Talk:Slipknot (band)/Archive 8

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

2010 album

Is that actually true? Is there going to be a new album? 71.126.21.142 (talk) 00:35, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

There's no reason to believe there wouldn't be. Of course, it doesn't yet warrant more than a brief mention here. Tim meh 03:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Purgatory Masks quote

This quote confuses me: "they represent the ego of that is Slipknot" First of all, it doesn't make sense that way. This makes it seem like it was a bad quote, or the band member said it oddly. I don't trust the source because of that (it's off a fan site). Can someone dig up the actual interview to find the quote that the fansite referenced or if it is a direct quote, can someone put "that [which] is Slipknot" in there, so it's not confusing to read?

Thanks. 03:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soapfoam (talk • contribs)

"Metal" or "Rock" in the lead up

I believe we should have something more broad like "metal" or even "rock" in the lead-up, rather than "heavy metal". Having "heavy metal" in the lead-up is a little misleading as that term is usually for more traditional metal bands, while they are more-so associated with alt-metal/nu-metal which is far from the traditional metal. Ximmerman (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

That would be fine of it were an amatuer fanpage that could use an unencyclopedic "trailer-park-jargon" like "metal" (same kind of numbnuts who refer to Judas Priest as just 'Priest' or Iron Maiden being just 'Maiden') But an encyclopedia chould stick with unaltered wordings. Heavy metal is a sub genre of rock. Rock would not be incorrect in the lead. But if the consensus is to go with heavy metal... then the entire term should be used. heavy metal is the parent of every other heavy metal sub-genre. So, no matter what style of heavy metal a band plays... whether thrash or gothic or death or avant garde, calling that band heavy metal is never wrong. The Real Libs-speak politely 19:28, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Genre Again

I edited the page to show that they are a nu-metal band. Seeing as how they are on Wikipedia's List of nu metal bands and also mentioned as an influence on the genre on the nu metal page, I have edited this article so that it matches up with these two pages.

I think something more broad, like just 'metal' (not heavy) or even 'rock' in the lead-up is more appropriate. Ximmerman (talk) 13:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Personally I don't think there is any doubt as to whether or not SlipKnot is nu metal. MahoganyCow (talk) 03:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Personally you think, but what about some reliable sources? (see WP:OR and WP:V for reference!) --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 12:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Defying 'genre'

Maybe Slipknot is a band that, by incorporating different elements of extreme music (metalcore, nu-metal, screamo, industrial or whatnot), they choose to let the music speak for itself (and kick you square in the teeth and rack your nuts) rather than stoop to any single 'label' or 'genre' for their sound. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.184.217.215 (talk) 17:22, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

genre

I think they should go under the genre metalcore Well guys there actually Nu Metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.68.120.207 (talk) 12:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

You can't jsut say "Yeah I think they're metalcore". Wikipedia policy states that you need reliable sources to verify any information that may be contested. Please see these pages for more information:

If you can find a reliable source which can back up your statement then please post it here on the talk page. REZTER ^TALK ø 16:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Agreed with Rezter, 100%. Zouavman Le Zouave 20:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

"They have also stated that they are influenced by industrial bands like Head of David, Godflesh and Skinny Puppy as well as Neurosis and jungle music like Roni Size.[85][86]"

-- Speaking of genre, Godflesh, Head of David, and new SP are not industrial bands. It would be best to change that phrase from "industrial" to "electro-industrial" and "industrial-rock." There is a significant difference between the two. See the following links: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Records & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_post-industrial_music_genres_and_related_fusion_genres

They're new album has the characteristics of metalcore, like the switch from melodic to screaming vocals in some songs like phsychosocial. I also Would probably say melodic death metal for the song all hope is gone. The band even said they were metalcore in a magazine I read.User Jakeellsonator

They're not metalcore at all.... they're more alternative metal, and their old stuff is definatly Nu Metal. What do you guys think?User Dropdeadcody666 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dropdeadcody666 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Quote from allmusic.com for those that say its heavy metal and source it from there.."....and Slipknot's blueprint for nu-metal success was set." Slipknot is nu metal/alt metal get over it!its not heavy metal!not even close to it!Ninjutsu111 (talk) 14:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

If you look at their allmusic bio, the left side of the screen states that "Pop/Rock" is their genre and "Heavy metal", among other things, is their style. black ngold29 14:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

There's no screaming in pyschosocial. It's death growling. SLipknot's first album is a nu metal classic, one of the defining albums of the genre along with Korn's self titled. Iowa has been called a "great record/triumph" of the nu metal era. The first two albums are nu metal completely. Volume 3 experimented with their sound, with some songs having taste of the signature sound, and others getting rid of the hip-hop influance that helped make them a staple of nu metal. by all hope is gone, the band have almost entirely abandoned nu metal, instead taking a more extreme metal influanced sound with many songs, such as the hit single pyschosocial, using a groove metal sound similar to pantera or sepultura, and even making use of the power ballad structure (snuff). Slipknot are just what the article currently says in the infobox, a heavy metal band that plays the styles nu metal and alternative metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.163.16.174 (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

see WP:OR... Your opinions or original research do not matter. Referenced, reliable, independent sources matter... Wikiwikikid (talk) 19:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

messed up genre

Someone put them as aggro rock and rapcore. Can you Change it back to nu metal and alternative metal. They are rapcore more then rap metal because they incorporate screaming rapping and sing. Thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.224.123.196 (talk) 02:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Metal!

slipknot ARE alt-metal if you like it or not. aggro rock does not - and will never - exist as a real genre.'nu metal' is metal regardless if you can accept it —Preceding unsigned comment added by KTDucky35 (talk • contribs) 06:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot is not a heavy metal band! Heavy metal use countertenor singers. Please tell me an Slipknot song where you can prove that. Aggro rock is another way to call Nu Metal genre. --Anarkangel (talk) 22:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

