Jump to content

Talk:Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleVol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 25, 2014.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 23, 2008Good article nomineeListed
July 14, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
August 3, 2008Featured article candidatePromoted
August 7, 2008Featured topic candidateNot promoted
September 16, 2008Good topic candidateNot promoted
November 21, 2008Good topic candidateNot promoted
July 28, 2009Good topic candidatePromoted
April 17, 2015Good topic removal candidateDemoted
Current status: Featured article


Genre

[edit]

You should include Alternative metal and heavy metal. Since all their singles from this album are any of those genres, why is the album just labeled as nu metal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.238.222.205 (talk) 02:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Please leave me a note when done. Cheers, giggy (:O) 10:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More comments below. giggy (:O) 01:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Similar to their previous albums the lyrics include strong use of metaphors and touches upon themes including anger, disaffection and psychosis." - doesn't sound good starting a sentence with "similar"... just talk about what's on this album, then perhaps mention that it's similar to something else.
  • "being labelled as including "stately vocal harmonies"" - by who?

Untitled

[edit]

This GAN has passed, and this is now a good article! If you found this review helpful, please consider helping out a fellow editor by reviewing another good article nomination. Help and advice on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles, and you can ask for the help of a GAN mentor, if you wish.

Cheers, giggy (:O) 01:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

Ref 17 has been vandalized. Ironxwalrus (talk) 04:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Four singles, not five

[edit]

I think is notable that the "The Nameless" single is not from Vol.3. While it originally appeared on this album, the single is actually from 9.0: Live.

Do I have permission to change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xanthic-Ztk (talk • contribs) 02:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved it over to 9.0: Live. Thanks for the reminder. REZTER TALK ø 14:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

In an attempt to end continuous edit warring the following list has been organized, please add any sources to the list so a consensus can be reached on what to add to the infobox. Keep in mind that personal opinions have no place on Wikipedia articles, and all information should be from a reliable source and WP:NPOV. Thank you. Blackngold29 01:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Pop?!" WTF?!?! 98.174.219.202 (talk) 15:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Band Genre for Slipknot

[edit]

heyy err i really like the page and it was very informational, but correct me if im wrong but aren't slipknot classed as a Nu-metal band ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guitaralica (talk • contribs) 00:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See "Genre" section above. Thanks! blackngold29 01:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Album of the decade

[edit]

Recently Metal Hammer called Vol.3 one of the "Albums Of The Decade". I feel this is worth adding to the article. I just need a consensus on this. What do you say?

Albums Of The Decade-Vol.3:(The Subliminal Verses)

Torque3000 (talk) 08:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Add that! FiggazWithAttitude (talk) 13:23, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

Please do not add a genre to this article unless you have a source per WP:RS, WP:OR, and WP:SUBJECTIVE. Thank you. Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:27, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Still waiting to here from other users about adding a source to it. If there are not further comments made, it will be removed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Alternative metal is the albums genre and out of all the links mentioned further up the page it is the one mentioned the most, as for nu-metal this album isn't the first two albums are though. Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Further up the page? The only article in the page that mentions it, is the allmusic link where it says ""not just another flashy alt-metal billboard", which isn't very specific. Is there a link on the page you are mentioning that I missed? Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • About
    • Alternative/Nu Metal

Lukejordan02 (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I still have issues with the allmusic link as stated above. I wouldn't use MetaCritic as the site says it pulls it's information from AllMusic, so it's basiclly the same thing as the source above. Last.Fm is user updated so it's useless for wiki. WP:ALBUM/SOURCE says to be weary about using About.com. The About article says nothing specific about this album either. You need specific sources for the album, not the band in general. Andrzejbanas (talk) 10:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.nme.com/reviews/7428

http://www.chroniclesofchaos.com/articles.aspx?id=2-3492 http://www.metalstorm.net/pub/review.php?review_id=1690&page=&message_id= http://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/8386/Slipknot-Vol.-3%3A-(The-Subliminal-Verses) Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


http://alreadyheard.com/post/52788999687/versus-slipknot-vol-3-the-subliminal-verses-vs#.U_XUvmK9KK0

