Talk:Nu metal/Archive 1

message: I could pick this article apart but this section bothers me particularly. Please consider what I have to say. I consider just going in and editing this section myself but I thought I'd run it through the talk page first.
QUOTE
To emphasize this rhythmic "pulse," nu metal guitarists generally make liberal use of palm muting, a technique which itself blurs the boundary between melodic note and rhythmic attack. Another common tactic is the use of de-tuned strings (in drop-D or lower, sometimes adding a seventh string) whose lower pitch creates a thicker, more resonant sound.
UNQUOTE
This makes it sound as if nu-metal invented this style of playing. Trsut me, it didn't. If anything, this style of playing is highly derivative of almost every other style of metal out there. Many, many bands do these things and I feel that this cannot be used to differentiate between nu-metal and other genres. It is just re-explaining something that is already the staple diet of metal guitarists.
posted by deftdrummer @ 1800 8/13/06 I feel the same way about the drum section. I find it odd that the author believes drum beats never really go beyond 4/4 time signitures in nu-metal. 
I propose it is reworded to something along the lines of...
"In terms of timbre, nu-metal sounds much like any other metal sub-genre. Guitarists make liberal use of typical "metal" techniques such as palm-muting and often de-tune the strings (to drop-D or lower tunings) to create a thicker, heavier and more resonant tone."
I'm sure somebody can word it more delicately than I can, so there it is.
Phorque 12:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the "Guitar" section 

message: "The idea of matching up rappers with rockers is not entirely new," writes Rolling Stone. "Run-D.M.C. and Aerosmith did it in 1986 with `Walk This Way,' and Public Enemy joined up with Anthrax in 1991 for a version of `Bring The Noise.' But somehow the concept of musical miscegenation between the two most urgent forms of youth culture music has remained a largely unexploited source of creative exchange."
http://mantle.geop.itu.edu.tr/~onur/hiphop/judgment.html
LOAD and RELOAD represented a significant musical change for Metallica. The band's breakneck metal tempos and layered guitar compositions had largely been replaced by bluesy rock songs, full of bent notes, warm guitar tone, slide guitar, and shuffle and swing rhythms.
Metallica also reinvented their visual image with LOAD and RELOAD: the CD booklet for Load contained many controversial photographs of the band, taken by Anton Corbijn. The band members - who had recently cut their hair - were depicted wearing pimp suits, smoking cigars, and sipping brandy, sometimes wearing heavy makeup..
nevermind the napster thing which made them look like they were REALLY out of touch with new metallers.
these are things that should be considered adding to the article!!!!
what does metallica have to do with nu-metal? Xunflash 19:26, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not much, imho. St. Anger could be classed as Nu Metal, but (Re)Load? No way.--Mark (Talk | Email) 14:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  judgement night, LOAD & RELOAD 

message: This article is littered with obvious NPOV comments, most sided towards claims that Nu Metal is inheritantly unoriginal and commercialized. If someone better with NPOVizing skills than I would please correct this, it'd be great.--MardukZero 04:51, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: See articles Gothic Music, Gothic Metal and Gothic Rock for how your 'thinking' is wrong. Leyasu 17:30, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV meter going off the richter scale 

message: This name is given as a joke to poser bands preteending to be Heavy Metal. People don't refer to themselves as Nu Metal.
:Of course they don't, it's intended as an insult.  Unfortunately, nu metal is the name that stuck with these bands, and that's what they'll be called, even in Wikipedia MrHate 00:27, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
: - right, it is an insult, and maybe the articule should better reflect that.  it's why it's inherently a biased derogatory term.  a valid term, one i readily use myself, but, imho, better defined as the matter of opinion that it is.  i think the least arguable bit is that nu-metal is more mainstream and commercial.  it's a label fans of less commercial, less pop-mainstream metal sling around as a point of contention, though the specifics therein DO vary, from one self-proclaimed real metal fan to another.
Still not a sub-category though.
:Nu metal is not metal, and has no place on the metal page except to clarify the fact that it is not actually related.
so start removing from here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_heavy_metal_genres , because there are people that dones't know too much about metal and will go in the nu metal thinking that nu-metal is metal.
The name "heavy metal" was also started as an insult to the genre. Haters of the genre originally said "it sounds like heavy metal falling from the sky and making loud noises when it hits the ground" which was how it got the name "heavy metal". The name basically means it sounds bad but the name stuck just like "nu metal" did Metalfan72 (talk) 17:55, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Nu Metal is a joke and not a sub Category of Heavy Metal

message: nu-metal is not heavy metal it is rap with some distorted instruments
:Obviously, you've never listened to nu metal -- Dysfunktion 23:34, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: nu-metal is the name "purists" use as an insult for hard rock bands that use rap and dj-ing techniques. Xunflash 17:07, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Take this page off of the heavy metal music list!!!!! 

message: I've taken ScratchFace off the list of progenitors of nu metal. We don't have an article on them, and a quick search on the net didn't yield anything. Algae 09:55, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: ScratchFace

message: I was reading 2000s and it says that in 2003 Nu-Metal became "dated"...yet there is no information on this article about it? Flyerhell 06:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 2003?

