|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mike Patton article.|
|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
«Faith No More also performed in Portugal in Festival do Sudoeste the 8th of August, where Mike Patton sang one song, Evidence, completely in Portuguese. They had already played the same song completely in Italian on June 14th, 2009, at the Rock in Idro Festival in Milan. » This is false. Mike Patton acted in Festival do Sudoeste at the 8th of August, with his Mondo Cane project. Faith No More have nothing to do with it. angelofwisdom (talk) 02:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
- Nevermind, I just noticed that Faith No More actually were in Portugal on the Sudoeste Festival, August 8th... 2009! The year is not explicit. In August 8th 2010, Mike Patton was back to exactly the same venue, with his Mondo Cane project. It was a (huge) coincidence and misunderstanding. angelofwisdom (talk) 03:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Earlier history of Mike Patton
His father is a football / Soccer coach at McKinelyville High school. Mike went to Eureka Senior High School in Eureka, California and graduated 1985. Played base for Jazz Essamble for the high school. Loved to party and was well liked.
While in High school, he worked in a music store called "The Works," owned and operated by Larry Glass, Eureka City Council Member. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
This is ridiculous. Mike Patton has never been on a jazz, funk or pop album, and he only contributed to a single noise album (Maldoror). Meanwhile, a huge portion of his actual output is being ignored. If we insist on having a list of genres rather than "various", then they should each have sources or justification on the talk page. I suggest we looks through his discography and the genres listed for each band and each album, and list genres based on that. After we agree on a list, we should all agree to revert all further undiscussed edits to the genre list. Pwrong (talk) 04:47, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- What I did, after I saw so much IP activity in the genre box, was look for those genres in the article. The ones I deleted did not have any hits at all in the article, and I felt I could safely remove them as unverified. Ideally, each genre in the infobox should have a footnoted reference--that makes it very easy to patrol new and unverified additions. Drmies (talk) 04:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- This approach is a good start, but most genre information tends to be in the infoboxes of the individual bands and albums. We might as well use these, they're fairly accurate. Pwrong (talk) 05:10, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- Whaddayaknow. That ridiculous list actually has some foundation to it--here. That's not going to work; you and I already agree that this list is too long. Let's look for genres we can agree on, find some sources (not Allmusic!), and stick them in. I'll offer rock, funk, and alternative metal. Drmies (talk) 04:55, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
- It's not the length of the list I'm worried about. He does play a lot of genres and the list should reflect that as long as there's no rule against lists being too long. I'm worried that the guidelines say aim for generality, so people are including very wide genres that have nothing to do with Patton. For example, he's never been on a funk album that I know of. Bungle and Faith No More were both prominent examples of funk rock or maybe funk metal in their early days, but these aren't subgenres of funk. I think it would be ok to list 'rock, funk rock, and alternative metal', among others. This is as general as we can be without sacrificing accuracy.Pwrong (talk) 01:09, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
In addition to rock, funk rock and alternative metal, I'll suggest the following:
Hip hop covers Peeping Tom, X-ecutioners, Lovage and Crudo (if it ever gets released).
Experimental Music covers the crazy solo projects, all the collaborations, and most of his output in general.
Avant-garde Metal covers every Fantomas album, all the Moonchild Trio albums, and to some extent Bungle and FNM. I know this could be called a subgenre of experimental music or alternative metal, but we're talking about at least 9 albums that can't really be described any other way. I think this deserves a spot
Reaction to Fame?
First of all, acting irreverently towards the music industry and expressing distaste for the lifestyles of rock stars isn't unconventional. Second, wouldn't he have to be famous before he could have a reaction to fame? Seriously, if you asked a thousand random people who Mike Patton was I'd be shocked if you could find even two who knew who he is. 99.999% of people surveyed would either have no idea who he is or think you were talking about the WWII general George Patton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 08:24, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- It looks fine to me, and it is all cited. How would propose we improved it? And yes, Mike Patton is famous. The general public probably does not know who John Bonham is (were) either, unless you are a Led Zeppelin fan. That does not make him "not famous", though. Nymf talk to me 19:14, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
This article fails to mention anywhere in it Patton's work with John Kaada. They made a collaborative album together called Romances. What's rather ironic is that Patton is indeed mentioned on the article for Kaada. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyde937 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Under the heading "Style and influences", it states "A list published by the Chicago-based music website Consequence of Sound (CoS), acknowledged Mike Patton as 'the greatest singer of all time'." Setting aside that rather overblown claim, there is also the disturbing use of the term "acknowledged". To acknowledge a thing is to objectively recognize its qualities or characteristics. That's not what said website is doing; it's stating an opinion, not a fact. I think that "...acknowledged Mike Patton as..." should be changed to something like "...opined that Mike Patton is..." or "...claimed that Mike Patton is..." Any other opinions? Bricology (talk) 16:37, 23 March 2015 (UTC)