Talk:Slipknot (band)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Why

OPEN APOLOGY TO WILDKNOX OPEN APOLOGY TO WILDKNOX

I want to issue an official apology to WILDKNOX. I'm sorry you and I butted heads and I'm glad we're working with one another. I'm going to shoot an email to the site's admin and ask them to clean it up a bit, or make it look more RESPECTABLE. Is that cool? I want to work with you here. I haven't been on Wikipedia nearly enough in the last year in an editing role, but will be. Is that cool for now, Wildknox? :)

Oh you don't need to issue an official apology, though it is appreciated :). I don't know if an email is necessary if they are going through an overhauld but go for it. Wildnox 00:57, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

8:41PM CST for WILDKNOX: Apology accepted. Thank you for accepting mine. What is "offish"? What is wrong with it if it provides what it's supposed to provide? Joey Jordison was in-studio and talked about it with the guys. Please explain further. They're going through a site overhaul for the next few weeks, but it does it's job. Help me for future reference. I standby how I feel. :)

Like I said it was more just the initial look of the site to me, it didn't seem quality(The content was good though), though if it's going through an overhaul I guess even that would be fixed. Wildnox 00:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

8:39PM CST for WILDKNOX: In regards to "type of site" ... please let me know what type of site links to Wikipedia? I didn't know there was a "type" or anything like that. I thought as long as the site either provided valuable information or was cited as a resource, it was fine. Please explain your rationale. That's all I ask. What is BETTER? What is TYPE?

That's the thing I'm not sure how to describe what I ment by that(which is strange, I'm sorry for that). It's just that there is usually an expectation of quality and on first look it didn't seem to come to the level expected. The content is good, which is why I'm not going to remove it anymore unless I find a better site with all of the same content. Sorry if I was a little quick to delete the link in the first place. Wildnox 00:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

8:34PM CST for WILDKNOX: I deeply apologize for appearing confrontational. Believe me, it wasn't my intent. I just went nuts after adding something that I thought was interesting and then someone declares it spam. That's all. When I found out about those links, I thought "Damn, other people would love that." Let me know what BETTER is to you, because those guys at that show are on the up and up and they'll change whatever needs to be changed. I've been listening to them for YEARS. And I'm a huge Slipknot fan.

It's cool, I also didn't mean spam to be quite so "attackish"(I can't find a word to fit). The content on the site isn't bad it's intial feel is just a little strange, and off to me. Wildnox 00:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

8:31PM CST for WILDKNOX: I'm totally calm. Look, I love Wikipedia and use it every single day. I added that link in good faith. It wasn't to spam anything. I was listening to their radio show that had a member of Slipknot on it and they mentioned that they had the links. So, today, I went to Wikipedia and decided to add it. It's a link to videos and live performances. That site has an online stream and they even air on regular radio. What is wrong with that site? What is BETTER? I want to know. Let me know.

I'm not really doubting your good faith, sorry if it might appear that way with the use of the word spam. It's just that the site doesn't seem like the type of site usually linked to by wikipedia. Like I said I'm going to try to find a site with the same content and leave that site up until then.

Wildnox 00:38, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to get in the discussion, but may i suggest [link to copyvio website removed] also? It was listed and removed after. I know is hosted in blogger but that's a temporary decision and is not a blog. And yes I am affiliated with the guys maintining it --Valah 07:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Umm it doesn't seem too bad, I won't add it personally but if you want to I wouldn't see why anyone would have much of a problem with that one. Wildnox 04:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll add it again maybe know that I explained the fact that is not a blog but just hosted on a blog platform it will stay :) --Valah 10:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

8:28PM CST: WHAT SITE WILL YOU ALLOW US, OH MIGHTY ONE, TO PUT IN ITS PLACE? THEIR VIDEOS ARE AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THEIR HISTORY.

8:25PM CST: I AM NOT AFFILIATED WITH THAT SITE BUT IT LINKS TO ALL THEIR VIDEOS! I FOUND IT AND THOUGHT IT'D BE A GREAT ADDITION CONSIDERING THEY MADE THOSE VIDEOS! HOW IS THAT SPAM? IT'S SLIPKNOT VIDEOS! THIS IS AN ARTICLE ON SLIPKNOT! HOW IS IT NOT A USEFUL LINK? I COULD SEE IF IT WAS NONSENSE - LET ME ASK YOU - WHAT SITE DO YOU LIKE THAT WE CAN LINK FOR THE VIDEOS? AFTER ALL, YOU THINK YOU KNOW EVERYTHING. SO, WHAT DO YOU APPROVE OF?

Hey calm down, I'm not trying to be mean here. Yes I know it links to all the bands videos. If you can find a better site that has the same it would be good. If you really think it's all that important put it up for now and I'll try to find a better site with the same content, alright? Wildnox 00:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

There isn't anything more sickening than someone editing this page that knows nothing about the band of what they stand for, especially Wildknow. They are a HEAVY METAL band. As the user below states, we could have 55 references by band members to that effect, but he'd take them all down. THEY ARE HEAVY METAL. Listen to the darn music.

I'll assume that I'm the "Wildknow" you refer too.

