Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Slipknot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Slipknot
This box: view • talk • edit
Information

Contents

[edit] Assessment scale and guidelines

I think that these are beneficial things we need to help start this project and for something that members can adhere to when editting articles within the projects scope. I would be interested in helping make both of these elements of the project but I haven't been part of a WikiProject before and I feel it's too big of a task to tackle on my own. So could one of the fellow members who feel they are up to it help me create these? Rezter TALK 03:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Today I began work on the guidelines for the Project, you can find my progress on my sandbox; here. I have written the Citations section and give a rough idea of the other sections that need writing up. I would like other members to help me write these guidelines, feel free to write up a section or even add another one. The sections I have listed were basically all that came from the top of my head so feel free to add as many sections as you see fit and you know, I don't think you can ever give too much help. Once the guidelines are up to a reasonable standard they should be moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Slipknot/Guidelines. I also gave the assessment scale thing a re-think and I think at least for now, we should leave the assessing for more established projects. Rezter TALK 06:22, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History

Note that the page is built on a test page of mine and the history is a little strange. ThundermasterTRUC 08:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FA Comments

BuddingJournalist made some good points that need to be checked about the main page such as:

"While the band's roots lie back as early as 1992..."
"one of the most popular nu metal bands of this period." What exactly would "this period" be?
"Since which time they have released two other albums..."
"Early formations of a band were beginning to form as early as 1992 with the core band members" Very awkward. Why is this single sentence its own paragraph?
"The band continued to develop their vision of what the band would be"
"at a local club called Crowbar" What's local? Des Moines area?
"suggested renaming the band "Slipknot" after their song." What song?
"eventually the anti-image concept developed towards the members wearing masks" Quite awkward, and what's an "anti-image concept"?
"remained mainly obscured due to their desire to wait until their music was fully developed." Perhaps "in obscurity"? Sentence seems unfinished. Wait to do what?
"In February 1996, guitarist Steele left the band due to his Christian beliefs; though the other band members were prepared to allow him to stay, Steele decided to leave." Explain further how Steele thought his Christian beliefs clashed with being in the band. "Steele decided to leave" – we were just told this.
"After conflict over the mixing and mastering," Vague. What conflict?
"which resulted in airplay on local radio and, in turn, won a spot at Dotfest" Awkward and what is Dotfest? "Slipknot had returned to the studio " Why "had" returned?
"who was to become the first and only member to be fired from the band due to his lazy attitude." Spot the ambiguity. Also, was he really fired for his lazy attitude, or his laziness?
"the band were assigned individual numbers respectively" What does that mean, and why was this done respectively?
"interest grew from record labels" "With the acquisition of Ross Robinson, interest grew" Repetitive, and awkward phrasing. Note that these examples are from the lead and Early years (pre-1998) only.
In general, an over-reliance on the weak passive voice. ("The demo was sent to many record labels", "eventually producer Ross Robinson was contacted", "it was then decided they would work together", "DJ Sid Wilson was brought in") The alternating between referring to bands as singular and plural entities is jarring.
Linking needs work. Sometimes specific phrases that require linking are not ("heavily down-tuned guitar set-up (lead, rhythm, and bass guitars)"). Sometimes phrases are linked more than once.
ThundermasterTRUC 08:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Outline for all albums

I think we should create an outline for what all of the albums should include. That way each one will fit in well within the overall project and look good as a group. I've gathered the follwing from what I think are good album articles: This list includes: Dark Passion Play and Reign in Blood (whitch was featured on the main page). All catagories are as needed, but let's try to get as many as we can.

Outline of what to include, in this order (Adjust as you see fit):

  • Album Infobox (with all info filled in)
  • Intro Paragraph
  • Title Origin
  • Recording of
  • Leaks (if needed)
  • Music Style
  • Track Listing
  • Lyrical Themes
  • Live Performance
  • Critical Response
  • Chart Performance
  • Credits
  • Notes
  • References
  • See Also
  • External Links

Any changes you would like to make...just change my list. Keep it (sic) though. Blackngold29 (talk) 03:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Good ideas man, add it to the guidelines we are currently working on. They're over at my sandbox: User:Rezter/Sandbox. We need to try get these up to some kind of finished standard some time soon and then I think we should do to-do lists for articles and focus on fulfilling those to-do lists one at a time. Rezter TALK 10:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Awesome I'll add it over there, the list looks good so far. Blackngold29 (talk) 14:35, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to point out that those information should be properly referenced on the article. No original research. Zouavman Le Zouave 05:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, or 1. it will never get promoted 2. it will contain lots of rubbish and 3. it will probably get deleted. So we need to use and strong and reliable sources as possible. Thanks for reading, ThunderMaster UTC 09:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bigmouth Records

Is it mentioned anywhere on Slipknot's article that Corey Taylor has his own record label entitled Bigmouth Records? They are a label focused on the native grassroots musicians of the area where Slipknot grew up. I just thought that this was interesting, and also reflects good on Taylor's character since it shows that he still cares about his hometown and its musicians.

If this IS a part of 'pedia, then would it be a good idea to include Bigmouth Records on the Wikiproject:Slipknot? Dark Executioner (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2008 (UTC)Dark Executioner

If it has anything to do with the band or any of its members, then yes, I think it should be.Inhumer (talk) 17:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I just found out that it is here. Dark Executioner (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Dark Executioner

[edit] Getting Articles Graded...

