're intent on finding one. yes there's probably a such thing in the world as a meaningful coincidence, or a productive coincidence, but the encoded message nonsense is garbage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.119.132.160 ( talk • contribs) 24 January 2007.
I'm really tired of coming here and see that someone has edited the 10,000 Days page to say that Jambi uses iambic meter. It does not. If you, for whatever reason, think that it does, then please provide examples from the lyrics where iambic meter is used. If you can't, then do not alter the article to say that it does. Mrmcpheezy 19:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm just going to delete the mention of iambs being used in the song and leave the fact that the title does mean iamb in Finnish. Mrmcpheezy 21:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC) Apparently the database is closed, so I can't save my edit, but this is what it should say: " In addition, Jambi is Finnish for iamb, a metrical foot where an unstressed syllable is followed by a stressed one." And that's it. Mrmcpheezy 21:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that not only is it not fair that articles for non-singles songs can't be created for tracks on 10,000 Days, but it also hinders the quality of Wikipedia as a whole. A while ago I created a pretty good starting article for Right in Two, which has since been turned into a redirect. Since many other artists, such as The Beatles, Nirvana, and the Red Hot Chilli Peppers have articles on nearly every song they've ever written, why not Tool? I feel that articles should be created for EVERY Tool song (I'm planning to complete "Pushit", "Eulogy", "10,000 Days (Wings Pt 2)", "Right in Two", and "Rosetta Stoned" soon). After all, the goal of Wikipedia is to provide comprehensive information on topics, so why not? I think they're notable enough. Floaterfluss (talk) (contribs) 17:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Alright, but if we take King Bee's assumption to be correct, then shouldn't we delete " Die Eier von Satan" and create " Eulogy" (one of the band's most popular songs and " 10,000 Days (Wings Pt 2)" (title track). I'll be willing to settle for that. Look, 10,000 Days has sold pretty well, so it's pretty notable. The reason that so many articles contain original research is because some Tool fans happen to be boneheads (like the ones that sing along at concerts) and will add a bunch of opinions and the like. The Rosetta Stoned article is all fact as far as I'm concerned. The trivia section is fact. Floaterfluss (talk) (contribs) 18:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm hella with king bee on this. If you can't find an article with information about a song to use as a source, then what is the purpose of starting a page for that song? People can go to toolnavy if they want to discuss the songs. That is not the purpose of wikipedia. Also, the fact that other bands have pages made for so many of their songs is not a reason for still more pages to made. Perhaps someone should look into getting rid of some of those. Mrmcpheezy 21:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
So, I had to add a original reasearch tag to the article, because I'm sick of Tool fans adding all of these claims about the backmasking, the wine, or anything else of that nature. We need to cite our sources here. So, I suggest we start finding sources, or start deleting things. Thanks. – King Bee ( τ • γ) 17:02, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I stumbled across this page, and I haven't even heard the album, but I think I could weigh in on the discussion, as I've read the rules on original research. I think you could mention the backmasking in the song while citing the song itself as a reference. I've seen this done in academic articles all the time. The rules for OR state that:
An edit counts as original research if it does any of the following:
It introduces a new theory or method of solution; It introduces original ideas; It defines new terms; It provides or presumes new definitions of pre-existing terms; It introduces an argument, without citing a reputable source for that argument, that purports to refute or support another idea, theory, argument, or position; It introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source;
It introduces or uses neologisms, without attributing the neologism to a reputable source
Citing the mere existance of something does not present a new theory, method, or solution. It does not introduce an original idea, it just tells you that something is there. It would no more present an original idea than stating that "this album has music on it" would be stating an original idea. It does not define new terms. It does not re-define preexisting terms. It doesn't introduce an argument. It does not present an analysis of the established facts. It is just stating the fact, without any kind of interpretation beyond just saying "it's there." It doesn't introduce any neologisms. Really, all you're doing is stating that there is something there. The best way to cite it would be to give the track time when the track is playing forward, not backward, and cite the album as your source. This isn't original research, any more than stating that "There is a picture of Bob Dylan on the cover of Blonde on Blonde" is original research.