You got a source for that? Jasca Ducato (talk) 22:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot is a nu metal band, whether or not that should be included as metal is matter of opinion. The mainstream portrays nu metal acts as metal bands, while the underground metal community does not recognize nu metal as a form of metal, but rather as a form of alternative rock. Saying Slipknot is a "metal band" would be matter of opinion, and therefore non-neutral, since many do not consider nu metal a subgenre of metal. This is why we must specialize that it is a "nu metal band". Zouavman Le Zouave 00:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Slipknot is a nu metal band, but the article says that is a heavy metal band and that is incorrect. --Anarkangel (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

There are multiple recent sources that class Slipknot as Heavy metal, and some class it as Nu metal. Simply stating "that is incorrect" has no bearing on what goes into the article, we need sources. If you can provide a source saying "Slipknot is not heavy metal" then do so, otherwise, stop moaning. Jasca Ducato (talk) 17:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Amen. Honestly, there are other, more crucial issues on this article than the intro sentence. Zouavman Le Zouave 20:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Listen to the song "psychosocial" and tell me that is not metal. 24.18.180.44 (talk) 04:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC) They're instrumentals have metalcore elements although their vocals don't, so I think nu metal is their destined genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.49.166.86 (talk) 02:17, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

It is apparent that some above consider Slipknot metalcore but they absolutely do not have any of the genre qualifications of a metalcore band. The singing/screaming technique has been around since Fear Factory's debut album in the early 90's and Fear Factory is of course not metalcore. Slipknot also doesn't emphasize the chugging breakdown during the bridge of any of their songs. Calling Slipknot metalcore suggest the listener is just recently learning the differences in metal sub-genres. For metalcore listen to Shadows Fall, God Forbid and similar bands. Musically and ideology wise Slipknot do not share the same ingredients. Keep it .simple and just label them Alternative/Nu Metal. The term is broad enough to cover all the various non metal elements they mix with the metal foundation of the band. Bertrumredneck (talk) 04:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Nuclear Blast

I have just noticed that under 'Label(s)' in the infobox, there is Nuclear Blast in addition to Roadrunner. As not many will know of this fact (is it true?), as Roadrunner is, and always has been, the band's primary label, I believe it needs a citation or two. Andre666 (talk) 15:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah... I notice that somebody added this a while ago: "Roadrunner Records also announced they would be no longer be distributing Slipknot's albums in Scandanavia, due to financial terms. However Slipknot managed to pen a deal with Nuclear Blast Records in early 2003 for the releases in Scandanavia." But I've never really seen any good sources backing it up. Nuclear Blast do have them listed in their artist page I know that much... can't say how reliable that is though. REZTER ^TALK ø 15:11, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Are the two companies (Roadrunner and Nuclear) related somehow? I have a Nightwish DVD from Nuclear Blast, although many of their albums are released through Roadrunner. The two labels seem to pop up together a lot, I wonder if they have some kind of agreement for certain countries? Black ngold29 16:13, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Pictures

I don't wanna be mr. bossy, but i would suggest some changes of, and new pictures. First of all, i think the picture at the top that images Slipknot playing live is quite, well... We don't see all of the members... And those who we DO see, the picture was taken from far away so we still can't really see them, theyre masks and theyre outfits. I would suggest a non-live picture.

Second, in the part of the "Death masks" i would also like a picture of the members in death masks.

Third, i don't really like the image "Slipknot at Mayhem Festival 2008" at the middle. Again, i can't see anything clear,

I can't really think of something else at the moment, i will do so later.

Tell me if my suggestion is helpfull or not, please. Chainzz (talk) 16:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)Chainzz

Well those are suggestions, but helpful, no. If you can find a photo of the band together and/or with their death masks which is issued under a free lsicense then i would lvoe to see it and would be absloutely delighted to put it on the article. I hope you realise we can't just go on the internet and grab any image from a website and publish it on wikipedia. Using images in the manner you are speaking does not meet any fair-use rational or liscense (see WP:NFC) and thus we can only use iamges which the copyright holder (the photographer) has published under a free liscense or released in to the public domain (see WP:IUP). REZTER ^TALK ø 18:32, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Wrong category

Who put slipknot in the category "American Death Metal Musical Groups"? Last time I checked, this band doesn't sound a THING like death metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.119.199.235 (talk) 23:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Chris Fehn's join date

Chris Fehn joined Slipknot in April of 1997, not 1998. Homie C (talk) 18:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Per what source? Black ngold29 18:52, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Check his Wikipedia page. Homie C (talk) 22:41, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Black ngold29 02:02, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

It has a reference on it. 70.111.230.73 (talk) 03:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

As of right now, there is no reference for a join date on this article, in fact, there's only one reference which is to an interview which talks about the songs, not really him. If somebody actually has a source is it so difficult to just post a direct link here and not direct people elsewhere? Black ngold29 03:15, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Hidden Messages

i came across this -

[1]

is it worth adding this information to the article (maybe under influences and style)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torque3000 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Opiumofthepeople.net is not a reliable source. Please read this page for more information. REZTER ^TALK ø 15:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

nu metal

i dont like to catogorize them they are their own genre they have their own unique sound but most people like to catogorize them as nu-metalBold textslipknot equals slipknot they are themselves and nothing moreSk8t3r (talk) 04:48, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

not heavy metal

Slipknot is not a heavy metal band, they are nothing like other heavy metal bands such as Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Motorhead,and they should not be classified as such. Heavy Metal usually refers to bands that have a sound similar to the original heavy metal bands. They are alternative metal, or Nu-Metal. Distorted Guitars does not make a band Heavy Metal.