message: I know I'm going to sound stupid but oh well. What exactly is Nu Metal, as you guys put it.? I am so confused. Many people say a certain band is Nu Metal and then people argue it's not. I am just so confused and it would be of much help if someone could clear up this. TearAwayTheFunerealDress 16:15, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Ironically I would imagine the existence of New Rock footwear - so popular with some nu-metal fans, may have contributed to the choice of monicker. I'm sure we wouldn't like to call something DM-Ska or Burberry-dance or Rbk-rap, so steering away from any brand confusion seems like a possible, if questionable, factor.
And yes I know that some New Rock wearers hate nu-metal, and vice versa. Just a thought, OK? :)
Skewer 12:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As i do the review, ill put it into the common misconceptions part im drawing up if its something that comes up sometimes. Leyasu 14:47, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why not nu-rock?

message: The section headed "notable Nu-Metal groups" points at an (intended) list of all nu-metal groups.  This really isn't the same thing.  The section should either list notable groups or have it's name changed. 202.45.98.81 01:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Noted in kind and duely changed. Thank you for the contribution. Leyasu 03:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Suggestion: Reverting things is not going to solve anything. The proposed merges have been suggested due to the names all being the names for the same thing. Let me also point out, the opinion of a user of Wikipedia as to wether im a 'metalhead' bears no importance to me, as i find such things infantile and dull. Im Ley Shade, i have vast knowledge in a handfull of subjects of intrest to me. That is all. If you have suggestions to improve the article, please make them in kind. If not, then please refrain from petty threats, abusive comments, and schoolyard politics. The spirit of Wikipedia is to make better articles all around, not further ones ego. Leyasu 16:00, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Notable Nu-Metal groups" 

message: Above: I was reading 2000s and it says that in 2003 Nu-Metal became "dated"...yet there is no information on this article about it? Flyerhell 06:38, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a matter of opinion and not a matter of fact. Trend here in England still has many teenagers as hooked into Emo and Pop Punk as they are Nu Metal and Alternative Rock. Its surge of popularity might of died, and yes it might no longer be the most fashionable form of music on the planet. But, it is by no means 'dated'. And as such, the article is going under major revisions both by Aj Ramierz and Myself. As such, your comment has been noted, and we will look into including this in the article come a full revision of it. Leyasu 02:02, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: 2003 was about the time numetal was no longer "cool"

message: "After Nirvana frontman Kurt Cobain's death in 1994, the viability of other bands in the grunge scene would follow". What the heck is that supposed to mean? -- Jmabel | Talk 03:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impenetrable phrase 

message: Why on Earth does 'pop metal' redirect to here? Pop metal is stuff like Def Leppard and Scorpions and between heavy metal and glam metal. I have never, ever heard anyone refer to nu metal as 'pop metal'.
Pop metal should redirect to glam metal. Or, better yet, glam metal should be a section under a pop metal page... but that is a discussion for another time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.149.28.67 (talk • contribs) 24 Dec 2005
: Concur. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It does not matter either way. "Pop metal" is an idiotic made-up term, a neologism which we were able to eliminate from the Wikipedia and which was being used to define bands such as Nightwish by a biased anon. The consensus on VfD was for it to redirect to nu metal, so that was done. Just leave that redirect be. Does it make the genre less worthy if a redirect nobody uses points to it? I don't really think so. Just let that "article" rot. --Sn0wflake 05:27, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Pop Metal is used to define 'any' metal band of 'any' form that is considered large, popular, or otherwise well known. This the 'redirect' should say this, and and have the Metal Genre Footer on it for easy access of the genres. Then it can rot, while being poked with sticks. Leyasu 09:24, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't change VfD consensus unless you promote a new consensus by means of an AfD or in this case maybe a RfD... or promote wide consensus on the article's Talk page... something along those lines. The center of the discussion is quite simple: "pop metal" does not exist. It's a junction of the terms popular music and heavy metal music, but not one anybody uses, so perhaps it woulod be best to just put it up for Redirects for Deletion. --Sn0wflake 21:36, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

text: What i meant is the article, or stub as the case would be, should simply point out that the term isnt a form of metal, and is simply used to mean 'any' metal band of 'any' form that is considered large, popular, or otherwise well known. Leyasu 02:00, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop Metal? 

message: Ok, so basically Nu-Metal= Rap vocals? Thats ridiuclous. The bass player is the hero? U can't even hear the bass riffs most of them play as they are only playing the roots along with the rhythm guitarist.
You call Korn Nu-Metal? Slipknot? Mudvayne? Rapped vocals? This is a ridiculous article that gives a totally ridiculous analysis of the genre as a whole.
: Read article Alternative Metal and you will see why this article needs serious editing, and serious merger with Alternative Metal. Leyasu 07:50, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is a joke 

message: Forgive me, I'm new, and I probably shouldn't start out telling you all that, but I wanted to let you all know exactly how this looks to a "new reader" who doesn't care much for this "heated" debate and thinks it's highly if not entirely political.
You are trying to group together a bunch of artists which shouldn't really be grouped together, except as follows.
Basically you are taking alternative metal artists which also mesh well into other genre's and calling them all 'nu-metal' and trying to seperate them from the 'straight' alternative metal artists.
My suggestion would be to make this article one which says just that - that it isn't really a genre so much as a term used to describe alternative metal artists who also fall or lean slightly towards other genres as well, such as rapcore or grunge or hard or funk rock or punk.
: I studied genres for 2 years. I know a bit more about what a genre is. If you need to see what genres are and are not when it comes to metal, see this article Leyasu 13:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My take on all of this... 