Now, if there is another source, you should cite it, even if it isn't peer reviewed (which it won't be.) That will simplify everything. Dlmccaslin 20:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Nothing in this article about what or where that sample of dialogue in "Lost Keys" comes from? DJRaveN4x 11:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The article said that Ray Zone was credited for the 3D modeling found in the album art. This is not true. The computer-generated 3D modeling was created by (and credited to) Bayard Baudoin and Meats Meier. Ray Zone converted this CGI (as well as the photographs) to stereographic images viewable through the lenses provided. He did not model any of the 3D figures. I removed this statement from the article. Unless you can prove otherwise, please refrain from undoing this change, Oli Filth. 67.70.97.31 18:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
It says that the video has not been released. I have seen the video, I know it HAS been released. someone needs to fix that.
Where does Adam Jones use a sitar? Seems like a load of nonsense to me... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.242.88 ( talk) 16:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The whole section needs to be outright removed, it's in clear violation of everything wikipedia stands for (See: Being an encyclpedia, not songmeanings.com or a fansite).
Song interperation is out of place in an encyclopedia. You'll see nearly no other wikipedia album articles littered with this much speculative and plainly useless interperation. On the songs page is more acceptable. NOT on the albums page.
I understand a lot of you are Tool fans (as am I), and believe that it's valid under your belief that Tool songs are more open to interperation than say, the Jonas Brothers; but that is irrelevant, this whole section is still out of place in an otherwise decent album article.
So in closing, please move it to either the songs page (if it doesn't have one, tough luck) or delete it entirely, it's out of place with nearly all other album articles on wikipedia. 75.149.203.217 ( talk) 18:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Was "Viginti Tres" made by Lustmord? It is pretty similar to his album releases and the sound effects he did for the "Vicarious" music video. -- Wiz-Pro3 ( talk) 13:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
This is said in in the 'Track Interpretations' section:
Contact with alien entities as well as an inability to understand the experience is common with heavy DMT usage.
It is formulated as stating common knowledge, which it is not. There is also no problem in understanding a DMT experience, and if there is, it has nothing to do with DMT usage at all. If this sort of information is to be presented in this manner (conveying general knowledge instead of sticking to telling the storyline) it ought to be done somewhere else by someone who has experience in these matters.
So, because it is not in the song, but an opinion, wrong, not factual, I opt to remove that line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.251.69.245 ( talk) 04:30, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
If only one did meet "aliens" during DMT :-). I agree it should be removed; a gross generalization and un-sourced. I have thus removed The7thdr ( talk) 04:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
This video contains Maynard with his opinion on internet downloading/leaks, dont know if a youtube video can be a source though. I also believe it is the only source on this matter... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idPPnWRgTiU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.103.14 ( talk) 22:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
I recall hearing when the album came out that it was titled such because the date was 10,000 days before the Mayan calendar said the world was going to end. Anybody have a source on this? DanielDPeterson ( talk) 23:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I created a "Trivia" section to mention the synchronised songs, however the only proof I have is from a blogspot page about Tool. Anybody able to find a more reliable source about it?
Here is the "Trivia" section recreated in case the wikibot blocks the URL from changing the page again (it said something about how the URL wasn't appropriate for Wikipedia, which makes sense, because its from a blog. However, I feel like this should be mentioned on the page and that's currently the only source I have for it)
It has been revealed that when playing some of the songs together, you can create hidden songs from the album. Currently, the known mix is of " Viginti Tres," " Wings for Marie (Part 1)," and " 10,000 Days (Wings Part 2)." This is achieved by using a sound editor, placing "10,000 Days" in its own track, and then placing "Viginti Tres" and "Wings or Marie (Part 1)" in a second track, with "Wings" directly following "Viginti." This puzzle-like combination of songs is similar to the picture of the members of the band, which has been hinted at being able to be put together as a sort of a puzzle. Fans have noted similarities among other songs that may suggest more of these musical puzzles to be solved, perhaps aimed at creating a larger final result. (Source: http://tool.wordpress.com/2006/06/20/tool-post-to-go-here/).