slimply untrue.what is and isnt metal isnt a matter of opinion. you can tell if something is metal by listening to it. slipknot is metal.judas priest is metal. they have things in common. any way,just because you might not like them doesnt mean they arent metal. and if you do like them and say they're not metal,then you apparently dont like them enough to learn about their own genre —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.233.152.222 (talk) 23:34, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Slipknot is not a heavy metal band. Slipknot is nu metal, a genre not recognized as being a subgenre of heavy metal by the majority of heavy metal fans. I do have to say though I like MFKR and some the self titled and I hear they put on an amazing show. But either way it should not be classified as metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.86.118.2 (talk) 03:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Melkortheevil (talk) 20:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

erm, the last I checked. Nu Metal is a sub-genre of heavy metal, and is widely recognised as such. It may not be a particularly favourable title among heavy metal fans, but they don't deny it's inclusion. But that's besides the point, the point is… with have probably hundreds of sources that say "Slipknot are heavy metal", and none saying they aren't… so it stays where it belongs. Jasca Ducato (talk) 12:37, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Merging Slipknot Demo and Welcome to Our Neighborhood into Slipknot (band)

The discussion about the existence of both articles have gone on for long enough, at both their GANs and AfDs, and most recently at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Slipknot discography. I say we just merge them both into this article once and for all. Otherwise, we can't move on with an ultimate Slipknot topic at some point in the future. To merge them both in, a lot of stuff will have to be removed, but a lot of it is redundant with what's in here. I recall talking about this with Blackngold29, who might be able to shed some more light on the situation. Gary King (talk) 19:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

As you said this has been discussed in the past. I believe Rezter was against merging them; I have not seen him around for awhile due to his lack of computer access. I will try to e-mail him to see if he can join in here. I believe that Welcome to Our Neighborhood does deserve its own article as it pretty clearly meets notability guidelines (especially with the top position on the Billboards). The demo could go either way for me; it will be difficult to merge it properly while observing WP:WEIGHT. I think the guidelines for demo notability are lacking, to state "significant coverage in reliable sources" seems POV; it should state what exactly classifies "significant". As I look down Category:Demo albums it seems that most are not as good a quality of Slipknot Demo and yet few have been proposed for deletion like this article. Without the emergence of new sources, I guess these fall into the awkward category of "well written, but still not GA enough". If it is a Featured topic that we're after it would be reasonable to simply have these two peer reviewed. Black ngold29 20:53, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

They've already been peer reviewed. They can't be compared to other demo articles; these ones have received more attention because we brought the attention to them, with GANs and featured topic nominations. Gary King (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that this was going on, though after reading through it, it appears we have our hands tied. Rezter makes a good point that both are notable and there were no replies made from the editors who opposed before it was closed; this isn't the first time this has happened (though not a FT) and I can see where the directors are coming from because you can't let the evaluation period go on forever, but it feels like a punishment for something not our fault. How about trying for a Good topic? These articles seem to me as classic cases of "article is an audited article of limited subject matter." Black ngold29 22:35, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

That was for a Good Topic. Yes, we have our hands tied, which is why I recommend merging the articles. I asked for the topic to be closed because it failed to gain any traction—once again. Gary King (talk) 22:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm heavily opposed to merging basically because these are decent articles, even better than most album articles out there. They are better than stubs so why should they be deleted and/or merged? So what if we can't get them to GA class or get a good topic or whatever... I don't care about any of that personally... I just want to create a comprehensive, accurate guide to everything Slipknot on here. They should have their own articles and if that stops us from getting Featured or Good topic status I quite frankly couldn't care, that is no reason to merge these articles. There is no reason why these articles should be removed. REZTER ^TALK ø 14:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

If they are merged, we won't be removing most of the information. Most of it will be moved along with it. The article would then be redirected to a section about, say, all the demos that Slipknot has released. Gary King (talk) 20:30, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

To me it seems like you only want to merge them because it's stopping you from getting to featured topic status or whatever, which is the most stupid reason ever. These subjects deserve their own articles, they are bigger than stubs and if a stub article has a place on wikipedia then so do these. REZTER ^TALK ø 10:40, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

The topic is something to add as a contribution to the Slipknot WikiProject. In any case, both articles went through several AfDs, failed GANs, and Peer Reviews; they are pretty much in a limbo state right now. Gary King (talk) 16:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

What is really stupid Rezter is to say that any subject "Deserves" an article. That is not part of any rule, guideline, or policy, and is simply false. Articles are created, deleted, merged and split based on reliable sources of a sufficient number to warrant an article, and neither of these articles can clear the GA hurdle. As a result, they should be merged into their parent article, since deletion is a blocked path because there are a few reliable sources for the subjects, but not enough for a whole article. It's only a trauma if you make it, there is no need to make a fuss over a simple merger. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:30, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Lol only a "trauma" if i make it, I'm not just trying to be a pain in anyones arse I truly believe that these two articles should have their own articles. I never said any subject deserves an article, but I said these two do. The only reason you guys are giving for deleting or merging these articles is because they cannot achieve GA status, I don't see anywhere on WP:DEL#REASON or WP:MERGE which says thats an adequate reason for either. I also used the example that why can't these article remain which are well written and include a decent ammount of information over stub articles because if not then why does a stub template exist? REZTER ^TALK ø 11:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this comment by Rezter (talk · contribs). Cirt (talk) 11:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Cirt, could you specify which part? Also Rezter, I think the stub template exists to mark articles that are at that time looking like a stub, but it is assumed, I think, that they can eventually grow long enough to be GAs—ideally, of course. Not a perfect system, but it's assumed that most stubs won't actually ever expand to GA; I'm sure some stubs even deserve to be sent to AfD but there are just too many articles to go through. Gary King (talk) 16:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with everything said in that comment, I already gave the link to it and it is above, there is no need for me to quote the entire quote here below. Cirt (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Genre change with sources?