This site refers to the album as an Alternative Metal masterpiece and the site is not on the unreliable source section on wiki. Lukejordan02 (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So to clarify these links you are posting without context:
  • NME says "At least two thirds of it is still comprised of head-spinning speed metal, but there are signs of genuine progression – not to mention progressive rock – from the off."
  • Chronicles of Chaos says "More than before we find Slipknot exploring the extremes of the nu-metal realm by incorporating influences from a wide variety of musical styles. The military percussion on "The Blister Exists", the catchy groove of "Duality", melodic SOAD-influences on "Opium of the People", a bit of gothic in "Vermillion"... borrowing heavily on different styles is something Slipknot gets away with with ease."
  • The Metal Storm review can be discounted as it states "This is a guest review, which means it does not necessarily represent the point of view of the MS Staff."
  • Sputnik says " So when I heard about their latest effort, Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses), I was, to say the least, skeptical. When I finally listened to the album, I was pleasantly surprised. I was glad to see that they had, for the most part, left their rapping nu-metal past behind and opted for a more straight-forward rock/metal approach."
For your Alreadyheard source, i can't find any major notability of the source. There author on the review seems to be " Aaron Wilson" who isn't credited in the staff page here. Judging by the text below here: "Want to be a guest writer for a future ‘Versus’ feature? If you’re in a band, run a label or music website then we want to here from you. Send us an e-mail to info@alreadyheard.com.", it sounds like they are just getting anyone. I really can't find them notable.

So with all that, we've found that it's not a nu-metal album at least. Please actually post content from your review so I don't have to go digging through it myself to figure out what you are trying to say.Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But like I said Alreadyheard isn't on the unreliable sources section so it would not break any rules to use it. Lukejordan02 (talk) 12:18, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not every site can be listed on that list, and you've pretty much got to back it up that's it's high quality source. So far it just appears to be a self-published music site with no credibility. The fact they are asking pretty much anyone to write for them isn't very convincing. You are also ignoring the posts above from the NME which also lists genres and styles. So which one is it? Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:23, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The other links, I simply added as they are reliable sources to search through for any one interested. Lukejordan02 (talk) 12:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I did, the one most detailed about genres is the NME article. Please finish up your reseach next time and confirm that the sources are reliable and not guest posts or user-submitted reviews. Andrzejbanas (talk) 13:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Andrzejbanas::I have spent a while trying to find reliable sources on online and in print but can't find any, what do you think about changing this genre and the All Hope Is Gone genre to just Heavy Metal? Lukejordan02 (talk) 18:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Lukejordan02:, I'd normally agree with you, but if we leave it with a genre we consider obvious then others will come in and say "oh, but groove metal/nu-metal/death metal etc. is obvious to me too, just listen to it!" etc. I'd prefer no information to uncited info for these reasons. Maybe we should ask the Slipknot task-force on this? If any members are still kicking around. Andrzejbanas (talk) 14:34, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, archived version of The Boston Globe review may be helpful; it classifies the album as nu metal. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 21:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Andrzejbanas (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Might as well go ahead an add it to the genre field as no other answers have gone through. Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:34, 12 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question from User:Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel

[edit]

Is The Blister Exists actually a single because it does not have a page for itself?

[edit]

Singles traditionally have pages for themselves but The Blister Exists doesn't. When also saying that it was the single that preceded All Gone Is Gone, User:FlightTime seemed like they wanted to start a war of words when seeing it and aggressively told me that it was violating the policy (IT WAS NOT) and deleted it. But for The Nameless which precedes The Blister Exists, it states that The Blister Exists was the next single that was released in 2007, even though on this album, it says it was released in 2006.

The chronology of the singles within this album is also mixed since it goes Duality, Vermillion, Before I Forget and then back to Duality and FlightTime wasn't dumb enough to realise this before it was reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikey'Da'Man, Archangel (talk • contribs) 19:41, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When also editing The Nameless a while back, I said it (The Nameless) was also from this album, despite it first being released as a single on the live album 9.0: Live, since the song was practically released first released on this album before it became a single. But once again it was deleted by FlightTime because it was an "unreliable source". Again, I said The Blister Exists was released in 2006, but was also reverted; but the thing that confuses me is why did FlightTime delete The Blister Exists being a single on All Hope Is Gone but not The Nameless?

I guess that you'd have to ask FlightTime. FiggazWithAttitude (talk) 13:25, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vol._3:_(The_Subliminal_Verses)&oldid=1195494860"