Talk:Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat.

Archives Archive One: pre → July 2008

Requested move

User:Dude527 recently removed the period after "Repeat" in the title, saying he "corrected the title." Is there a source for this? Amazon, Opium of the People, and MFKR1 lists it with a period, Allmusic lists it without. It is contested that all of the sources are "reliable", but I would like to know what the album says, anyone? Blackngold29 01:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I have the re-issue of it and it has the period at the end of Repeat. See here [1] that is a scan of the back inlay for the CD and you can clearly see it has the period. REZTER ^TALK ø 17:18, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I requested this to be moved due to the fact that there is a redirect currently at the name I'm trying to mvoe it to per the album cover art. So it's clear that it's been moved before. REZTER ^TALK ø 14:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I think I should make it clear that I requested the page to be moved to Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat. which includes spaces because the title does include spaces REZTER ^TALK ø 19:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:Slip

Personnel

Do we really need all that information in the personnel section. Specifically what I'm talking about for example is things like "cover photo concept, cover photo cage, middle panel". Granted all these are credited for in the album booklet, it's just that section is just so messy and those things look way out of place. REZTER ^TALK ø 17:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't think we need it. Just the instumentalists, vocals and stuff like producer, mixer, etc. It's too cluttered and overwhelming (like track listing for Slipknot (album) used to be. Blackngold29 17:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Wording

• In the statement, "...release party at the Safari...". Is it "The Safari" or just "Safari"? If "the" is part of the club's title it should be capitolized, if not it should read "party at Safari". Blackngold29 02:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
• The statement "The most significant example of this is evidenced by the band's third studio album..." seems kind of odd to me. As a fan, I easily understand this, but a GA reviewer will probably require a source. It might be alright if we just took out "most significant", and just say "An example of this..." Blackngold29 02:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Reception

Should we include a reception of the album? AllMusic has a review, although beyond that finding additional sources would probably be difficult. Though with searching I could probably find something. Blackngold29 02:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Well try looking for some sources if you find enough I guess we could do one. REZTER ^TALK ø 09:45, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

I think the only good source that we have for a Reception section is AMG and it's a retrospective review... I really don't think that we are in a position to write anything about this because it wasn't really released per say. REZTER ^TALK ø 17:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

• "1000 copies." → "1,000 copies." per MOS:NUM
  • Done
• En dashes for page ranges in the references per WP:DASH
  • Done
• Publishers are required for references per WP:CITE/ES
  • Done
• Why no Reception section?
  • I wouldn't think 1,000 copy demos would usually have too many reviews. Allmusic has one and I think there might be one more that we found, but not enough to pull from for an entire section. Blackngold29 04:26, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

    Yeah, good point :| Gary King (talk) 04:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Gary King (talk) 04:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Pretty short article, but everything seems in order. Passing! Gary King (talk) 04:51, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Genre

Would avant-garde metal be the best genre for this album? --↑ɻ⅞θʉɭђɥл₮₴Ṝ 12:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps, but you'll need a source. Blackngold29 13:55, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The current genres are unsourced. --↑ɻ⅞θʉɭђɥл₮₴Ṝ 19:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Most are covered in the "Musical and lyrical themes" section. Though I guess I can't say I would be opposed to adding avant-garde to the list. I don't think it should replace the current ones though. Blackngold29 19:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Funk metal

Yes, I see that a number of the songs on MFKR contain elements of funk, but I do not believe the album could be classified as funk metal for that. The introduction of these elements, I believe, is covered with the inclusion of experimental metal; Slipknot are a metal band, and adding the funk, disco, etc. makes this album experimental, not separate genres altogether. See what I'm saying? Andre666 (talk) 05:55, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Pale One vs -ismist

I made an edit changing -ismist Recordings to Pale One Music, as that is the 'label' (independent) MFKR was originally released under by the band. It was removed due to lack of a reliable source. However:

1. -ismist doesn't actually have its own source either; and
2. The first label the album was released under should be mentioned, so surely -ismist should be replaced with "Independent" or "Self-published" or just removed.

Well? Andre666 (talk) 06:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

This is explained in the Legacy section. They self released it and I believe "Pale One Music" is just their own name they came up with for a label because they used to be called "The Pale Ones". And to quote the article "On June 13, 1997, -ismist Recordings took over the distribution of the remaining copies of the album." Which is sourced. In that case why not list them both? REZTER ^TALK ø 10:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Future appearances?

I am all for the section but do you not have any sources at all to back up the information? Otherwise it fails WP:OR. Sorry. REZTER ^TALK ø 12:18, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

reworks?

should we have a section saying what songs were reworked? like slipknot was made into (SiC), gently became... well, gently, and killers are quiet became iowa.... should we include this? and if so, can anyone find a source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastermarth (talk • contribs) 04:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Well it is already mentioned in the Legacy section that they reworked most of the tracks to appear on later albums. I don't think we need to say "this song became this song". Because we don't have sources for every song like that. REZTER ^TALK ø 10:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Donnie Steele not credited?

In the "Mate. Feed. Kill. Repeat." (credit page) part of the booklet, it clearly states: "Guitar leads on tracks t, 6, & 1o, as well as other rhythm guitar tracks performed by Donnie Steele." Isn't this considered crediting? CrowzRSA ^{01:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)}

You're right, I removed it. REZTER ^TALK ø 18:26, 26 January 2010 (UTC)