Should the genre in the band's infobox be changed to say Heavy metal, Alternative metal, and Rap metal per http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&searchlink=SLIPKNOT&sql=11:dxfoxql5ldae~T1 ? Winston ^talk 21:10, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree, let's give it a few days and if no one opposes we should change it. We did all of the albums, but apparently forgot this article! Black ngold29 22:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Not Heavy Metal

Slipknot is not a heavy metal band. To say that Slipknot is a heavy metal band shows a very shallow understanding of what heavy metal actually is. The term "Heavy Metal" usually is used to refer to bands such as Judas Priest and Iron Maiden that existed before the "Heavy Metal" music slit into sub genres. Thrash Metal bands do not have a heavy metal classification listed under their genre, death metal bands do not, neither do black metal bands. The only exception to this is if the band has a style very similar to "Heavy Metal" bands in a classical sense. It appears that the reason for this classification is either ignorance or bias. Supporters of Slipknot wish for the band to escape the stigma of nu metal, and therefore incorrectly declare the band to be Heavy Metal. In order to maintain consistency Wikipedia has two options the first option would be to remove the heavy metal classification from bands that do not fit it (for example Slipknot/Mudvayne), or the second one which would be to attach broad genres to all bands in addition to the current one, (For example all death metal bands receive a heavy metal classification, all emo bands receive a punk classification, or even a broader rock definition)

Melkortheevil (talk) 17:42, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Unless you have a reliable source that back up your claims, the band will be classified as heavy metal. See the discussion right above this one in which Allmusic does call Slipknot a heavy metal band for more. Black ngold29 18:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

There is a third option, people like you can stop complaining and presenting your "facts" nkowing full well it's not going to change anything. Like Blackngoold29 said, you need a reliable source. Jasca Ducato (talk) 20:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

This source is much more reliable then allmusic on the subject of heavy metal, because heavy metal is its prime mandate, and slipknot is not listed as a heavy metal band. http://metalstorm.ee/bands/band.php?band_id=1106&bandname=Slipknot

Melkortheevil (talk) 00:59, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Low quality amateur fanzines cannot be used for citations. The Real Libs-speak politely 01:06, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Allmusic knows nothing about heavy metal music anyways so they are not a reliable source, what is more reliable a website dedicated to the actual topic, or a website with a very shallow understanding of the topic.

Melkortheevil (talk) 01:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Because AMG passes Wikipedia's WP:RS policy... your amateur fansite does not. The Real Libs-speak politely 01:49, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Will you people kindly let people who actually LISTEN to metal take care of this? Wait, no... of course not, Wikipedians always know better. Gaiacarra (talk) 13:24, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Will you please read the reasoning why we cannot use the opinion of "people who actually listen to metal". We are not putting forth our own opinions we are simply using reliable sources to try and discourage debate like this. If we were to use one editors opinion then another editor might come along and say "you're wrong because I think they are Heavy Metal" or whatever.... so we use reliable sources so that it is fair on all editors by not using any opinions at all. Granted you may have a completely valid statement but this is Wikipedia and you have to follow Wikipedia policy. REZTER ^TALK ø 13:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Slipknot only intended on making one album - I've got a source on this!

In an interview, Corey States that he and Clown intended on making one album and then getting out of the music business, but decided to make a follow up after the sucess they had

I have a Source - http://www.3news.co.nz/Video/Full-interview-with-Slipknots-Corey-Taylor/tabid/551/articleID/76988/cat/55/Default.aspx?articleID=76988#video - on it. The interview's 10 minutes long and it comes about 6 minutes into it and there are probably other things in the interview we could use. It's an interesting fact that I doubt is known by many people, maggots included.

I wasn't sure where to add it, the S/T album seems to be the best place to put it. Although, it could also be added to the history section of the main page. Mentioning it in the S/T part and saying in the Iowa part something like "after the success of their first album, Slipknot decided to make a follow up album"

Any thouughts? Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 20:40, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

I think its worth adding.Torque3000 (^talk) 09:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I added a bit about it to the section about Iowa, but it doesn't make complete sense due to the fact that it is never explained that they inteded on making one album to begin with. I wasn't sure how to add it to the bit about their debut, so would anyone mind adding it for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanthic-Ztk (talk • contribs) 04:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Now Slipknot isn't nu metal?

everyone knows for a fact that slipknot is a nu-metal band, allmusic is not gospel, this is getting ridiculous, you have no idea what you are talking about. I am sure someone is trying to rewrite the article to make it look like slipknot is a "Heavy Metal" band when they clearly are not. Allmusic is a worthless website filled with inaccuracies.

Melkortheevil (talk) 14:39, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Read the all music description it clearly says they are a Nu metal band, "One of the most popular bands in the so-called nu-metal explosion of the late '90s", "Slipknot's blueprint for nu-metal success was set."

I'm confused as to why you would call Allmusic "a worthless website filled with inaccuracies" and then cite them in the next sentence, but nevertheless... If you have the link to the description you're quoting, please provide it and we should be able to add Nu metal back again. The genre section in the infobox is just to give people who have never heard of Slipknot in their life a general description of what they sing. "Heavy metal" isn't there becasue they only play heavy metal music and nothing else (that's obviously not true) it is there so people don't think they're a pop or a folk band. Each album's article gives very specific descriptions of the style of music (not the infobox the Prose). Black ngold29 19:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Its on slipknot's all music page in the description text,now please stop reverting the page, its amazing that no one can read the description text.

Melkortheevil (talk) 22:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I really don't get why no one will even respond to the fact that no one will respond to the fact that even all music describes slipknot as a nu metal band in the main body text, why doesn't wikipedia do the same, all that happens is a bunch of slipknot fans watch this page and revert it whenever someone describes the band as a nu-metal band. If this continues I'm going to have to ask another admin to step in and correct this nonsense.