I think that it would be beneficial to the project if we had some articles reviewed and given a rating. The main band page is pretty good, but none of the albums have been given a rating it would be easier to improve some of the articles if we knew exactly what needs to be done. Blackngold29 (talk) 04:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Maggots

Shouldn't ther be more on the fact a slipknot fan is called a maggot like an ICP fan is called Jugallo /Juglette —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.175.188 (talk) 04:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't see what else is to add. Slipknot fans are often referred to as maggots. That's it. There is nothing else to add. Zouavman Le Zouave 06:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Unless, we could find any sourced information on it, yes, I think that is basically it. Thanks for reading, ThundermasterTRUC 16:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RIAA Certifications

I have added the RIAA certifications (Gold and Platinum albums) to all of the CDs and DVDs. However, the Disasterpieces DVD has not date in the RIAA Archives for a Double Platinum Certifacation, it does have logs for triple and quadruple though. If you know the date or another site that has it, please add it to the list. Thanks! Blackngold29 (talk) 04:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Crowz

If Anyone can find any source that can improve this article, please provide it.the juggreserection IstKrieg! 15:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I have 3 books specific to Slipknot, along with multiple other musical books which include Slipknot along with a huge stack of magazines which contain information about the band. The only mention of anything that I could possibly see related to it was that they continued to write and record material after releasing MFKR. Soem of which were released on Roadrunner Records Demo, they may have planned to write and record enough material for a second independent release but they never did and there's no mention of track listings, album names or anything of the sort. There is information on FAN websites but that is unreliable, I personally don't believe it and it's not enough to base information on wikipedia. Rezter TALK 17:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The offical site states that it is a "collection of songs", which has not been released; it is not now, nor has ever been an album (or released in any format). It can be found on some fan-sites, however none are legit sources. If all traces have not been removed yet, they should be. Thanks. Blackngold29 (talk) 03:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] MFKR

Serious problem with the genres. Does anyone have any solutions to this? Thanks for reading, ThunderMaster UTC 10:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thats a good point. Its very unique, unlike all their albums. It has a very technical influence on it, but not nu metal. I don't know what kind of genre you can put it as, but they definately need changing. Riverpeopleinvasion (talk) 20:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

On here: [1] it says Alternative Metal, Heavy Metal, Rap-Metal. You will probably be able to find some other sources like this too. REZTER TALK ø 21:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Slipknot (album)

What do you guys think about this article? Recently it was rejected as a "good article" and the comments state it could do with a copyedit and some expansion on the reception section. Do you guys think we should continue to pay focus to this article and push it to GA status now? I personally can't be involved in the coediting of the article because I wrote most of it, so obviously I'm not the best of writers haha. So yeah, shall we push thsi to GA status now or do you think we should move the AoF to something else? REZTER TALK ø 11:52, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering the same thing, I don't think we need to make it our article of focus, as to me it looks like pretty good. I say we do something different and then after we've improved most of the other important articles (Vol. 3, Iowa, some members, etc.) we could "hit it again". That being said, if anyone doesn't like writing new stuff; they could copyedit Slipknot (album) while we're working on the other articles. Thanks! Blackngold29 (talk) 17:35, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Slipknot has been graded, should be begin Iowa as our next AoF now? Assuming nothing else will be nominated. It seems pointless to keep this promotional period going, we should move on and try to improve the rest of the albums. Blackngold29 (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedits

Have we made a request for Slipknot (band)to be copy-edited? And also, what about Slipknot (album)? 86.135.80.62 (talk) 13:17, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

There is a request made for Slipknot (band) at WP:LoCE but not for Slipknot (album) I think that should be handled by our project because we're not trying to get FA status with it like we are with Slipknot (band). REZTER TALK ø 15:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Coverage template

I noticed how the coverage template didn't work on the talk pages of templates so I made a template for template talk pages at {{Slipknot Project TempVersion}}. Thanks for reading. Thundermaster (talk · contribs) 16:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Band member list?

Many bands have articles dedicated to the members and line-ups of bands, should we do the same for Slipknot? A basic example of what I'm talking about can be seen here. The only reason why I question whether or not it should be done, is because there have not been many member changes, none since 1999 actually. In addition, I do not want to start adding articles that are not necessary, because we have quite a bit of work to do. Thoughts anyone? Blackngold29 (talk) 02:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Not a bad idea. Thanks for reading. Thundermaster (talk · contribs) 14:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Things are moving along, let's keep it going...

I believe all the issues of the Slipknot (album) GA review have been addressed, it shouldn't be too much longer now. Iowa (album) is looking good, I think it is close to a GAC. I added a reception section to 9.0: Live, which has fullfilled all of the requirements for a "B class" article. Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses) is lined up to be the next AoF, I think that we have learned quite a bit from the first two articles and Vol. 3 should have a good amount of material out there to pull from. I think that the project has generated quite a lot of improvements, unfortunately it seems that participation in the project is dwindling. I was just wondering if there are any users out there who no longer wish to participate; so that we can keep the Member's list on the main page updated. If no one responds to this messege, than perhaps some sort of survey could be sent out to all members addressing their involvement into the Project. I don't wish to offend anyone, I do not have all of the Project's articles on My Watchlist, so if you are contributing, keep up the good work! Blackngold29 05:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

My contributions haven't been great lately due to college work but I should be able to contribute more when I break up in June.. but then I'm going to University in September so my contributions may dwindle even more I dunno, but I check My Watchlist nearly everyday so I'm always keeping an eye on things. REZTER TALK ø 16:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)