Talk:Slipknot (band)

Archive

• Talk:Slipknot (band)/Archive 1: The Beginning – July 2006

Genre

I think we should change the genre to alternative metal/rap metal/heavy metal. That is what the all music guide puts for their genre. DavidJJJ 21:44, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally I would approve of adding alternative metal, but would oppose adding either rap metal or heavy metal, or removing nu metal. The only problem with all music in regard to nu-metal is that it does not list nu-metal as a genre in any respect. The mixture of elements from alternative metal, rap metal, and heavy metal is one of the defining elements of nu metal. Wildnox 21:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

We all agree that the band is some sort of metal so why dont we just call there genre Unspacific Metal instead of dabated. Matthew Husdon 20:11, 19 August 2006

I think it should definetely be noted that the band's first couple albums are nu metal, and their latest is more alternative metal. Nu Metal should be there somewhere though, as Slipknot were one of the pioneers of Nu Metal, they also have a turntablist and make use of samples, lacked guitar solos for a long time, and were marketed towards the Nu Metal fans. They are no longer Nu Metal, but they were a few years ago. Cloudy 16:04, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Genre "Debated"

In the past I thought that listing the genre as Debated and referring people to the genre controversy section was unnecessary, but now I believe otherwise. So I'm going to set it as Debated and link "debated" to the genre controversy section. Under the section I would suggest anyone list any genre that has a reliable source, prefferably music profiles or reviews, and cite the source directly next to the genre. Wildnox 21:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Um i think some where on here we should mention their fans being called Maggots..--Hoah.. 09:06, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

"Listeners"

Listeners

---

- Patrick Gargano (Queer) - Rhett Chesser - Gelati - Luke Casey - Oliver

wtf is this? Vandilism?--69.213.152.186 10:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it's vandalism and I just removed it :).--Wildnox 16:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

—savetheheavymetal—222.154.153.190 09:02, 8 September 2006 (UTC) wats up im new to this convo huz doing the vandalism???

who idiot?

who idiot writed that Corey Taylor is former member? Hes still in the band. A notice for you who writed it, next time please do not make emberassing mistake like that anymore

It likely was vandalism, and was done on purpose. Someone has reverted it, and most vandalism edits on this page are removed in a matter of minutes.

Also, in future edits, pleas refrain from calling people "idiots". Thanks, --La Pizza11 22:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Discography

There is no Discography, despite haveing a link to jump to it...

Yes it's suppose to be like that.It has it's own page now. SOADLuver 02:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Musical Experiment

Slipknot combine many different consistencies of Hardcore Punk with Heavy Metal-- At their base they are Thrash Metal, but their style is Ranging from the Nu-Metal they did to Metalcore, and even Industrial Metal, Goregrind, Death/Grind, and Death Metal.

Taken from (www.black-goat.com) with permission:

» 1.1. What You Need To Know 1.1.1. What genre does Slipknot belong to? Hard to explain, but let's put it this way: they're a band that fuses elements taken from hardcore (ie. aggressive vocals, heavy chunks of distortion), goregrind (ie. blast beats, gore imagery), and modern rock. They're not metal, and they're certainly not plain hard rock either.<end of quote>

This should explain it...

198.189.164.206 21:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)Christopher Cole

Do you have reliable source that states this? If not this is original research and therfore is not of much use on wikipedia. --Wildnox 21:31, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

First let me request that you reply instead of editing your previous post, thats perfectly fine rule wise, but it can make for an unreadable discussion if it gets out of control. Second, the sourced provided is much less reliable than the sources used on the page for the genres listed under categorization. Third, the source is slightly ambiguous and if anything runs counter to your claim by stating that Slipknot are not metal. Fourth, the source provided never once mentions Thrash Metal, Nu-Metal, Metalcore, Death/Grind(sic), or Death Metal as you did in your original statement. --Wildnox 21:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Rewrite

I'm going to try to rewrite the article. Mainly I'm going to focus on factual accuracy and clarity. The version I am working on can be found at, any help there would be welcome. [1] --19:59, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Here is my first set of changes.

1. Moved genres to Infobox
2. Changed to the <ref> style of citation.
3. removed Categorization section, as it was mostly uncited and a POV hotbed.WP:V WP:OR
4. Moved much of the intro to a section called "Image and identities"
5. Cleaned up Members Section

--Wildnox 21:17, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The most difficult part of this obviously will be the history section. Does anyone have any reliable sources for some of the uncited and sometimes contradictory information? --Wildnox 21:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I've just replaced the old, obsolete infobox. Now some stylistic comments: The Musician's WikiProject standard is to put a very general genre in the infobox, and discuss more specific genres in the article itself. Usually in the intro. Also, I've never, ever seen anyone put refs in an infobox before. I'm not sure that's a good approach. But I left all the content the way I found it. Along those same lines: I understand why the bandmembers have numbers next to their names, but again, I'm not sure that needs to be in the infobox. (Though I could go either way on that.) I do think the point should be more clearly linked to the actual presence of the numbers. The reader shouldn't have to backtrack to figure that part out. It should be much more obvious that those numbers are there because those are the members' numbers. I'll think about ways that could be improved. One last thing: even though there's a separate discography article, it's still generally considered a good idea to have a brief summary at the main band article. A common approach is to just list albums, not singles, and include just the name, year and label. But there should be something there as a teaser. I may be back with more suggestions later. cheers. Xtifr _tälk 16:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I do think you're definitely right about the numbers. I think I'll remove them and relist in alphabetical order. The genre citation and listing is more of response to SPAs and one time editors who come on and switch the genres constantly. If I left the genre heavy metal, a detractor comes by and replaces it with something like mallcore. If I left the genre nu-metal, a fanboy comes by and replaces it with something like death metal. So I've decided a medium list with citations was a way to deflect most of the edit warring. I'll handle the discography the next time I have the time to do heavy duty editing, which might be a while from now. --Wildnox 00:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)