Melkortheevil (talk) 01:39, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

So to be clear, are you referring to this quote: "one of the most popular bands in the so-called nu-metal explosion of the late '90s." on this page? It's really a whole lot simpler if you would just post the direct quote and link in the future. I haven't reverted anything, though multiple users should heed WP:TRR; I do not know why others are removing it. If nu metal or is added (due to its inclusion of said quote) I will not revert it, however, I believe it belongs in the "Influences and style" and the infobox, but not the lead sentence. If it were up to me there would be no genre in the infobox (I personally hate the entire concept), but per past discussions on various pages I appear to be in the minority. That's my two cents anyway, I look forward to any other comments. Black ngold29 05:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Why you guys removed nu metal from the genre field on the infobox? Heavy metal? yeah right. Pure WP:OR --Kmaster (talk) 14:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Genre

It's funny.everyone sais Slipknot is not a heavy Metal band.it's correct. OK Nu Metal and Alternative Metal Are Subgenres of Heavy Metal But as Heavy Metal is mostly used for refering Traditional Heavy Metal Bands like Iron Maiden and Motorhead, I dont think it's good for mentioning it as Slipknots genre,Wich will give the readers a bad describtion about the bands sound.

I also think there might be a way to describe the bands Speed-Death Metal sound.altough I know their Music is not Speed Metal Or Death metal but as the vocals have a lot of roars and grunts that are inspired from "Extreme Metal"[Thrash,Death,Doom,Black] and the music's fast drums ,double bass drums and blast beats, I think it's good to think of a way to describe their sound better in the genre part.Because Alternative Metal and Nu Metal might make the reader recall the Sound wich Linkin Park or Korn and Limp Bizkit make.But Slipknot's music is far away from these bands' groovy sound.I don't have any idea about this yet.Cause Speed Metal,Thrash Metal or Death metal are not good words to describe their sound.( I think Death Metal can be Helpful.Although they are not a death metal band,but their sound is a mixture of Nu matal and death metal) (Solino the Wolf (talk) 23:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC))

Hey!Why doesn't anyone answer?! it's been a while that I've sent this and no one answer's! Solino the Wolf (talk) 18:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

There are seven topics involving the genre of the band above this topic. Perhaps you should look over them before posting, because you will likely get the same answer concerning Verifiability and Reliable sources. Black ngold29 19:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

I've read them all.Ok.about reliable sources.KoRn is a Nu Metal band and reliable sources say that they don't concern their own music to be Nu metal! So are we not to put Nu metal in their genre? ? I don't know wich reliable source puts Slipknot in HEAVY METAL genre! But I know that Heavy metal doesn't give the readers who haven't heard Slipkont,a good discription of their music and sound.Cause the word "Heavy Metal" might make them recall Traditional heavy metal bands such as black Sabbath,Iron Maiden,Motorhead and ... as I said before.Solino the Wolf (talk) 19:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)no answers? I think it's more like you're not thinking about improving the article,you just like to insist on keeping Heavy Metal on their genre.ok.let it be.But it's VERY funny.(as we all know)

According to Allmusic (a reliable source) at this page Slipknot's genre (or one of their genres) is "Heavy Metal". If you feel that is incorrect then you need to provide a reliable source that states they are not. The point of the infobox is a quick overview, most of the info about their genre is in the "Influences and style" section. People may indeed inturpret "Heavy metal" as sounding like Sabbath or Maiden, but I don't see how that's our concern. All the infobox is meant to do is to give people who have never heard of the band the idea that they aren't a classical, folk, or jazz band. Black ngold29 23:14, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok.I give Up.So let's put all Alternative Metal,Nu Metal,Gothic metal,Death Metal,Doom Metal,Black Metal and etc. in Heavy Metal genre because all the reliable sources put these genres as subgenres of heavy metal and as you say the infobox is only to show people that the band is not jazz,folk, etc. so why not put ALL Metal bands in heavy Metal genre.Or even put them all in Rock genre as all reliable sources put heavy metal under the header of rock music!Solino the Wolf (talk) 11:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Calm down, Wikipedia policy is in place to avoid the contest of content by abolishing original thought. You may well be completely clear that Slipknot are a certain genre, and in that yes you may be right, but to avoid conflict Wikipedia must rely on reliable sources. Because I could come and say "no it isn't that genre" and you would have nothing but your opinion to back it up so we use sources to avoid edit wars. However, it never seems to do much good on Slipknot articles anyway lol. REZTER ^TALK ø 12:55, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

ok.I accept it.The thing is,All the things writen here must have reliable sources but not all the things writen in reliable sources must be put here.As I gave an example before about how KoRn have claimed not to be a Nu Metal band.We must write this on their article-as we have- but we musn't erase Nu Metal from their genre in infobox.Cause Infobox is to give the readers the best discribtion about the bands' sound and music.But you're right.As Slipknot doesn't have a certain genre, It might be hard to find reliable sources wich contain their genre.Solino the Wolf (talk) 17:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Allmusic calls it Heavy metal, Alternative metal, and Rap metal. However, they heavily mention nu-metal in their summary. Rolling Stone says (see) "Iowa is not just the first great record of the nu-metal era...". Discogs catogorizes it as nu-metal for Iowa, All Hope Is Gone, and others. I would add have the infobox have Heavy metal first, Rap metal second, Nu metal third, and Alternative metal last. Rtyq2 (talk) 07:02, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Kun Nong

I was just on black-goat.com a slipknot fansite and went into the section mfkr facts. i came across a section where it said kun nong was the first guitarist in slipknot, and quit after 6 practises. should this be mentioned??? - Adozenlies97 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 04:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC).