message: I tried to condense the article a bit, the "definition" section was pretty redundent with the "history" an "musical" traits sections, so I moved a bit of it into the history section, and renamed that section "overview".
I also tried to trim down the multiple references to the controversy over whether or not it is "metal", I feel that it makes the article more neutral. If someone can find good sources, the controversy might deserve it's own article. maxcap 02:22, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A very proficient and well done edit. Perhaps you could do the same with the instrumental definations as well? Leyasu 02:49, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maxcap's edits 

message: I remvoed this from the article because it seems rather questionable.
The first actual use of the name "Nu-Metal" was a sub-genre category first seen at Rasputin Records in Berkeley, CA during the 1990s, a well respected music store where many bands we know today, have become famous from. Rasputin's was one of the first major record store chains to actively seek hardcore and rare Metal music from around the world (even as far as selling indie demos at retail). When their collection jumped from 1 small shelf with about 2 dozen bands, to 12 shelf long isles with hundreds of bands (both labels and indie), they began to separate the styles of metal they had in stock. From Black, Death, Grind, Thrash, Folk, Power, Industrial and a lot more. As a joke, one of the now ex-employees came up with the "Nu-Metal" sub-genre name that was supposed to stand for "Neutered-Metal", as she said "It's like Metal that had it's balls cut off." because it didn't have all the sounds that would have made it real Metal, thus they used it. Rasputin also did a lot of work on the live scene with many bands (local and afar), getting them known, putting on shows, making record deals become reality and getting them signed on with the store for promotional deals. When local bands that played the the style similar to "Nu", they adopted the sub-genre name and put on "Nu-Metal" shows around the Bay. And thanks to the rising popularity of the fast growing internet at the time, the sub-genre name traveled fast and became used quite liberally throughout the music scene. Since then the "Nu-Metal" moniker officially stuck on with the industry. Very few people back then actually knew where the "Nu" came from or what it was supposed to mean. Most figured it was just a rebellious way of saying "New Metal" as in a new sub-genre. WesleyDodds 12:34, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the term 

message: The Nu metal article is horribly POV. The last sentence of the intro's negativity introduces the subject as bad. Instead, the criticisms should be left to only the criticisms section, which should also be moved further down the page. Additionally, the article makes Korn and Limp Bizkit seem much more important in the genre than they are. The definition of nu metal should be expanded more, and we should define alternative metal, rap metal, and nu metal better to make the articles more cohesive.Theunknown42 22:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the Criticisms section needs to be retitled, simply because when I wrote the bulk of the article it was meant to be a straight history and not a separate section.  What parts are POV to you? WesleyDodds 03:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article and related articles need major reworkings 

message: Strange that Leyasu, who herself admits that she dislikes death metal, would insist that there is any influence of death metal on nu-metal. Whne you don't like a genre, chances are you know very little about it. I hate punk rock and hip-hop, myself, but I will also admit that I have limited to no kn owledge about them due to my dislike. That being said, I can tell you that there is absolutely *NO* relation between nu metal and death metal. I have changed it to "hardcore punk", as I feel that it is the most appropriate. If anyone disagrees please state your opinion here: which genere, according to you, would have sonic smililarities with nu metal? --Nargos 03:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted it. The genre doesnt have similarities in scene. It has sonic similarities musically, in the way the guitar is often played. Also, just becaue i dislike something, doesnt mean i know nothing about it. Such a claim is a 'straw man attack', so please refrain from making them outside of open POV comments. Also while i remember to do so, WesleyDodds also cited a source for the claim, which means your not allowed to delete it without provided a contradicting source, as without doing so your violating WP:CITE.Ley Shade 08:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC
Could you show which source claims that nu metal has sonic similarities with death metal? PS: sorry about the attack, I was just in a bad mood last night (I had read the Heavy Metal article and noticed how it was desecrated by Deathrocker), therefore, I wish to keep this discussion as civil as possible. We should both refrain from pulling the "vandalism" and "POV" card. Therefore, I kindly ask you: could you show the the citation of which you speak?--Nargos 17:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: If you message the user WesleyDodds and ask him for it, he should be able to give it to you first hand. Dont worry about the attack, it happens when people are in less than angelic temperments. As i said, ask WesleyDodds for it, if he cant provide yew directly with it, ill go dig it up from the serial vandalism that this page has naturally attracted. Ley Shade 17:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

text: The citation was there, it was probally knocked off when Deathrocker and Danteferno tag teamed to POV push on the article. Ley Shade 18:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death Metal???? 

message: Ok, once this article is unlocked someone needs to update the Meteora link to "Meteora (album)". Thiseye 01:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a lot that needs to be done. I need to become a sysop so that I can unlock it. — Phantasy Phanatik | talk | contribs 08:32, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meteora link 

message: jesus christ... what's wrong with you..
i listen to tool maybe a year and everywhere i read: "tool is nu-metal"
this is the first time i heard that tool is, well, rock...
listen to someone who knows about music...
...
:Well, there you go ladies and gentlemen. You can't argue those facts. maxcap 15:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And sometimes you wonder why you ever even tried... marnues 07:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  tool is nu-metal, it's not rock or sometj+hing like it, it's metal... 