1. You act as if I know nothing of the band. At one point in my life they were my favorite band, and even now :Mate.Feed.Kill.Repeat remains one of my favorite all time albums. I have a pretty good understanding as to the bands history and :style of music.

2. When have I ever removed properly cited references from this, or any other, article?

3. I think you're reaction right now was sparked by my removal of your addition to external links. I removed that link since all it :appears to be is a poorly put-together site, and it appears to me to be more spam than a usefull link.

4. I'll leave the genre arguement for the rest of the entire talk page which has much related to it. Wildnox 00:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Quote Removed

I removed --"On an Interview with Paul Gray he said " We are not rap-metal or nu-metal. We are just metal like bands Pantera and Slayer."(this should hopefully put an end to the debate on categorization)-- Since there was no source and a google search for the quote only turned up this article -Wildnox

Uniforms

Who deleted the uniform section? I worked my ass off putting that in. Don't delete random things.

h4cker 21:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

This article is the king of delete this, revert that, fight here, nonsense there.

Michael Jackson?

Okay, I was looking at this article, and I noticed the bands that Slipknot is generally compared to, and someone wrote Michael Jackson. Is this a joke? I've never heard them compared to Michael Jackson. . .

Vandalism

someoneon's been seriously screwing with this page, look at all the uncited references to gay porn in the article

ok, someone messed up bad. all I see is "This band really sucks". You know, someone spent a lot of time writing a major and serious article and someone just messed it up. That's not right! (Ok, well, now it's fixed. But never, ever do that again, whoever you are!)

Genre: update

To whomever keeps deleting the "nu metal" classification: " If you blindly delete the words "nu metal" from this page, you are being biased." This is a quote taken from a comment below. In other words, DO NOT REMOVE NU METAL. There is a wide amount of detractors (including myself) and this classification is valid, whether you agree with it or not.

-> To add on to that, Nu Metal and Alt Metal are generally not seen as the same thing, for the lone fact that alt metal doesnt contain rap influence. I mean, slipknot has a freakin member working the turntables. NPOV would require both genres have their mention - do not edit without a valid point. (Valid, not, OMG slipknot is teh hevvy!!1) --Ryouga 01:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

--> "Nu-metal" is the same thing as aggressive rock. Either term should be acceptable. The term alternative metal is ridiculous because alternative metal is not a real genre of metal. As in it doesn't exist. -jerichowiz

Though "Aggressive rock" (or "aggro rock") can be used as the same term for nu-metal, it is not a widely used term. It is easier if we use terminology that everyone is familiar with. And though you might beleif alternative metal is not a genre of metal, many people feel the same way about nu-metal. Even if it isn't a genre of metal, it is still a genre of music in general. La Pizza11 22:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

---

> Why is alternative metal being put back in front of "nu-metal"? Alternative metal is not a metal genre and does not exsist in the metal world. I will be removing the term, unless there is some good reason why it is there. Also, I think it would be a good idea to put the term "aggressive rock" in parenthesis after the term "nu-metal". Just to show that they are the same thing, and further show that Slipknot are not a metal band. May, 11th 2006, jerichowiz

Exactly. Slipknot AREN'T METAL therefore they aren't Alternative Metal ( Which isnt a real subgenre of metal.) I would say that Slipknot's newer stuff like Vol3 is Hard Rock. Nk70

First thing, explain how slipknot is not metal, don't simply say a blanket "SLIPKNOT AREN'T(SIC) METAL". Secondly Alternative metal, is considered a real genre, it is generally accepted and used across wikipedia. In fact it is one of the genres, according to the article on Nu metal, that lead the birth of the genre. Wildnox 17:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Slipknot dont use a metal structure on their songs, having heavy distorted gutars doesnt make a band metal. Nk70. Also go to metal-archives.com. This websites lists metal bands and Slipknot arent on there.

I have been to metal-archives.com many times before, no matter what you say it is not the be all and end all of metal and does not overule other arguements. Nobody made the arguement, that I can see, saying that slipknot are metal simply because of distortion. Second thing what "structures" do they lack, Heavy Metal music is wide and almost all encompassing genre so saying a band completely lacks "metal structures" is almost impossible. Wildnox 18:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If you want to go and remove alternative metal, go ahead it doesn't bother me that much if you do so since it's only in referece to one album. Just leave the comment about not editing the genre on there ok? Wildnox 18:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

alt rock is one of the genres that lead to the creation of nu-metal

I added a little comment next to the genre part of the infobox about not editing the genre without going to talk. If this is somehow agaisn't the rules or a bad idea remove it. I'm just hoping to end the constant edits to the genre. Wildnox 22:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I want it to be changed to just metal. slipknot doesnt consider themselves nu metal anyway. they go by just plain metal. and with all of their music you cant say it all sounds nu metal. the first album was considered nu metal by media but thats it. i really think this should be metal rather than nu metal. slipknot as a hole is metal and nothing else.

thesmokinggun.com

Dear, um, people,

Is the mention of thesmokinggun.com in the article necessary? I often come across pages that seem to abhor and dislike things I happen to like. I've seen everything from Marilyn Manson, Slipknot and the color black to my love of cats and fatty meats trampled, spat at and branded as idiotic.

