From Specific types of releases:
"If a live bootleg has a proper title, enter the release title as it is on the release and follow the guidelines for live bootlegs for the release group title. If a live bootleg doesn't have a proper title, follow those guidelines for both the release title and release group title."
I see a looot of bootleg releases being renamed w/ the expanded date/location info- it's very easy to miss on the Live bootlegs style guide that this applies only to the release group (I didn't see it myself until around my 5th read of it).
Also, specifically for live bootlegs, I believe it makes far more sense to group multiple versions of the same show into the same release group. There are already 4 bootlegs of The Smashing Pumpkins 1995-10-23 concert on mb, and there are many more bootlegs & recordings that are primarily of the same show. Having a separate release group for each of these just clutters up the listing, IMO, when it seems to me that these should just be listed under a single release group of "1995-10-23: Riviera, Chicago, IL, USA".
This was argued at (great) length here a few years ago, and most of the votes seem to be in favor of what I'm proposing, so I'm bringing it up again as a formal style update. For the sake of preempting one of the counter-arguments present in that thread (i.e. where to "draw the line"), this will only apply to live concert bootlegs (no extended recording sessions, etc). I'll define "concert" here in the narrowest common-sense view: a single "concert" by an artist consisting of 1 or more "sets" and 0 or more "encores". No festivals, no all-day multi-city/artist crazy events like LiveEarth or SxSW, etc. For true "Various Artist" events still considered 1 "set" (or sets/encore(s)) where the artists rotate out per song, that can be easily handled by track/artist credits.
So, I've set up a copy of the Live bootleg w/ some proposed changes- please comment!