message: 'A Perfect circle is nu-metal?! who wrote this!?
Of all the bands listed in the article, A.P.C is the worst reference for a nu-metal band, they have never rapped, their music never have used hip hop based rhytms or samplers, their lyrics are very complex,romantic, and with a sound that incorporates certain elements like the use of strings, acoustic guitars, or psychedelic sounds that make A.P.C very, very distant from bands like linkin park,korn,limp bizkit,adema,disturbed,papa roach,etc. Damn, thell me just ONE song of any of these bands that can be compared with "3 libras" , naming just one example.
:He's right, APC display none of the characteristics assoiated with nu metal other than being somewhat heavy and fairly popular.--Switch 14:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about that the prime focus in heavy metal music is often musicianship and solos, both of which are noticeably lacking in nu metal? Or that nu metal's only conceivable relationship to metal is that it's heavy, while not all heavy music is metal, and not all metal is heavy? The fact that the term itself is used mostly as an insult to non-metal bands posing as metal? --Switch 16:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A PERFECT CIRCLE IS NU-METAL?!? 

message: It's been a month, and I don't even know why it was protected in the first place.  WesleyDodds 10:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this page still protected? 

message: It took me a bit of an effort to reach this article, given that I can actually spell properly.
<I>Grunge is perhaps the most recognizable ancestor of nu metal; the quick jolts of distorted guitar chords, tortured vocals and lyrics of angst associated with grunge have found clear public display in signature nu metal artists, including those with a reputation for integrating hip hop into their sound.</I>
I have massive problems with this statement. Even though I hate Kurt Cobain with a passion, I'm not prepared to concede that insult. If we were to use the same inclusive factors as a marker of influence, we could come to the ridiculous conclusion that an art-rock band like Mogwai, or Achers Of Loaf are influences and are also nu-metal acts themselves. Mogwai has the typical 20 layers of distortion thing happening, but it does not make them nu-metal. As to the lyrics of angst, why not say that shoegazer bands are nu-metal, or an influence?
We all know that Nirvana were a second rate Pixies rip off, and I can see nothing that can link either of these bands with this genre. My guess would be that they are just listed as a generic influence, as with 99% of bands, but I can see nothing of note that would definitively link Grunge as the overriding influence of this genre. Chops_a_must --218.215.195.246 07:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grunge as an Influence? 

message: the band Limp Bizkit inspired the name nu metal. Limp Bizkit is practically dead and so should this term be dead. This connotation was applied unfairly to bands like Sevendust and Disturbed who do not rap as Nu metal is defined as.
:The funny thing is I have an aticle where Sevendust says they're a nu metal band.  WesleyDodds 11:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nu metal is dead 

message: Plenty of articles suffer from weasel words, but this one is excessive and it's already too POV without the weasel words.  I added the tag. -Unknownwarrior33 19:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please explain the instances.  WesleyDodds 07:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok.  I don't have the time, energy, or reason to list all of them (I'd be here for weeks), but here are some examples.  Look at the lead in paragraph:
"Nu metal (also called aggro metal, or nü metal using the traditional heavy metal umlaut) is a musical genre that has origins in the mid 1990s. It typically fuses influences from the grunge[1] and alternative metal of the early 1990s with hip hop, electronic music and other metal genres, most often thrash metal and groove metal. The popularity and perceived vast commercialisation of such music in the late 1990s and early 2000s led to widespread negative associations with the term nu metal, which in turn led to many fans and artists rejecting it. [citation needed]"
First of all, that paragraph is filled with meaningless quantifiers.  "Many", "most", "vast", "widespread", and "typically" don't really mean anything because they don't tell us actual numbers or what those numbers mean.  For example, "vast commercialization" can mean different amounds to different people.  "Many" fans can be 3.  "Most often" is only valid if you have a verifiable percentage or ratio.  Similarly, what's the source of these quantities?  The source listed is just as weasily as this article, and it doesn't say that the most common influences are thrash and groove metal.  Each and every one of these quantifiers needs to be changed or removed.  For example, not only do we need a good, verifiable idea of how many artists are rejecting the term, we also need to know what kind of artists.  The guy who does charicatures at the state fair is an artist, after all.  Nobody said anything about famous musicians, and even if they did, that would require proof too.  "Many artists" can mean a charicaturist, a church organ player, and a fingerpainting 5-year-old.  Because there's no defined value for these terms, they don't give any real information.  Even if we assume good faith and understand that the article is referring to famous musicians, it still needs to say who and how many and list a source proving that claim.  It's impossible to find a statistic for EVERYTHING, but there's absolutely no support offered for these claims.
The word "popularity" on its own as it is in that passage can mean anything, any number of supporters from 0 to infinite.  "Popularity" doesn't always mean high popularity.  Now, in some cases that's nitpicking, but I really have no idea what this article means by "popularity" And "commercialization" in this context is not an encyclopedic term because it has no set definition and it's not a classification used by major people and groups in the industry.  The article on Wikipedia to which you're redirected from the word "commercialization" doesn't mention this context of the term at all.  Furthermore, even if that was a valid term with a single definition, the article still doesn't give good information on who believes it, how many people, and why it's important.  
Then we have the part about "negative associations".  That barely means anything.  In addition to what I said before about quantifiers, it's about as vague as possible.  "Negative" can mean anything, and what's being associated?  What kind of association?  And what significance does this have?  
Taking all that into account, this is the only content from that paragraph that really belongs on Wikipedia until more sources come in:
""Nu metal (also called aggro metal, or nü metal using the traditional heavy metal umlaut) is a musical genre that has origins in the mid 1990s. It typically fuses influences from the grunge and alternative metal of the early 1990s with hip hop, electronic music and other metal genres."
Also, look at the next section.  Of that long paragraph, the only verified factual information is that Staind is not a numetal band and that Korn's newest album has a "funky" sound.  Since the sound of a specific album doesn't belong in a section about rejecting the name of the genre, and Staind not being numetal can be addressed much more appropriately by simply taking it off the list of bands.  Assuming it's already off the list, that entire section should be deleted.  I'm not saying every piece of information in every article needs a source, but a lot of these things are debateable and some are completely misleading (a link to information about Staind used as evidence for a point about the entire genre?)  And weasel words are not the only problem.  What about this:
"People who consider themselves "metal purists" refer to fans of nu metal as "mallgoths," "mini-moshers," or "angsters" in a derogatory way, claiming that nu-metal fans are subversive "rebels without a cause" (whose rebellious attitude is questionable because of their allegiance to corporate vehicles). Some people believe that the entire nu-metal genre was invented by record executives (similar claims have been made about Post-Grunge). The postmodern art design of nu-metal albums and music videos has come under criticism for attempting to appear raw and gritty in spite of the multimillion dollar production teams behind such designs."
The first part of it is an example of the way some people make fun of other people, and the second part is as far away from verifiable information as possible.
It would be quick and easy to fix this article, and so I'm going to do it.  I'm not planning to change anything that doesn't go against Wikipedia policy to the best of my knowledge.  If I have (or you want) reasoning for any of my changes that isn't the same as my reasoning for these examples, I'll give it to you here.  Don't get me wrong; I'm not trying to say I have more authority to choose what's here than anyone else, but the fact is that if I make a change and someone who disagrees immediately changes it back, we're going to have an edit war instead of the consensus that the rules require us to have. -Unknownwarrior33 01:52, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel

message: A reference is an outside source that verifies the respective claim.  I deleted the reference "Limp Bizkit, for example, have used the same marketing firm, M80, as pop music artists Backstreet Boys" because not only does it not even come close to proving the point (that the majority of the world's 6 billion people believe nu metal is commercialized), but it's not even valid to the article.  To prove a majority, you need a number of people.  There are dictionaries to explain the definition of "proof" and they can set straight people who believe an outside piece of information proves that a majority holds one opinion about something not even mentioned in that outside piece of information.  Furthermore, for the reasons I stated in the previous topic of this page, "commercialized" in this context is not an encyclopedic term.  However, somebody changed it back immediately saying that I should let people choose whether to accept believe that the opinion about commercialisation is true.  Ignoring the glaring hypocrasy of this statement coming from someone who lists an opinion as a fact in a Wikipedia article, I deleted it again and put my reasoning here.  If you want to argue this, go ahead.  Just please don't tell me that the band Linkin Park sharing the name of a place where Sesame Street Live once performed is irrefutable proof that "most people" (for that term to be proven as written you'd have to verify information from over 3 billion people) think the reference should stay in the article. -Unknownwarrior33 01:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't so much footnoting the whole statement; more so trying to address commercialization (selling out) itself. That being said I think your points are valid and the intro is better without the sentence.maxcap 12:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad we could reach an agreement.  Looking at the edit history of the article can give anyone a pretty good idea of how this might have turned out differently (not pleasant stuff) -67.163.21.39 15:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, that was me; again I forgot to log in. -Unknownwarrior33 15:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and I want to add that I apologize if any of the stuff I wrote on this page (the talk page) yesterday was offensive to anyone.  I've been feeling really weird lately and it's come out in my talk page posts, among other places, in the form of me being too tired and messed-up-feeling to make sure I'm saying things the way i mean to, as well as being unable to think of what I'm trying to say (for example, last night I spent about 4 hours editing a single sentence of a different Wikipedia article, drifting between degrees of consciousness as I was doing it). -Unknownwarrior33 15:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted reference and why

message: Over the course of several months, several edits have either deleted, 
downplayed, or added an extremely out of place "counter-argument" to the 
influence the band "Tool (band)" has on the nu metal genre. Why?
Granted, this is a very controversial, polarized "subgenre" of music, and other bands have been removed by editors for similar reasons (i.e., not having the musical traits of the genre, or "being around" before the nu-metal era began.) However, nothing is more solid than a nu-metal band or musician claiming (a said band) to be one of their influences - with a source to back this up.
I like Slayer. I don't consider them nu-metal, but their more commercial albums (i.e., God Hates Us All) have had an influence on the nu-metal genre. I may not like the connection - but does that give me any excuse to rid their name from the article, simply for that reason? Absolutely not. --Danteferno 03:49, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I apologize; I wasn't attempting to make any band-specific or opinion-specific changes.  Believe me, I left a lot of stuff in there with which I don't agree.  I was just trying to de-weasel-ize it and take out some of the things that were extremely unencyclopedic.  The fact that mention of Tool was in a place I edited was coincidental.  I promise I won't revert anything if you put it back; I wasn't paying too much attention to who was where, and I apologize for that. -Unknownwarrior33 17:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Again, please STOP removing the [[Tool (band)]] influence the article. 