I'll be the first to admit that Slipknot is not the most intelligent music on the planet. Then again, neither is arrogance. And that's the first thought that struck me when I saw your page. Here's yet another person (or set of persons?) who seem to think their opinion counts more than other people's.

In essense, I don't care whether you like Slipknot or not. What amazes me is that you seem to care why I do. Honestly, what purpose can your website possibly have, other than to inflame or enrage the people that do like this band? I'll agree, the typical Slipknot fan may have trouble tying his own shoes, but let's give these kids a break.

It's an outlet, simple as that. It's an outlet for the anger and frustration that are inherent to the process of growing up. This goes not only for the teenage years, which are obviously a much easier target to pick on, but is a lifelong experience. They carry a positive message, which says to believe in yourself, don't care what others think about you, and live your life the way YOU want to.

Naturally, as is the case with many of the artist that carry similar messages (Manson immediately springs to mind), kids misinterpret these messages by dressing up and doing things EXACTLY LIKE their icons, but let's not dwell on that. Eventually, the message will seep in and the world will be a better place; a world where conformity is not the first rule and the status quo is abolished.

What worries me is that people like you seem so bent on making fun of people that are really doing just that - living their lives and growing up. It's sad that people like you seem to think this is a bad thing, and it seems painfully obvious to me that you, as an individual, is really just coping with the same problems, albeit in a bitter and resentful way.

I realize much of this is falling on deaf ears, so I'll leave you with a closing argument for further thought: You say on your webpage that spamming guestbooks is lame and pathetic. Is starting a website that voices how much you hate something without giving any concrete examples or any sensible alternatives for the sole sake of sparking controversy and illiciting hateful messages any better?

I hope that you grow up soon, too.

Sincerely, Linker 06:07, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ok for starters, i was just wondering why you would type up a whole conversation of your useless thoughts on the web about a band that you obviously don't know, or probably havn't given the chance of listenin to their albums.

....Pretty stupid runs in mind.

Now you have to listen to my input. (I gotta tell ya, it's alot better than yours)

You said that it was probably goin to "deaf ears" or some **** like that, and your right, so dont do it! Im sure Slipknot wont lose any sleep about your mindless chatter.

And honey, whats the point of rambling on about bad points that you think, to people who might come across this page like me, who are die hard fans. "Oh no, this person's right, i better stop liking this band" Do you expect that? You know....**** that **** off. Us "maggots" dont need it, and we can bloody well listen to what we want! If you don't want to hear it, then dont!.

So keep it to yourselves and in future research your debate more, because everything you said was based on unknown territory.

If only you knew about them. --User:203.12.163.10

Note: User signature and intendation added, swearing covered out from above by me. I think it's fair to remove the Paul Gray -link, it's not really on-topic. There are no other smokinggun-links on the page now. --kooo 21:03, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

Note: The anon user has trouble with reading comprehension. Obviously, if they actually read it they would know I am a Slipknot fan defending their music against hateful critics. Linker 19:16, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Is the smoking gun thing with the Burger King lawsuit even real? I mean, come on, they spelled it "Cory" on the front page. Either the Howard Weltzman guy is retarded or its a phony piece of crap that some kid typed up at 2 am. -- BY, 3/31/06

Um...wow.Well what i really want to know is why the hell does it matter what genre they are. If you truly like the music then listen to it. I also want to know why all these people think that because of the lack of solos in earlier material Slipknot is automatically nu-metal but when the guitarist show they can solo and solo well, now the solos dont matter. A good chunk of the riffs in earlier songs are actually quite challenging due to the speed needed to play them. Im not saying this is music you need to be a master to play, however you do need a some skill. Also the vocals in a few songs have a rap style influence, and yes they have turn tables but it isnt to lay down beats and "get down in the hood" with. Sid lays down sounds for intros and backround noise for songs while the "rap" style singing on some songs just adds a nice groove. And if you really pay attention to the lyrics you have to be smarter tahn the average metal fan to get them.

EX. Look in my eyes for the answers - typical I can feel it underneath like a miracle Everybody in the world needs more than Lies and consequences to power them Once again, it's me and no one else I can't remember if there was a someone else It's not mine, it's not fair, it's outta my hands And it's shaking - you'll never take me

If you just read it outloud it has a groove but if you listen to the song it sure as hell is not rap.Id like to further this disscussion.

Slipknot is NOT metal.

http://www.black-goat.com/faq.php

I quote:

"» 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..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.208.67.103 (talk • contribs)

That website is not a reliable source. Slipknot is definitely metal. In all my life, when a band wears masks made out of real human flesh it is definitely a metal band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Why? (talk • contribs)

I Agree Slipknot are a Metal or more specifically a nu metal band the image plays a part but the music also I Mean Double kick Percussion, distorted guitars, violence, a picture of a fetal horse! this all adds up to the genre metal OK Iron Maiden and Metallica are Heavy Metal Bands. but slipknot are also I mean if they screamed any more they could be classed as a whole different genre like Doom metal or Alternative Metal or even Death Metal (if they were Satanists) I'm not enforcing my opinion but it's true, think about it.