I know there has been mentioned a few other Slipknot band members on fansites and other stuff... but fansites are not reliable sources (please read WP:RS), that is why we haven't included them. If you can find some reliable sources which back up these claims I would be happy to add the information. REZTER ^TALK ø 12:30, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Quan. not kun..... look here. 64.231.10.91 (talk) 18:26, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Corey Tailor And Joey Jordison Interview

"One Day Create a Band Of Post-Grunge With Influence of Hardcore and some Shit the i dont remmember the name I think the name is something like alumminum or Metal!! One Day When Mtv Pays me a big f***ing money said to me The need something new and give me more Money to say to my Stupid Fans the bullshit about a "new wave of american heavy metal" Shit The Never Exist jajaja but Give a lot of fuckin gold(Money) nu metal isnot a Real Metal Genre!! But Who Dont Cares!! Give a Lot Of Money" Joey And Corey Interview -- Metal.Darkness666

What? Jasca Ducato (talk) 00:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep clean 64.231.10.91 (talk) 18:26, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Slipknot is thrash metal

SLIPKNOT is thrash metal because of Vol.3 (The Subliminal Verses) and all hope is gone —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seth4000 (talk • contribs) 14:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

OK... you've made a beginning by starting a discussion.... before you were just editing the pages ignoring our comments. Now.... if you had read all the previous discussions about genre debates then you would have realized that we do not base it on user opinions.... we base it on the opinions of reviewers and what are listed on reliable websites. So please feel free to go out and find some reliable sources that say Slipknot are thrash metal.... but yours (and everybody else's) personal opinion on what genre of music they fit in to is irrelevant. REZTER ^TALK ø 14:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

How slipknot started

Slipknot stared with-out corey taylor and if you want to learn more about slipknot you can go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfTPPAugXG4&NR=1 and you will learn how slipknot REALLY started —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slipknot191 (talk • contribs) 01:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, they were more of an experimental act when they first started. Take "Do Nothing/Bitchslap," for example, which alternates between funk sections, speed metal riffing and jazz. When they first started, the band was simply combining different styles of music, in an attempt to find their own sound. In fact, M.F.K.R. kinda reminds me of experimental acts like Vintersorg in some ways. And in that respect... thank the metal gods that Slipknot found their current sound!

Hey, Slipknot has 2 other 'Unreleased' albums (or EP's, I'm not sure what to consider them) "Crows" and "Clan." Clan was released just before Iowa and Crows was released either right after or before their demo. idk how to make albums, but I'll post the song names so you can make them —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.31.234 (talk) 00:52, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it says somewhere on the Slipknot portal that there is to be NO mention of Crowz in any Slipknot article. Infact, I recall reading somewhere that Mick Thomson said "Crowz doesn't exist". MFKR and their '98 demo were the only demos released. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanthic-Ztk (talk • contribs) 00:36, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Shawn is dead!

He died in 2008!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.28.122.41 (talk) 15:47, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol, is that right? Then who's been performing through January and February in his place? I'm not trying to seem arrogant but I think I would have at least heard that he had died. Where did you hear that anyway, from your buddy at school? Please show me a reliable source that says he's dead. REZTER ^TALK ø 13:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

clown isnt dead (Seth4000 (talk) 13:40, 23 February 2009 (UTC)) Seth4000

Genre

They are not known as a heavy metal band. They are known more as a nu-metal band than any other genre. Gune (talk) 21:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Please note the eleven other sections devoted to genre discussion above and provide WP:RS. Thanks! black ngold29 21:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you should get your so called "reliable" source that says they are heavy metal then Gune (talk) 23:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Again, please see the other sections devoted to genre discussion above. Tim meh ! 23:31, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I already did. They do not mention that it is known as a heavy metal band. You're both ignoring my point because you both know you are wrong and making stuff up. Gune (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I am confused as to how we can be wrong when we never made any indicative statement. Anyway, Allmusic is mentioned several times, and they classify the band as heavy metal. Tim meh ! 01:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I would put them in the rapcore genre —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.31.234 (talk) 00:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

there not rapcore there more like rap metal and groove metal (Seth4000 (talk) 13:54, 9 March 2009 (UTC)) Seth4000

Quan Nong

The former members list doesn't contain Quan Nong's name for some reason. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshRobMack (talk • contribs) 12:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You wanna provide some reliable sources that can back that up? Because that's what we need. REZTER ^TALK ø 13:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Quan "Meld" Nong was the first singer, but only sang for the first year(1995). he is more widely known as the former guitarist for Slipknot in 1994 when the project first began under the nickname "Meld". However, sometime during the sixth practice of the band, Quan Nong left due to his following of a more alternative/punk style of music. He did not wear a mask. Though it seems otherwise, his name is actually spelled "Kun". I got this from the Slipknot-Metal fansite. There are also a few other members mentioned on that site: Brandon Darner, John Green & Patrick M Neuwirth. (Sorry I made a new thread thing, I don't know how to reply because I'm new to this) —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshRobMack (talk • contribs) 13:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I am fully aware of that "information", but like I said..... could you provide a RELIABLE source for that information? Following Wikipedia policies we need to cite any references of information that may be contested and a fan website is not a reliable source... please read this page: WP:RS. REZTER ^TALK ø 13:56, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Breakup Rumors (Again...)

Why is it that, every time this band puts out new music, that breakup rumors emerge? I remember back when Vol.3 came out, all these kids at my high school were all freaked out that "our favorite masked band is breaking up!!!" Now here we are, I'm 19 years old, and these same rumors are coming out again, even though they are currently TOURING and have INTENTIONS to RELEASE NEW MATERIAL. Even with Corey wanting to start a solo career, he's mentioned in interviews that he still wants to remain Slipknot's throat. My whole point is... Is there ANY concrete evidence? Or is it just more unsupported (and probably untrue) breakup rumors? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.174.219.194 (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Probably just rumors. Like you said, Corey is very far from breaking up. So without anything solid we can't really add it to the article. black ngold29 00:51, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Crowz & Clan albums

SlipKnoT has two other unreleased albums, 'Crowz' was released in 1997 before their demo, and 'Clan' was released in 2001 before 'Iowa.' I don't know how to put albums on, so if you do just tell me and I'll put the track names on —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.31.234 (talk) 01:27, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Crowz was never released.... in fact it never even had a title.... it's just what fans called a collection of demo tracks which Slipknot were working on in 1997 that were leaked. Clan is an unofficial album which was not released by Slipknot themselves which includes demos and remixes. They both do not have any place on Wikipedia. REZTER ^TALK ø 13:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