message: THe fact that people are looking for Nu Metal should proof it is a genre. As with all music it's hard to define a (sub)genre and some may call it Trip-Hop, Hardrock, Heavy Metal, Darkcore, etc. but let's face it, it's all about the music. If people put a lot of time and effort in writing this article that must mean there IS a (subd) genre called nu-metal. Jorgenpfhartogs 10:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Yes or no?

message: Hi, all. What happened to the list of nu metal bands? It used to be up here and was a pretty big list.
This seems like a hard genre to define, but what I listen for the most is the guitar sound, as opposed to rapping vocals. I hear the nu metal guitars always down-tuned, and there is usually a lot of use of palm muting between chords. Also, the tempo is usually moderate and will never go as fast as say, thrash or death metal. The guitar parts usually have a certain "groovy" style to them as well. The music is usually in a verse-chorus-verse-chorus-breakdown-chorus-chorus format. These are some reasons why I do not consider Deftones nu-metal, but I do consider them an influence on the genre.
Just an interesting tid-bit to add: I've noticed in a few nu metal bands that the guitarists sometimes hunch over really low when playing. I first saw this in Korn with the guitarists Head and Munky, and later in Coal Chamber, Finger Eleven, Flaw, and then Linkin Park.
And about Slipknot and Mudvayne. I have heard these bands be called nu-metal many times, but their guitars and drums sound much faster. As well, the vocals in their debut albums were more aggressive sounding than most other nu metal bands. There was no melodic singing in Slipknot's first album that I can recall except the chorus in "Wait and Bleed." But even that was more aggressive than nu-metal's vocals. They seem to have emerged around or just after nu-metal's popularity, but I do not consider them nu-metal. For the record, I like nu-metal. I also like thrash, black, death, doom, and all other metal genres.
Thoughts?
66.68.210.69 06:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: List

message: it is a combo of grunge, and hip-hop. 24.139.31.210 (talk) 21:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any sources to back that up? And get a real discussion going before you change big things like that. = ∫tc 5th Eye 22:50, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Listen to any song from this genre. That should be proof enough, unless you are mentally retarded. 24.139.31.210 (talk) 19:14, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I used to listen to this music all the time. But that doesn't matter. You're providing no arguments or sources to back up your statements. = ∫tc 5th Eye 16:14, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it isn't metal. I get the feeling you don't know anything about music theory, which is why you can't back up your statements. In any case, the burden of the proof is on you, so telling us to "listen to any song from the genre" is not proof. --BennyD (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Of course nu-metal is not metal, that is why it is called nu-metal. It is a fusion genre. Historically, it takes influences from metal, grunge, funk, and hip-hop, although most bands have only a partial mix of these. Linkin Park, for example, certainly takes a heavy influence from hip-hop, and might fall into the sort of classification you speak of. Disturbed, however, does not, and takes much greater influence from traditional metal and syncopated/funk styles. With that said, the definition of "metal" is not something which you can fix. At this time, nu-metal is considered to be a fusion/split with metal, so that is what it is. Next think you know, you'll be saying Beethoven is not Romantic because he isn't Brahms, and not classical because he isn't Mozart. As to the person below, as far as I can tell only you and the original poster deserve your epithets if anyone here does. Mad2Physicist (talk) 17:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  nu-metal has NOTHING to do with metal. 

message: Tool does not belong on this page.  Tool and many of their fans take serious offense to being grouped into this category.  It is not appropriate.
:The article doesn't say they're nu metal. It says they influenced nu metal, which they did. --Switch 11:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is Tool mentioned on this page?!? 

message: They pioneered this fuckin genre when everyone else was still in nappies!
:I've never heard of them. Are they nu metal? Or od they more properly belong in the alternative metal category? Nu metal isn't generally thought to have started until the early-mid nineties with Korn and Deftones. I have never heard them, but maybe someone else here has. --Switch 11:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely, Stuck Mojo are rapcore, not nu metal. They were among the first acts to fuse rap and metal, but can't jump into nu metal because they have come way before. --Egr 20:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is Stuck Mojo not mentioned?

message: Why is the music described as almost always containing rap elements, but System of a down is a front leader in the genre?  They have no such element, but are some of the best known as Nu Metal.
:Well, many people do not consider SOAD nu metal, and most nu metal bands do have rap elements. -Switch t 07:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nu-Metal doesn't mean rap+metal/rock. If that were the case the only nu-metal bands would be Limp Bizkit, POD, Linkin Park and Crazy Town. Most Nu-Metal is groove oriented and rhythmic, and outside of some bands not very technical. The reason SOAD is considered nu-metal is because in the metal community they're not considered "metal" enough and nu-metal is the "best" label.Outlaw-Viper 11:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's irrelevant. Even if it isn't integral to the genre, most nu metal bands do have hip hop elements. Including Korn, Mudvayne, (hed) PE, and others, not just "Limp Bizkit, POD, Linkin Park and Crazy Town." More, if nu metal only meant "rap+metal/rock", the Beastie Boys, Anthrax, Everlast and many, many other bands would be "nu metal" though they aren't. SOAD are widely not considered nu metal, and what the metal community thinks is largely irrelevant. They don't play traditional metal, so I don't see why the metal community would be the best judge of their genre. Most music critics have them pegged as hard rock, alternative metal, experimental rock, even progressive rock and various other things. Regardless of whether SOAD are nu metal, most bands do have rap elements, just as the article says. -Switch t 12:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I consider SOAD a nu metal band not because of what the metal community thinks, but due to the fact there is not a lot of cohesion in the genre, it almost as if anything goes. Also, "rap elements" needs to be defined more. Most Limp Bizkit songs do not sound like hip-hop so an explanation of these "elements" needs to be done. It also needs to be said that funk is more vital to the genre rather than rap. A nu-metal bands success rides on the talents of the bassist and drummer, although there are exceptions to this rule. Also I don't give a damn what the metal community thinks because outside of metal they know very little of other music genres. It seems nowadays the term nu-metal means almost anything anybody wants it to mean within reason.Outlaw-Viper 00:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SOAD 