I think that this should be called a "Layered Song" as Synchronisation refers to time, whereas the tempo is not consistent in the layered song. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psypherium ( talk • contribs) 03:46, 12 September 2011 (UTC) I'm sorry lol, Thankyou autosignbot! Psypherium ( talk) 03:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC) I could be wrong and feel free to revert me if you feel that I am wrong or can cite a reference, but it seemed to me that it wasn't perfectly in sync, moving one song one way would cause one part to be in time, but an earlier or later time to be off-timed. Psypherium ( talk) 09:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
It is actually there. I guess if enough Tool fanboys grasp at straws, one of them will eventually find something legitimate. Find cites before you put it in though. 143.92.1.33 ( talk) 03:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Two Hearted River uploaded a new version of the album cover image displaying the 3D glasses insert over the cover. I wasn't so sure of this done as the accessory isn't apart of the album's artwork as suggested by Template:Infobox album#Cover, but he argued with it after I reverted it and reverted it back to his revision so I wanted to ask here. What does anyone else suggest what should be done here? • GunMetal Angel 17:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
My copy also has the glasses, but right now the discussion seems to be drifting towards "are there copies of the album without the glasses out there?" to decide the outcome, which is what this shouldn't be about. I'll leave this comment here with stating that I have never seen the album with the glasses as being part of the artwork, which even the guideline for album infoboxes makes mention that it's the artwork that should be uploaded, says nothing about anything extra. The cover for The Devil Wears Prada's albums, With Roots Above and Branches Below and Dead Throne, both have their band logo as a part of the plastic wrap packaging. But when it's removed, there aren't these things and yet both the Wikipedia articles for both these albums have images of what they look like without whatever's on top of it and this image should be treated the same. • GunMetal Angel 07:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
a few songs still have that early 90s tool feel.
also it says somewhere that danny considers tool an alternative band. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.220.148 ( talk) 11:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on 10,000 Days. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
10,000 Days (Tool album) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 9 March 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
Hi, guys! has the genre been discussed? maybe it ain't much to discuss, but maybe 'art rock' would appropriate alongside the obligatory progressive metal? the whole 10,000 days epic, the lipan conjuring and lost keys interludes, intention and right in two are particularly artsy, what say you? Revan ltrl ( talk) 20:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Some additions to the article have been regarding the backmasking of "Listen to your father, stay in school," etc. in "Intension." I've listened to the song backwards, and it's absolutely there -- it's not one of those suspicious backmaskings that obviously were not intentional, like Satanic messages in Beatles songs. However, I'm hesitant to allow its mention in the article, because it seems like it's verging on Original Research. I was hoping some other people could chime in so that we have a consensus about what to do with it when anons add it in. Kane5187 17:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
It's there, I added it to the article without reading this, hope no one cares too much. -- xxsquishyxx
I was wondering..., does this track actually have lyrics? Is it something hidden; is it something only on specific versions, for example only US or something? According to [1] and [2] (probably copied from eachother) there are lyrics. I tried slowing/speeding up and reversing (because I was bored) but with no luck (it's funny that reversing the track doesn't really sound like anything special but also doesn't sound very distorted).
[1] http://lyrc.com.ar/en/tema1en.php?hash=ecc2f8f4840b5c0201473cbe438a2e0a [2] http://www.lyricsmania.com/lyrics/tool_lyrics_1951/10,000_days_lyrics_28301/viginti_tres_lyrics_309720.html
[1] http://randomnous.iamthecheese.com/id/black/c4.html [2] http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread88890/pg1
Hi guys, I just thought this is something that you might think should be on the album's Wikipedia page. Basically, "Wings for Marie (Part 1)" and "Viginti Tres" are the same length as "10,000 Days (Wings, Part 2)" (11:13). Play them together and they synch up. Go here: [ [1]] to read more. Stuart mcmillen 07:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
AVC: Some people think there are three tracks on 10,000 Days that supposedly form one hidden track that's the key to the whole album. It's as if people want to believe there's going to be some ultimate aesthetic payoff.
MJK: [Laughs.] We can barely decide whether we're going to do a baseball cap or a beanie. You know what I mean? Now, granted, if you subscribe to the whole spiritual, energetic level, when you get into that weird, meditative state… I'm trying to think of the word… Sufis? I don't remember—the whirling dervishes. When you get into that weird state, at some point, your body clicks out, and you have a weird out-of-body experience, and so you can tap into those things unconsciously. So if people are reading into those kind of things that basically had nothing to do with us, that are just us clicking in a moment and being true to that whirling-dervish process of emoting with each other, some of that stuff just might naturally, accidentally come out. But it's not in any way a product of our design.
I find that in synchronizing the songs you should play Viginti Tres first then Wings For Marie (Part 1), at the same time you are playing 10,000 Day (Wings Part 2).