But they still both exist, I have hard copies of them. They have credits for every member of SlipKnoT, even the ones who played on 'Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat.' They're not demo tapes, they have live tracks and remixes, and most maggots would still like to have the album —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.53.147 (talk) 01:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

That's true, but they are not official band releases and therefore not notable. black ngold29 01:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

14 out of 33 songs on the two albums combined are completely new, it doesn't matter if they're unreleased because there are still hard copies of them. ICP's first demo tape was unreleased the same way, but you guys still have that on here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.123.157 (talk) 02:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't speak for any other bands, all I know is that I have never seen a reliable source that states Crowz even existed. Band members themselves have said it was only a collection of songs, nothing more. black ngold29 03:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Well they do exist, just not off a record company like Roadrunner, they were self-released like Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat, the only difference is that MFKR had more copies released, I personally would like some more opinions to see if people want the albums on here —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.233.31.130 (talk) 00:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

ICP's first demo tape was unreleased in the same fashion, you are correct. However, they talk about it in behind the paint. As where slipknot wont even acknowledge the existance of crowz. 64.53.255.33 (talk) 04:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

These albums do NOT exist. They were not released by Slipknot. Just because you may have a factory pressed CD called "Clan" or "Crowz" doesn't make them albums. They are bootlegs and there are no reliable sources who acknowledge this as legitimate albums, and that is besides just Slipknot's acknowledgment. Please show me some reliable sources which says these are albums by Slipknot, I would really be surprised if there are any. REZTER ^TALK ø 10:42, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Genre (sorry.....)

sorry, i dont know how to reply, so i added this..... read and discuss please :) the reason i seen people arguing over whether slipknot is heavy metal or not is simple: some people are considering heavy metal to mean "heavy metal music" which covers all the subgenres (which includes nu-metal, whether metal heads like it or not, nu metal is a form of metal) while the die hard metal heads are thinking of traditional heavy metal when they say heavy metal. Well i just wanna say, if they were trying to classify slipknot as traditional heavy metal, the link in the article would say traditional heavy metal. However, the article should read that "Slipknot is a band specializing in a form of Heavy metal called nu metal" rather than "Slipknot is a heavy metal band" this would make everyone happy, and still stays factual at the same time. However, under genres, the link to heavy metal should be removed, as alternative metal and nu metal automatically tell the reader "oh they're a metal band" and therefore saying "heavy metal, nu metal" is redundant, as nu metal is a genre of heavy metal. the only way it isnt redundant, is if you mean traditional heavy metal, which slipknot is not. Also, the band member page states rap metal as one of the genres, as this page does not. anyone care to discuss?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.239.90 (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Dead Memories: All Hope Is Gone Live! ?

Since when was this announced? There is no mention of it in this article, nor is there an article for it. Should I just assume that this is a rumour, or has it actually been announced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanthic-Ztk (talk • contribs) 00:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I have seen no sources for it yet, so it still appears to be a rumor at this point. black ngold29 03:11, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

whoops

i just made a talk page called Talk:SlipKnot (band) but they already have one... plz delete nu talk page. thx...64.231.10.91 (talk) 18:27, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Done. black ngold29 18:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of tour articles

Do we really need four articles for the Iowa tour? Every leg of the tour has its own article and they really don't even warrant existance - no tour dates, very little information (about a paragraph, and that's the whole article) and offline references so they cannot be varified. The Pledge of Allegiance could warrant an article but needs serious improvement, as does The Subliminal Verses Tour, but at the moment, All Hope Is Gone World Tour is the only one that should have an article.

I don't know how to nominate them for deletion, so could someone else do it? Xanthic-Ztk (talk) 22:19, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I copied your message to here, so talk about it there :). REZTER ^TALK ø 13:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

perhaps all the tour stubs should merged into one article??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.255.33 (talk) 23:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Alias section

The band has only one name, there are some ways to refer to the band that aren't either official or supported by the band. Thus being, I haven't seen any reason for the "also known as" section, that I deleted. If people may thing this information is acctually essencial to the understanding of the article, I'd suggest to place them in the article body. män-et-arms (talk) 23:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Genre in opening sentence

Alright, I have no problem with 'heavy metal' being in the infobox. I want to get that out of the way, because from what I've seen, this is what most of the genre arguments stem from.

What I think needs to be changed, however, is 'heavy metal' to simply 'metal' in the opening sentence. This is not to say that Slipknot are not a heavy metal band, but to have heavy metal in the opening paragraph places undue weight on the view - that is to say, it places more emphasis than on nu metal and alternative metal. To place more emphasis on this would indicate that sources label the band as heavy metal more than the other two, which I am not convinced of. I'm not going to pretend I have read every review or comment ever made by a reliable source on Slipknot's genre, but from what I am aware, there are more sources for nu metal than heavy metal. As we have the genre of heavy metal in the infobox, we need to differentiate it from the metagenre of heavy metal, which is I assume what we are using in the opening sentence. The easiest way to do this is to call Slipknot a 'metal' band - this is the easiest way to make the article neutral. James25402 (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that there needs to be a genre in the opening sentence. If there has to be one, "Metal" is fine with me. black ngold29 19:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone else got any input on this? I would be more than happy not to even place a genre in the opening sentence, but the way it stands right now is not neutral in the least and places too much weight on Slipknot being 'heavy metal', which is not representative of the sources at all. James25402 (talk) 11:24, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion, "metal" = "heavy metal". Some make a distinction between the two terms, using "heavy metal" do designate the original movement. I have no preference what so ever to changing "heavy metal" to "metal". But if it was up to me, we would not put a genre in the opening sentence, because the genres are listed in the infobox and additional information on their styles and influences are well documented in the "Influences and Styles" section. Either way is fine with me, but I have a slight preference to omit genres in the introduction sentence. Zouavman Le Zouave 12:53, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Although you fans feel very strongly about this, I would like to point out that even Black Sabbath has "rock band" in its lead. I think most people would agree that Black Sabbath are more "metal" than Slipknot, even people who are not extremely familiar with heavy metal. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 04:37, 5 April 2009 (UTC))