I disagree , masks do not make a band a metal band , or even good for that matter , nor are their masks made of human skin. If you believe they are you are a fool. . If masks make a band a metal band then you are saying that(old) Metallica ,(old) Slayer, and Iron Maiden are/were not metal , which they clearly are/ were . Slipknot is not metal or even Nu-metal, they are a crappy (commercial) Rap Rock band from Iowa who wear masks for "shock value" to sell more cd's and pay more attention to their image than the music they play. Because they know that it is their image and not their music that makes them popular,and if their image dies , so do their sales. ::InfernisNecris

If Slipknot are not metal because of their masks and aggressive portrayal what makes you think Iron Maiden is they wear leather and chains, have a song about Satan and have a Zombie called Eddie walking round on stage! and slipknot are heavier music than them. Sheesh you need to think about it. a Slipknot and Iron Maiden Fan.

Definately have to disagree. Whether they wear masks or not, they're not metal. MrHate 09:21, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

That is the most stupid thing I've ever heard. They are not metal, and that doesn't mean they aren't a good band, it just means that they do not belong to the metal genre. As if they wear masks made from real human skin anyway. Gelsamel

There are several sources that disagree... http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Heavy_metal_music http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Nu_metal http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/heavy-metal-music http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=metal&r=d http://www.answers.com/topic/heavy-metal-music By any stretch of the imagination, Slipknot would be defined as "metal," because they're not really (fully) in any other category. Like it or not, this smacks too much of the "Ministry isn't truly industrial" argument from the 90s. In essence, who cares? There are, like it or not, only a handful of accepted lables--regardless of all the labelling that goes on--that people use, "metal" is one of them, it's understood what it is. Slipknot is metal more so than they're R&B or pop or funk or hip-hop or anything else. Splitting hairs on the "nu-metal" or "goregrind" definitions is stupid. Wait a few years and "nu-metal" and "goregrind" won't even be around anymore, having fused into something else, but metal will remain. As for the above mentioned sites not being authoritative...there is no authoritative site defining what is or is not metal; just as Wikipedia isn't authoritiative either. Get over yourselves, it's just metal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.156.242.39 (talk • contribs)

I have to disagree with that. There is a huge difference between "real" metal (iron maiden, black sabbath, and iced earth as a few examples) and Slipknot. The aformentioned three bands all have common musical characteristics that define them as metal, such as melodic vocals, long songs, many solos, and concept albums. Slipknot, for the most part, does not incorperate any of these staples of metal music into their music. In addition, it doesn't matter whether or not they wear human flesh on their face or not, it still doesn't make them metal. Eminem's music is not disqualified as rap just because he is white. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crucible Guardian (talk • contribs)

• Totally agree with that. Slipknot is not "true metal". I don't know why people are getting so offended by that simple truth. It's not degrading their music - just stating facts. Alternative/Nu-Metal is a form of heavy alternative rock. There's a huge difference because metal bands, and media influenced, mainstream rock.

Slipknot is whatever you want them to be. Music genre does not matter. If you like them, you like them. If not, oh well. There's no use in a petty fight over what people think of Slipknot's music genre.TearAwayTheFunerealDress 15:32, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

OK, so if a band wears masks they're not metal (according to some above). Alright - GWAR. Lordi. Alice Cooper (makeup, I know, but it's a form of mask). Green Jelly (yes, pushing the point). But what image someone portrays has absolutely knack all to do with whether they're metal or not. IainP (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Slipknot is metal, a crappier distorted variation of it, but it still is. Plus what is a true metal band? What makes more bands more metal than others? First of all, Crucible Guardian names three bands: Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath and Iced Earth. According much to the metal community, softer forms of metal liek progressive, industrial, neo-classical, avant-garde or hair (*shudders*) are still called metal. Though many metal fans will not truly consider these genres metal since they are not true like Black Sabbath, Metallica (old), Slayer (old), etc. They are still some form of metal as with Slipknot, sure I do not think they are great but they are still metal. Since many of you are giving, here is from dictionary.com [1] "loud and harsh sounding rock music with a strong beat; lyrics usually involve violent or fantastic imagery", I think this very well describes the music of Slipknot and many other metals bands. Panasonicyouth99

Whoever you ask, you will get different opinions on what metal is and what bands are 'true metal', some will say x band, some will say only obscure bands. You would have to be an idiot to deny that Slipknot is a type of metal, and labelling a band as 'true metal' is just an opinion. Again, different people believe different things and as such this is a type of debate that will never sleep. I would be interested to see what the band themselves think they are. ~bob

Couldn't agree more. Oh for the old days when I worked in radio and might have had a shot at an interview! Anyone know when/if they're due for the Spanish Inquisition in Metal Hammer and we could submit the question? IainP (talk) 08:30, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

• I must say something about this, I really think that they have the right to be called popular rock, if you were in grades 6, 7, or 8 you would see how popular they are--they are practically teen idols with the mallgoth and football player crews. These guys aren't metal, they just are reckless screamo-type rock (with screamo being undefinable) group who gets confused for metal or hardcore because they use death grunting to the maximum level; SOAD doesn't even use that technique much anymore and they are considered metal because their music is more original and experimental, and I think that is what makes a metal band. I mean, Slipknot sounds like a cheap Archenemy take-off group that has songs that have basically emo-like lyrics dealing with death and suicide to more of an extent; but I don't really like the term "pop-rock" for groups somewhat harder than your average pop-rock group (probably alot of you have seen how much I've complained about MCR being considered Pop-punk/pop-rock), so mainstream rock would be a good definition for the band--and if you deserve a more discreet term, I'd give you screamo.