I too find this much better than the other way around. 85.225.146.128 ( talk) 04:57, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
I analysed all tracks: wings for marie pt 1 is a different bpm to wings for marie part 2. This therefor makes it impossible to mix the tracks together without inconsistencies. Unless you were to alter the bpm as they do when they play electronic music in a club, perhaps they could go together - but that would also alter the time of the song and then it wont be exactly the same length as pt1. So, there ya go - I dont think this was something they set out to create, its just a fluke. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.109.169.45 ( talk) 13:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Anyone else have any theories about who (if any one person) "The Pot" is about? The more I listen to it, the more I think it's directed towards Rush Limbaugh over his Oxycotin scandal. ("Who are you to wave your fatty fingers at me? You must have been out your mind"). So far I haven't found any corroborating theories on this, but even the idea that it could be directed towards Limbaugh brings a smile to my face. Anyone have any other theories on this? - Y2mckay 22:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I just think the song is about hypocricy. It's been claimed many times and apparently by Maynard James Keenan himself. Who who's the hypocrite? Hm... YesMapRadio
From what I know the song is speaking to the injustice of the Kangaroo Courts for marijuana trials that were unfair and speedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.238.189 ( talk) 20:01, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that there's far too many professional reviews on this page. Is it really neccessary to have more there than just the usual reviews (Rolling Stone, AMG, etc.). I get the impression also that some of them aren't really professional. hellboy 01:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I was at the toolband site and on the left arm like thing by the tv I found a hidden link talking about filming the Rosetta Stoned video outside area 51, If anyone can confirm this, i cant figure how to get back. Gothmog1114 21:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
two pieces of foolishness have no place in the wiki.
"Another fan noted that jambi is also Finnish for iamb, a metrical foot where an unstressed syllable is followed by a stressed one, and that iambic meter is used in the lyrics of the song."
that is idiotic, and highly characteristic of tool fans. BLAIR's response in the newsletter clearly RIDICULES the idea that the finnish connection was intentional. in English there are two simple foot schemes (among others): IAMBIC and TROCHAIC. there are millions of poems and lyrics that use an iambic form. it's probably the most common foot scheme in English.
the morse code connection is even more idiotic. music uses rhythms. morse code is an alphabetic code using short and long blips. if you wanted to you could find all kinds of ridiculous "write-outs" by taking a morse code pattern from the rhythmics of any song ever recorded. you have to stop and ask yourself whether the phrase "3, 2, 1" could have any possible meaning whatsoever. the answer of course is no.
it's laughable that people find the need to reduce everything tool does to some pointless, incoherent, ridiculous puzzle or cipher. is the music somehow not good enough in its own right? you could find the exact same useless "messages" and connections IN ANY SONG EVER performed, if you're intent on finding one. yes there's probably a such thing in the world as a meaningful coincidence, or a productive coincidence, but the encoded message nonsense is garbage. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.119.132.160 ( talk • contribs) 24 January 2007.
I'm really tired of coming here and see that someone has edited the 10,000 Days page to say that Jambi uses iambic meter. It does not. If you, for whatever reason, think that it does, then please provide examples from the lyrics where iambic meter is used. If you can't, then do not alter the article to say that it does. Mrmcpheezy 19:03, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm just going to delete the mention of iambs being used in the song and leave the fact that the title does mean iamb in Finnish. Mrmcpheezy 21:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC) Apparently the database is closed, so I can't save my edit, but this is what it should say: " In addition, Jambi is Finnish for iamb, a metrical foot where an unstressed syllable is followed by a stressed one." And that's it. Mrmcpheezy 21:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that not only is it not fair that articles for non-singles songs can't be created for tracks on 10,000 Days, but it also hinders the quality of Wikipedia as a whole. A while ago I created a pretty good starting article for Right in Two, which has since been turned into a redirect. Since many other artists, such as The Beatles, Nirvana, and the Red Hot Chilli Peppers have articles on nearly every song they've ever written, why not Tool? I feel that articles should be created for EVERY Tool song (I'm planning to complete "Pushit", "Eulogy", "10,000 Days (Wings Pt 2)", "Right in Two", and "Rosetta Stoned" soon). After all, the goal of Wikipedia is to provide comprehensive information on topics, so why not? I think they're notable enough. Floaterfluss (talk) (contribs) 17:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Alright, but if we take King Bee's assumption to be correct, then shouldn't we delete " Die Eier von Satan" and create " Eulogy" (one of the band's most popular songs and " 10,000 Days (Wings Pt 2)" (title track). I'll be willing to