message: I think that the criticism section should have a little more to it, since this is one of music's most ridiculed genres in recent years, yet there are just a few sentences in the article.Adamravenscroft 14:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree personally, but almost as soon as nu metal stopped beeing 'cool', people stopped writing about it. I think if we can find some sources, it should be fleshed out a lot more, but there's not much on it we can use apart from the MTV article already in there. -Switch t 11:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't it be more useful to figure out why the genre is ridiculed and who exactly is ridiculing it? Is it the mix of genres and influences drawing more critics than would normally pay attention? It "seems" to be universally ridiculed but different groups probably have different reasons for ridiculing the genre. The genre is not exactly a "purists paradise" so that might be one reason.Outlaw-Viper 07:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Saying something "sucks" and it gives a bad name to "real metal" and mainly mallgoths listen to it needs proof, no? The genre has mostly died out with the "true metal revival" and the prominence of other genres. If you were to seriously think about this you would see your assumptions are for the most part incorrect, seeing as a mallgoth would probably be more apt to listen to Dimmu Borgir, Cradle of Filth, or any number of "true metal" bands before they would listen to Limp Bizkit or POD.Outlaw-Viper 10:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  As harsh as it sounds... 

message: I've placed both tags on the criticism section, as right now, it reads like OR, and a slanted OR at that. To wit, the following statements lack any verification:
* The mix of styles led to some criticism that nu metal was no longer related to traditional metal. 
* Rap is often used in nu metal, and fans of mainstream rap didn't always respond well to it.
* In recent times the genre has received increasing derision from the metal community for various reasons 
* and the term "mallcore" is used by many as a term for insult and as well as a synonym by some for the genre, believing it to be the "true" name for the genre. 
* The term "False Metal" is also used with the slogan "Death to False Metal" as a type of battlecry.
* Categorization of specific artists as "nu metal" is difficult, an issue made more prevalent in the online community by traditional metal fans who take offense to the term.
The frequent use of "some" and reference to unspecified critics is classic weasel-wording to try to get around POV and verification requirements. A criticism section is fine, but it should contain cited comments from actual music critics or other recognized experts, not "Some fans say..." commentary. | Mr. Darcy talk 19:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree slightly with your last statement - doom metal, for example, and a lot of early bands like Led Zep and Sabbath put a lot of emphasis on mood and atmosphere as well as musicianship. But it is true that nu metal is probably more musically akin to hip hop and punk than "metal" in the traditional and more accurate sense. Nu metal generally is very simple to play and the vocals play a large part, even in the more experimental bands of the genre. But citations for this kind of thing are hard to find, because no one writes it, because everyone knows it. But Wikipedia won't accept that. ~Switch t 15:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV/verify issues in criticism section

message: When I was reading the article, I thought that everything between the second paragraph and the contents box should be given its own "Origins" paragraph right after the contents. Looking at the history section this was the case at one time and was changed for some reason. I quite like the in house Wikipedia format style of: introduction, contents, main article. I just wondered why it was decided against in this article. ClarenceAtomkraft 17:46, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Structure

message: Can someone please stop this edit war between Inhumer and some annonymous guy in the paragraph that talks about Korn. The sentece is constantly modified with "death and thrash metal bands" and then with "thrash metal bands" and on and on... --Dexter_prog (talk • contribs • &site=en.wikipedia.org count) @ 23:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constant edit wars 

message: This is fairly straight-forward: ban him.  He does nothing but vandalize and has no place on Wikipedia.  Until he's planned, I think there should be some sort of unofficial group that reverts every one of his edits.  I'll join, Inhumer's pretty much in there by default.
I don't know the procedure for banning someone, if anyone has any pointers I'll gladly nominate him.  He's vandalized my user page before. Ours18 20:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A propisition for the edit wars 

message: I'm not sure of wording, but it is considered a part of the Hip-Hop family as well as the Metal, so why not throw it in there for good measure? Qubeh 12:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add the Hip-Hop external link...thing.. 