CagedInsomniak 1-5-06

Ok. I am in 9th grade and Slipknot is HUGE with the kids in my best friend's class. She is in 8th grade. I am not a fan of Slipknot much anymore. I used to like them a lot. But now I beleive they just target pissed off teenagers as a fan base. It seems to work. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 15:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Dont you think, Slipknot should be classified into Hardcore Metal in the stead of nu-metal... nu-metal is something like limp-bizkit or korn, isnt it?

Anirudh

Oh good greif. Of course they are metal. The characteristic of a genre that seperates it from other genres is what defines it; what makes metal metal is loud, distorted guitars and heavy hitting rhythyms - something no other genre has. It has nothing to do with melodicism, solos, complexity, or length of songs. If any of the latter had to do with what metal's definition truly was, then Slayer or Morbid Angel for example would not be metal due to lack of melody, and some songs by bands such as Machine Head, Sepultura or even Pantera would not be considered metal just because they have some songs without solos. Complexity? Pfft. Many, uh "tr00 metal" bands weren't super technical, not even for their time. And no offense but if you really think the band's incensed lyrics have a thing to do with Emo or Screamo then ask yourself if you really know enough about music to be here...

I don't think that anyone that doesn't like slipknot should ever see this page... that only shows how the band is huge! just think about it, any band that is criticised by people that say "I don't care about slipknot..." shows how much this band is important to current music (besides a little bit of hypocrisy)...

c14maggot

THIS IS PATHETIC.I'VE BEEN IN MANY EDIT WARS BUT THIS IS JUST SAD.THERE IS NO WAY ONE SIDE IS GOING TO GET ITS WAY UNLESS 1.YOU HAVE A SURVEY OR 2.YOU PUT METAL(conflicted) OR SOMMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS.ARGUEMENTS NEED TO STOP.-User:SOADLuver

Please keep the classification of the band NEUTRAL

Some people think the band is heavy metal. Other think it is nu metal. Because of this, both genres need to be represented and the reasons need to be brought forth. I have been trying to maintain this, but fans of the band continue to change this. If you blindly delete the words "nu metal" from this page, you are being biased. Wikipedia is meant to be a neutral source of information, and all classifications of the band should be given. Defacto

I think the better temporary definition for the band is "metal band" because heavy metal or nu metal, they are two genres of metal. Yes, the nu metal isn't considered part of metal in many ways, but this is a debate good for the nu metal article, not for a band article. Olpus

The quality of this article seems to have diminished, just looking through the edits since an edit I did a few days ago, seems there's a NPOV issue here. Possible to 'start over' an article here? Heck- I don't even know where to start, reverting anything will just result in some fanboy reverting back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.244.150.52 (talk • contribs)

Next time please sign your writings here, and try to argument. Olpus

"Critics argue that the lyrical themes and instrumental styles of Slipknot (most notably the rarity of guitar solos, the use of turntables and sampling, and rap-style vocals are definitely similar to those of typical nu-metal bands. On the contrary, supporters of Slipknot note that the majority of their music does not have a rap-based lyrical structure." -This wording implies that nu-metal is a bad thing to be, rather than simply a genre. In my opinion, that's not NPOV at all. I, for one, am a fan of nu-metal, and when I use the term I don't use it to be derogatory. So I changed this section to be more NPOV, while keeping the arguments in-tact. --Josh, 12:34 AM EST, September 14 2005 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.122.237.6 (talk • contribs)

I also took out the sentence "The structure of the songs tend to be simplistic." It was stuck into the paragraph, seemingly at random, and really threw off the flow of the article. Also, most fans of Slipknot who are familiar with all of the ticks and subtle changes within the songs probably wouldn't consider them simplistic. Plus, the sentence was gramatically incorrect. (should have used "tends" instead of "tend," as the word is referring to the singular "structure," not the plural "songs") --Josh, 12:34 AM EST, September 14 2005 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.122.237.6 (talk • contribs)

I've replaced the definition of the band of mallcore from the opening paragraph with heavy metal. Mallcore is a derogatory term which is not NPOV. It also does not help to classify the band musically, like hair metal or somesuch.

Like it or not, heavy metal is the broadest term the band can be categorised as. Trench 21:01, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Splipknot is a nu metal band and that's it. Revert if the genre is changed to mallcore, but otherwise, there is no justification for changing the genre. --Sn0wflake 02:28, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

I've got no problem at all with them being listed as a nu metal band, I think that is the genre that most of their material sits in. The only problem with this is that I think it's going to be frequently edited by people who either consider nu metal a derogatory term like mallcore, or think they're better described as some random assorted of metal sub genres. It'll be interesting to see how long it is before some edits it again. Trench 20:43, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, what can I say other than "Welcome to the Wikipedia"? That happens quite often around here, and what we do is simply reverting the genre to the most agreed-upon or logical one. You see, some other day I heard somebody saying that Slipknot were "the kings of death metal", and quite a number of people agreed with the person, so I don't really take the genres posers decide to label bands they listen to seriously, nor I think anybody should. Wait until metal is not the latest hype anymore and this shit will die down. Until then... --Sn0wflake 01:32, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Does it realy matter what "type" of music the companies want to call it, it's damn good music in my opinion and i tink thats all that realy matters.