-Unfortunately with the change of standard and extremity of metal music these days, Black Sabbath are more closely linked to rock music than metal. Also, I know fan's aren't a definitive source (wikipedia needs to add Metal-archives or Spirit of Metal as a viable source ¬_¬) most fans would consider that "true metal" falls under standardised sub-genres, for example; thrash, death, heavy/traditional, NWOBHM, black, power, speed, whereas nowadays, "metal" would refer to bands that don't exactly fall into one or more of these definitive categories, and so get lumped as "metal" for example, Job For a Cowboy are often labelled JUST "metal" when in actual fact, they're hardcore/deathcore/metalcore. etc.ThePerfectVirus (talk) 20:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Shall we just take the genre out, then? I see no reason to even have a genre in the opening sentence; we have a Styles section and we have all the genres in the infobox. James25402 (talk) 06:59, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

No, because it's the standard across the board to have the genre there… and in all fairness someone will likely just put it back in during the next edit. Jasca Ducato (talk) 10:16, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

That isn't a good enough argument to have it in this particular article. I'm sure having 'heavy metal' attracts vandalism too, but that wouldn't be a good enough reason to take that out, either. James25402 (talk) 13:29, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

article for the maggots??

Well Insane clown posse has an article for there fans, the juggalos (which slipknot has claimed to be juggalos, so why cant there be a page for the maggots? or at least a section of the article??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.255.33 (talk) 23:39, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a plausible idea, but first we need to highlight what kind of information we need to provide in this article so it is notable (see WP:N) then you need to go find sources (see WP:RS) and information for the article. I suggest that we create a sandbox for it and try and make a decent article before we actually publish the article. REZTER ^TALK ø 11:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Mis-information

The "Early Years" section of this article needs to be edited. Colsefini didn't leave the band until after the recording of their Self-titled album.

WhisperedConjuration (talk) 02:07, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

You are grossly misinformed, he left in 1997. And there are TONNES of sources which back up this claim. REZTER ^TALK ø 11:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Genre AGAIN, yes!

I think the most suitable genres for describing Slipknot and Iowa would be Metalcore and Industrial Metal and maybe Nu Metal. Their music sounds just as the description that genres have here in Wikipedia. Alternative Metal would be fine also. But I don't think they're pure heavy metal. Vol.3 and All Hope is Gone are more melodic and alternative if you ask me, retaining some industrial elements, and my source again is this page, because their music sounds just as it's described. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kakisto (talk • contribs) 04:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

i have to agree there first album has more of a metalcore style and there second album iowa is nu-metal then vol3 is heavy metal and then all hope is gone is groove metal (Seth4000 (talk) 14:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)) Seth4000

You still need a reliable source, which Wikipedia is not. black ngold29 16:13, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Songs

i think many songs are missing in the article (for example Jump da fuck up). maybe a list of all songs would help. Seelentau (talk) 21:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

There is an article for that... List of songs by Slipknot, but "Jumpdafuckup" is not a Slipknot song it is a Soulfly song that Corey contributed vocals to and it's on the album Primitive. REZTER TALK ø 12:43, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

lol

So apparently slipknot isnt the first band to be called slipknot. the first was a 1980 thrash metal band who only came out with an EP in 89 and contributed to a compilation 95, the year this slipknot formed. i dont know about you guys, but i never heard of this thrash metal band called slipknot. i dont really think theyre even notable enough to be on wiki. who agrees with me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.255.33 (talk) 03:20, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Lead Genre

OK, I don't have enough time (or interest) to involve myself heavily in this article. However, I've been heavily involved in a number of debates like this one with other bands. I've found that generally, the most general/substantiated genre goes into the lead sentence. For instance, if Slipknot is Alternative metal, heavy metal, AND nu metal, what do they all have in common? They are all metal or they are all rock (again, I don't know enough about this genre to know for sure). Therefore, I recommend something along the lines of:

Slipknot is an American metal band...
Slipknot is an American rock band...

Good luck fighting this one out guys and gals. Wikiwikikid (talk) 19:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Lead Genre Consensus

Here's a suggestion, let's take a consensus. No arguing here (you can do that above). Simply voice which side you side with along with a brief comment if you like. What should the lead genre be?

rock band because it is broad/general enough to encompass all of the other genres while still being accurate. Wikiwikikid (talk) 19:23, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
- How about no voting. The section is question is fine how it is and nothing needs to be changed at all. Jasca Ducato (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't use voting, it uses consensus. You can say it's fine how it is (which seems to imply you support heavy metal? as the lead genre?). To say it's fine and nothing needs to be changed is ridiculous though. Look at the topics of conversation above. They are almost exclusively arguments about genre (more than any other music article I've ever seen!). So, if you don't care to voice your opinion or reasoning, that's fine, but that's not to say that other's cannot or should not. Wikiwikikid (talk) 20:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Note 94 in the References

The link is dead on note 94 and the page is locked for editing for me so here is the new link for whoever can edit: http://www.chartattack.com/news/34166/young-killers-try-to-blame-slipknot-for-murder —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.164.201 (talk) 15:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

"Nu-Metal Band"

Are people still believing this? Nu-Metal as a genre was a fad that popped up in 97 and certainly never included Slipknot. Change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.34.220 (talk) 18:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

They WERE nu-metal, partially, on their first two albums. There's not a lot left on Vol 3, and it's all but eliminated on AHIG. I'd say their current sound is more like a mix of Slayer-inspired thrash, Pantera-style grooves, and the sheer brutality of Cannibal Corpse. 98.174.219.202 (talk) 21:25, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

"New Album for 2010"

The source was kinda confusing. It didn't really reveal anything concrete. Should we keep it? 98.174.219.202 (talk) 23:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

How is it confusing? It reveals everything it said it would &*ndash; that there is a possibility of a new album in 2010. It should remain. Jasca Ducato (talk) 15:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)