settle for that. Look, 10,000 Days has sold pretty well, so it's pretty notable. The reason that so many articles contain original research is because some Tool fans happen to be boneheads (like the ones that sing along at concerts) and will add a bunch of opinions and the like. The Rosetta Stoned article is all fact as far as I'm concerned. The trivia section is fact. Floaterfluss (talk) (contribs) 18:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm hella with king bee on this. If you can't find an article with information about a song to use as a source, then what is the purpose of starting a page for that song? People can go to toolnavy if they want to discuss the songs. That is not the purpose of wikipedia. Also, the fact that other bands have pages made for so many of their songs is not a reason for still more pages to made. Perhaps someone should look into getting rid of some of those. Mrmcpheezy 21:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
So, I had to add a original reasearch tag to the article, because I'm sick of Tool fans adding all of these claims about the backmasking, the wine, or anything else of that nature. We need to cite our sources here. So, I suggest we start finding sources, or start deleting things. Thanks. – King Bee ( τ • γ) 17:02, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I stumbled across this page, and I haven't even heard the album, but I think I could weigh in on the discussion, as I've read the rules on original research. I think you could mention the backmasking in the song while citing the song itself as a reference. I've seen this done in academic articles all the time. The rules for OR state that:
An edit counts as original research if it does any of the following:
It introduces a new theory or method of solution; It introduces original ideas; It defines new terms; It provides or presumes new definitions of pre-existing terms; It introduces an argument, without citing a reputable source for that argument, that purports to refute or support another idea, theory, argument, or position; It introduces an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source;
It introduces or uses neologisms, without attributing the neologism to a reputable source
Citing the mere existance of something does not present a new theory, method, or solution. It does not introduce an original idea, it just tells you that something is there. It would no more present an original idea than stating that "this album has music on it" would be stating an original idea. It does not define new terms. It does not re-define preexisting terms. It doesn't introduce an argument. It does not present an analysis of the established facts. It is just stating the fact, without any kind of interpretation beyond just saying "it's there." It doesn't introduce any neologisms. Really, all you're doing is stating that there is something there. The best way to cite it would be to give the track time when the track is playing forward, not backward, and cite the album as your source. This isn't original research, any more than stating that "There is a picture of Bob Dylan on the cover of Blonde on Blonde" is original research.
Now, if there is another source, you should cite it, even if it isn't peer reviewed (which it won't be.) That will simplify everything. Dlmccaslin 20:08, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Nothing in this article about what or where that sample of dialogue in "Lost Keys" comes from? DJRaveN4x 11:25, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
The article said that Ray Zone was credited for the 3D modeling found in the album art. This is not true. The computer-generated 3D modeling was created by (and credited to) Bayard Baudoin and Meats Meier. Ray Zone converted this CGI (as well as the photographs) to stereographic images viewable through the lenses provided. He did not model any of the 3D figures. I removed this statement from the article. Unless you can prove otherwise, please refrain from undoing this change, Oli Filth. 67.70.97.31 18:12, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
It says that the video has not been released. I have seen the video, I know it HAS been released. someone needs to fix that.
Where does Adam Jones use a sitar? Seems like a load of nonsense to me... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.242.88 ( talk) 16:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The whole section needs to be outright removed, it's in clear violation of everything wikipedia stands for (See: Being an encyclpedia, not songmeanings.com or a fansite).
Song interperation is out of place in an encyclopedia. You'll see nearly no other wikipedia album articles littered with this much speculative and plainly useless interperation. On the songs page is more acceptable. NOT on the albums page.
I understand a lot of you are Tool fans (as am I), and believe that it's valid under your belief that Tool songs are more open to interperation than say, the Jonas Brothers; but that is irrelevant, this whole section is still out of place in an otherwise decent album article.
So in closing, please move it to either the songs page (if it doesn't have one, tough luck) or delete it entirely, it's out of place with nearly all other album articles on wikipedia. 75.149.203.217 ( talk) 18:58, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Was "Viginti Tres" made by Lustmord? It is pretty similar to his album releases and the sound effects he did for the "Vicarious" music video. -- Wiz-Pro3 ( talk) 13:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
This is said in in the 'Track Interpretations' section:
Contact with alien entities as well as an inability to understand the experience is common with heavy DMT usage.