72.136.26.94 04:03, 4 June 2006 (UTC)I'm personally a fan of them... and I would consider it metal. That's all I would call it.

I also would just consider them metal, or experimental as they tend to experiment with a load of different sounds in each album. Slipknot there first album with roadrunner was more nu metal, iowa was a lot more heavy and would be on the metal sides of things and then subliminal versus has a mixture of the two with some balards included for good mesure so id either consider them as metal or experimental.--Paul 11:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Edits

I got rid of the UPC and Barcode links; they were active and all, but irrelevant to the topic. I rewrote "contemporary music scene" with a link to the relevant page providing a definition and greater detail of what exactly "contemporary" music is. ZPG0705 18:35, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I splitted the paragraph about detractors in two, because talking of the genre played by Slipknot doesn't implies that we are criticizing negatively the band. Olpus

Numbering of band members

Is there a reason they're numbered 0-8? If this is a system the band uses that's fine; otherwise it should be changed to 1-9 unless you're a programmer storing the members of Slipknot in an array. magicOgre 22:07, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it's just a gimmick thing if you like, Mick Thomson is often referred to as Mr Seven on stage (and has a tattoo of "Seven" on his arm)... among other things. Best pieces of hard evidence would be the numbers on the outfits, and the CD sleeves. 10:47, 17 August 2005 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.153.23.220 (talk • contribs)

Single Chart Positions

Why aren't the chart positions consistent with those on the Vol. 3 (The Subliminal Verses) page? They can't both be right. 08:01, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Whether any of you ******* wants to admit it or not:Slipknot is Metal —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.151.196.48 (talk • contribs)

Please keep your foul mouth to yourself and let people express their opinions. Nobody needs your type of language. You should be more mature than that. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 14:48, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

He's a typical Slipknot fan. Maturity is not to be expected from people pathetic enough to call themselves maggots.137.186.154.255 20:37, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Care to define a "typical Slipknot fan"? I'm 31, a well-paid IT consultant, and have never referred to myself as a maggot. I'm jumping to a bit of a conclusion, but I'm assuming you're not a Slipknot fan? That's no need to go making assumptions about those who are. If you don't like the band with such vehemence, then you're not likely to be able to provide an impartial POV for an article. Which begs the question - what are you doing here? IainP (talk) 22:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

It's called taking the piss 23:05, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I am not a "typical Slipknot fan" as you say. I do listen to them but whether you are a Slipknot fan or not you need to be mature and keep your foul-mouthed opinions inside of you. If you can't talk civil, don't say anything. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 16:14, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Alt. metal is the best definition IMHO

Slipknot music contains elements of nu-metal, rapcore, metalcore and some other styles so let's simply call it more broadly - alternative metal - it's more neutral and closer to truth

thnx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.131.158.69 (talk • contribs)

Alright, seriously.

I wasn't stepping in when the genre was being repeatedly edited back and forth between heavy metal and nu-metal. But no matter which you think is better, the alternative metal label makes sense. They obviously don't sound like basic, Sabbath-esque metal, so they are, in fact, an alternative form. Also, for those of you who think it's nu-metal: nu-metal IS alternative metal. Too make an analogy, We'll say nu-metal is Japanese and alternative metal is Asian: All Japanese people are Asian, but not all Asians are Japanese. Since all nu-metal is alternative metal, labeling the band as alternative metal satisfies everyone. I mean, with this much dispute, along with the article itself stating that the band can not be conclusively labeled as nu-metal, calling it that in the introduction would be incredibly biased towards your point of view. So, for the love of God, leave it alone. -User:Not a slave, October 26, 2005, 3:47 AM EST

This is just a petty argument over someone else's opinions. Just let people think what they want about their genre and leave it alone. You can't change someone's opinions, especially when it's over something as insignficant as a band's genre. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 14:46, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Just my 2p's worth (or 2c, or whatever currency you use) - I think both comments above are about right. There must be over 100 different sub-genres on rock and metal, with people making up new ones every other day. To try and pigeonhole one band is nigh-on impossible these days. To the casual listener, Slipknot are "metal" of some description. What Not-a-slave says is about right. They're not metal in the traditional sense of Sabbath et al, so therfore they're some kind of alternative. The only downside to this is that alternative does encompass a wide range of sounds including, as an example, Linkin Park - who sound absolutely nothing like Slipknot (yes, yes, I know you could argue that they're "nu-", "pop-" or "whatever-"...). If it were up to me, I'd suggest that all the rock/metal acts should be classified very simply as either traditional metal or alternative metal. Sadly, that can't happen! Basically, can we stick to "fact" on the page rather than "opinion", which in all honesty is what the band's genre really is. IainP (talk) 09:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

• The problem is that no one is able to agree on which genre is the 'factual' one for this band, which is why a broad one such as "alternative" should be used. Josh 15:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree that 'alternative metal' is the best description that has been put forward so far. -- Trench 16:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Anyone who thinks that the grave misnomer "Nu-Metal" somehow validates Slipknot as any kind of metal band should definetly look at Wikipedia's page on Equivocation. Using the argument that "Slipknot are nu-metal, and since the phrase 'nu-metal' includes the word 'metal', they must obviously be a metal band of some kind, no matter how distant," is the worst kind of nonsense that has allowed this band to slink their way into being mentioned alongside vastly more aggressive and brutal bands whose music dosen't bring to mind a toddler falling off a tricycle and wailing for attention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.221.178 (talk • contribs)
      • Nu-metal is a subgenre of metal, Slipknot display many of the characteristics of nu-metal, ergo Skipknot are a metal band. I can only apologise if they are not "brutal" enough to meet your definition of metal. Trench 13:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
        • Again, the phrase "nu-metal" is a vast misnomer. Metal and nu-metal have as much in common as genuine Schezuan cooking and the so-called Chinese food you can buy at a food court in a New Jersey mall. Nu-metal is NOT metal, no matter what insistence to the contrary from the same out of touch soi-disant "metal" magazines that were busy promoting glam rock acts like Cinderella and Poison as metal in the 80's, or from any stubborn adolescent whose entire knowledge of "metal" stems from these erroneous publications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.221.178 (talk • contribs)
          • Moving aside your rather childish and unecessary assumption that I'm a teenager who is relying on magazines for my musical knowledge, (which is ironic given that childishness seems to be one of you main complaints about nu-metal lyrics), anyone looking at your contributions can see that you're fairly obviously biased against nu-metal. You've basically made seven edits, six of which are critical (under the weasly banner 'general criticisms') and removed one line which was critical of traditional metal. You were so incensed you made mention of it on the talk page. Indeed the line you tagged onto the true metal page was so laughibly POV I had to rv it immediately. Please read the wiki guidelines on NPOV] and weasly terms. All of which is sadly irrelevant as I am quite happy for Slipknot to be listed as an Alternative Metal band. They may not use the same instruments, timings, vocal styles or "brutal" nature of traditional metal bands, but they are very clearly a heavy metal band. Blindly stating otherwise would suggest it was yourself in the stubborn minority. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trench (talk • contribs)
            • Notwithstanding your ironic strawman of Godzilla-opponent proportions that led you to draw some vague connection between my discrediting of the stubborn insistence of uninitiated youths who seem to think they have the authority to label distinctly un-metal bands as metal and yourself, the fact remains that this entire site has some broad, gross misconceptions about metal and the classifications of metal bands that seems to be born not out of a committment to accuracy so much as limp-wristed diplomacy and fatigued third parties who have some understanding of mediating disputes (but no knowledge of metal) who simply want to pacify the masses of Slipknot fans who resent the debunking of their beloved band as corporate-motived wuss sauce. I encourage you to make a search on a site with some authority on the matter, like http://www.metal-archives.com or any affliated site, and see if they have an entry for Slipknot. The fact is, no matter how many times you make statements to the effect of "Uh, Slipknot may have nothing in common with 'traditional' metal bands, but they're metal all right, because, uh, like, I said so," the facts won't magically alter to fit your distorted status quo, nor your attempts to peverse "NPOV" retorts to your advantage. Merely the presence of loud, distorted guitar does not a metal band make, otherwise what would separate punk and hardcore from metal? Furthermore, it's worth pointing out that many of my edits were not "NPOV" so much as they were made to help establish the sources of the wedge driven between the legitimate metal community and the splinter "nu-metal" community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.221.178 (talk • contribs)
            • That's cute, adding the index of contributions on the end of my comment. Did you actually have a counterargument, or are you making another ignoratio elenchi? If my contributions have been limited to nu-metal related topics, it's because they needed to be made, not because I felt like it. Trying to paint this as a matter of opinion through selective wording (ie, "obviously biased against nu-metal", "not "brutal" enough to meet your definition of metal") is patently misleading and lends groundless credence to the notion that Slipknot are metal just because they play loud, distorted guitar oriented music.
            • A quick check of the page history by yourself would have revealed that the contrib links were added by user Mushroom, not myself. And in answer to your question no, I'm not currently conjuring up a counter argument as I don't have the time to discuss the matter with you. I believe nu-metal to be a subgenre of heavy metal, you don't. If you don't think the current nu-metal entry is accurate, go edit it. Trench 00:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
              • This still isn't a matter of beleif, it is one of definition. Sloppily pulling off the second and first fret of the E string repeatedly with nary a palm mute to be heard is the polar opposite of metal music, which is dramatically more sophisticated in structure. Stop trying to blur the lines between definition and opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.222.221.178 (talk • contribs)
                • If you believe nu-metal to be a subgenre of metal, then you yourself need to edit the aforementioned article, as it specifically states in the first sentence, and I quote: "It is sometimes considered a subgenre of metal, but this is a misnomer, as it is actually a highly commercialized form of alternative rock." You have defeated yourself by your own argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.142.23.159 (talk • contribs)
• Nu-Metal is not a true form of metal. The 'metal' part is ambigious and MTV uses it to confuse poor youths who assume bands like Limp Bizkit, KoRn and Slipknot are TRUE metal. True metal does not has rapping, turntables or hiphop influences. Therefore Slipknot is not a true metal band, so to call them "Heavy Metal" is incorrect.
  • By that logic, no 'classic rock' bands are 'rock' because they don't sound like Bill Haley & The Comets.--Josh 05:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Why speak of 'Classic Rock'? That's not the topic. Use your common sense, man.