It is formulated as stating common knowledge, which it is not. There is also no problem in understanding a DMT experience, and if there is, it has nothing to do with DMT usage at all. If this sort of information is to be presented in this manner (conveying general knowledge instead of sticking to telling the storyline) it ought to be done somewhere else by someone who has experience in these matters.
So, because it is not in the song, but an opinion, wrong, not factual, I opt to remove that line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.251.69.245 ( talk) 04:30, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
If only one did meet "aliens" during DMT :-). I agree it should be removed; a gross generalization and un-sourced. I have thus removed The7thdr ( talk) 04:23, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
This video contains Maynard with his opinion on internet downloading/leaks, dont know if a youtube video can be a source though. I also believe it is the only source on this matter... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idPPnWRgTiU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.103.14 ( talk) 22:03, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
I recall hearing when the album came out that it was titled such because the date was 10,000 days before the Mayan calendar said the world was going to end. Anybody have a source on this? DanielDPeterson ( talk) 23:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I created a "Trivia" section to mention the synchronised songs, however the only proof I have is from a blogspot page about Tool. Anybody able to find a more reliable source about it?
Here is the "Trivia" section recreated in case the wikibot blocks the URL from changing the page again (it said something about how the URL wasn't appropriate for Wikipedia, which makes sense, because its from a blog. However, I feel like this should be mentioned on the page and that's currently the only source I have for it)
It has been revealed that when playing some of the songs together, you can create hidden songs from the album. Currently, the known mix is of " Viginti Tres," " Wings for Marie (Part 1)," and " 10,000 Days (Wings Part 2)." This is achieved by using a sound editor, placing "10,000 Days" in its own track, and then placing "Viginti Tres" and "Wings or Marie (Part 1)" in a second track, with "Wings" directly following "Viginti." This puzzle-like combination of songs is similar to the picture of the members of the band, which has been hinted at being able to be put together as a sort of a puzzle. Fans have noted similarities among other songs that may suggest more of these musical puzzles to be solved, perhaps aimed at creating a larger final result. (Source: http://tool.wordpress.com/2006/06/20/tool-post-to-go-here/).
I think that this should be called a "Layered Song" as Synchronisation refers to time, whereas the tempo is not consistent in the layered song. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Psypherium ( talk • contribs) 03:46, 12 September 2011 (UTC) I'm sorry lol, Thankyou autosignbot! Psypherium ( talk) 03:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC) I could be wrong and feel free to revert me if you feel that I am wrong or can cite a reference, but it seemed to me that it wasn't perfectly in sync, moving one song one way would cause one part to be in time, but an earlier or later time to be off-timed. Psypherium ( talk) 09:31, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
It is actually there. I guess if enough Tool fanboys grasp at straws, one of them will eventually find something legitimate. Find cites before you put it in though. 143.92.1.33 ( talk) 03:56, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 20:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
Two Hearted River uploaded a new version of the album cover image displaying the 3D glasses insert over the cover. I wasn't so sure of this done as the accessory isn't apart of the album's artwork as suggested by Template:Infobox album#Cover, but he argued with it after I reverted it and reverted it back to his revision so I wanted to ask here. What does anyone else suggest what should be done here? • GunMetal Angel 17:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
My copy also has the glasses, but right now the discussion seems to be drifting towards "are there copies of the album without the glasses out there?" to decide the outcome, which is what this shouldn't be about. I'll leave this comment here with stating that I have never seen the album with the glasses as being part of the artwork, which even the guideline for album infoboxes makes mention that it's the artwork that should be uploaded, says nothing about anything extra. The cover for The Devil Wears Prada's albums, With Roots Above and Branches Below and Dead Throne, both have their band logo as a part of the plastic wrap packaging. But when it's removed, there aren't these things and yet both the Wikipedia articles for both these albums have images of what they look like without whatever's on top of it and this image should be treated the same. • GunMetal Angel 07:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
a few songs still have that early 90s tool feel.
also it says somewhere that danny considers tool an alternative band. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.220.148 ( talk) 11:56, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on 10,000 Days. 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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:09, 21 May 2017 (UTC)