Since this whole thing is so debated, why don't we just say its genere is "Debated" like the Cradle of Filth article?

The problem here is, it doesn't seem as contested as it was in that article (or others with the use of debated), there are not that many edits to the main article or talk about the issue and it usually seems as though there is mostly agreement, as of right not, save for the occasional edit (usually by a 1 time anon). That and I'd like to avoid that since in my opinion it's more of a last resort than a serious solution. Wildnox 02:23, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Merging of SlipKnoT (band)

Looking at the content of the above, it's word for word out of this current page. There's not point whatsoever in merging when the smaller article may as well be deleted. IainP (talk) 16:05, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree; I'll just delete SlipKnoT (band). --Nlu 16:28, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Revolver reporting Corey has left the band?

Posted by someone with an IP address: "In the December edition of Revolver it has been said that Corey left the band due to personal issues,walking out on the tour and that they have already found a replacement (not yet known).This may just be a rumor."

As stated, this is a rumour, not fact - hence I've put Corey back into the "band members" list from the "former members list" until it's confirmed one way or the other.

IainP (talk) 15:08, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes I think Corey is still in the band. I think it was confirmed in an interview that this was just a rumor. Not sure which one though. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 15:51, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Disputed Tag

I added a disputed tag to the Violation of Innocence section. Not sourced and there is no evidence this group exists. Group is on AfD, if it is deleted, this section should be removed.--Isotope23 20:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Genre edit

Edited the first part of the article. Someone had put that the genre was rap/R&B.--Dess 20:58, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

No I hate to say it but this is fake rap a disgrace to rap its not even rap rock its just shitty music bunch of fucking fags screaming no talent there real music is rap talking about real life shit cuz.

Thanks for your insighful comments. With smart, opinionated editors like these it won't be long before the endlessly debated genre discussion is settled once and for all. --- Trench 13:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

your welcome its not my fault they fucking suck dick you guys should all listen to rap and learn something.

Yes, I learned a lot. My hooker will be here in an hour, and my bling bling and grill will be ready in a couple of days. I cant decide which gun to buy, should I get myself a desert eagle or a uzi? --Contaminated 23:02, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Nu Death

"This has lead to Slipknot being occasionally labled as "nu-death", however, nu-death is not an official genre." I feel this is (amusingly) poor wording. There's such a thing as an official genre now? ;) I'm gonna tidy this up a tiny lil' bit. I kinda like the sound of the "Nu Death", thing, though. It feels right. 82.13.243.37 22:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Removing it would be the best thing we could do. I disagree with the term, because Slipknot's music has extremely little in common with death metal. In addition, I googled "nu-death" and got 887 results (a extremely small number), and from what I saw, at least 10 or so in the first pages weren't even referring to it directly as a music genre, rather as part of a list of types of metal (e.g. Hardcore/Nu/Death/Black Metal). La Pizza11 01:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Categorization

Alright, I know there is a big debate on Slipknot's musical genre. This is how I think it should go: Since Slipknot had evident Nu-Metal influence on their self-titled debut, I think we should state beside their Nu-Metal classification, (S/T debut), and by Alternative Metal (newer).

If you really listen to Slipknot's last two releases, Iowa, and Vol. 3, you will see that their Nu-Metal influence has decreased (more so on Vol. 3). Iowa's vocals were NOT sung in a rap or hip-hop style fashion like most of the songs on their S/T album. However, what Iowa DID lack was the guitar solos (evident on the tracks Welcome, Pulse of the Maggots, Vermilion, Scream, and Before I Forget) and progressive rock influenced tracks such as Circle, Vermilion Pt. 2, The Nameless (melodic acoustic parts), Dont Get Close and Danger-Keep Away that are present on Vol. 3. The vocals are also not sung in a rap-style fashion either (this has been stated by Corey himself in a Revolver interview in 2004). Their Alternative Metal style is far more evident than their Nu-Metal influence.

I think we should keep listing both genres but specify, as I have stated previously, as to what albums the genre pertains to.

List of albums/songs

I removed the list of albums since there is a separate article for the discography. Wildnox 19:35, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

What are you thinking

Anyone who classifies Slipknot as nu-metal is insulting what they stand for. The fact is, Slipknot is unlike anything we've ever heard before. You're lucky that Slipknot fans don't like Wikipedia because you would be in a world of hurt.

First, what exactly do they "stand for" and what is it that set them apart? Second what genre would you classify them as, making a constructive arguement is always better than a hollow one. On another note,please don't use wikipedia, or any other internet media, to make an empty threat, it generally just makes you look foolish. Wildnox 16:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

comment

there is no link in this page to the hebrew page on slipknot.

well

There is now (link to the hebrew page)

Citations

Does anyone have citations for any of the facts in this article. I don't doubt their accuracy, it would just be nice to WP:CITE. Wether or not anyone else has any I'm going to be trying to find citations for parts of the article, so it would be helpful if people could add some of them. Wildnox 17:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)