message: Every time rapcore has been added to Template:Heavymetal it has been removed with no apparent reason other than 'nu metal sufficiently covers rapcore'. If this is the case, rapcore should be merged into this article as it is superfluous. --90.240.102.48 20:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rapcore merge 

message: Why is it that NONE of you can make a discussion of how the music sounds, or whether it is true Metal or not?  Wrap your mind around this: I hate DEATH METAL but everytime that I bring up something about how much I like SlipKnoT(this is an example) than I get Slammed for not being a REAL METALHEAD, and this is by the people that listen to Black Metal and Death Metal, the worst excuse I have EVER heard for music, yet I don't go to Wikiped's Death Metal article, and slam that
:Isn't this a bit off topic? I really don't see much slamming in this article. I think that is what you're implying is the problem. Could you point out the areas which are problematic? --Wildnox(talk) 23:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsigned rant

message: Check out the Soulfly Website.  Scroll down to the news item titled "AFTER THE SLAUGHTER" AVAILABLE MAY 1st! . Marking Dark Ages sound like a pop rock record seems pretty thrashy too me :) I hope the lyrics don't deterioriate to mega-negativity (Schizophrenia / Beneath the Remains) or even passive-satanism (Bestial Devestation / Morbid Visions) --GreatInca 19:09, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aggro Metal Should have its own Category 

message: i thought these bits could apply to any genre so should be deleted.  Anyone agree?
Nu metal bands, because their style was not clearly defined, were often considered within multiple other genres. For example, Korn crosses into alternative metal and funk, Linkin Park into rapcore and Disturbed into heavy metal.
Defining the term
Categorization of specific artists as "nu metal" is difficult, an issue made more prevalent in the online community by traditional metal fans who take offense to the term. Nu metal began as a mix of different genres, so the definition is not solid. Linkin Park's Meteora, for example, is listed as nu metal on Wikipedia, "Rock/Pop" on MP3.com[5], "Alternative" on AOL Music Now[6], and three different genres (Rock, Metal, and Alternative) on Metacritic[7]
Munci 10:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessary bits? 

message: By no means am I a musical "expert" of any order, though I do listen to some bands considered "nu metal" - Korn, Slipknot, and the Deftones. I have heard, in none of the above, rap-inspired percussion in most songs. I must state that, in addition to "nu metal," I listen to heavy, thrash, industrial, and alternative metals, along with other genres of Rock, and have noted the beats and drumming to be far more similar to those aforementioned than rap. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amerikaner (talk • contribs) 00:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  With regards to percussion 

message: I REALLY dont see what ANY of the fuss is about. "Nu Metal" is just as a legitimate form of metal as Black or Thrash, its just not as heavy. People dislike Nu Metal because it's popular. Bottom Line. Thats what happens. In five years, maybe more maybe less, Metalcore will possibly be looked down upon by the metal community. Its no different than when fans loose interest in a band for "selling out". If a band makes ANY money off of a record they are selling out. People like to take pride in the music they enjoy, it makes them feel special; like its their's and noone else's. But when lots of other people start sharing interest its makes the music a little worthless to that individual; like having to share a possesion with millions of people. Thus the band from there on out is a "selling out". Its happened to Metallica, Greenday, and MANY other previously well appraised bands. 
The case of Nu Metal is no different. In the mid to late 90's through the very early 00's Nu Metal was the premier fresh music that metal heads of ALL kinds enjoyed. There were some bands, however, that did give the genre a bad name; i.e. Limp Bizkit (although i personaly am a fan of their earlier work), much like Poison for Hair Metal. Then Metalcore burst onto the scene, almost overnight Nu Metal lost its worth. Relentless, powerful guitar riffs and raw screaching vocals like noone's ever heard, combined with something newe called a "breakdown", whats not to love? Metalcore is a powerful new force in the metal arsenal. Metalcore seemed to have errupted so fast however that Nu Metal was left in the dust, though it still limps on; Korn still kicks on pretty well and Linkin Park continues to sell millions of records. 
There seems to be a repetition of history. The very same thing happened in the late 80's with grunge. Hair Metal was the thing of the 80's, then Grunge came along and blew it right out of the water. Now little is left of that musical style, other than perhaps the Darkness or Veins of Jenna and possibly even Dragonforce. But overall the genre died, due mostly to the spawning of a another, fresher sound. 
There is noone to blame. Times change as does music. Many people have trouble accepting this all-to-real fact and as long as there is music to listen to, there will be people arguing about it. All that im saying is if someone doesnt like a band or a type of music, that persons opinion, in NO way, calls into question the legitimacy of the style or abilities as musical artist. 
Metal is the heaviest thing in music and there will ALWAYS be subgenres. None of these subgenres are better than the other they make the music lareger and more diverse. Whats Metal is Metal, regardless, and thats that.
I always say the same thing when it comes to situations like this, i say "fuck the haters". The truth is i dont care if limp bizkit are low iq, you know what? because most likely im low iq! in the sense that im working class, just like fred durst, i can relate to alot of his lyrics, and i dont care if "true metal" fans (whatever that means exactly) care. Listen if you like numetal, dont listen if you dont like it Portillo 04:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Popular = Bad = Nu Metal? 

message: I removed a lot of text that seemed to serve no purpose other than to promote a laymans casual observations of nu-metal while trying to seem unbiased when it was in fact not. There are many bands referenced on this page that have little to do with nu-metal such as lostprophets and chevelle. the whole page needs a good clean-up Alex 16:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  missplaced comments 

message: I almost certainly remember reading somewhere that the term "Nu Metal" came from an abbreviation of "Neutered Metal" - This was in a magazine or something, a source that seemed reliable. I'm definetely looking for a citation for that before editing, as I figure all hell would break loose if I didn't - Can anybody help me on this?--KWaal 06:04, 01 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Term Origins

message: It is closer to rock music than true heavy metal. Go to any good heavy metal message board and the experts there will say so. Most nu-metal bands know not to say they're metal because they get flak for it; most will correctly identify themselves as hard rock. The simplistic musical structures and commercial ideology inherent to nu-metal make it a subcategory of rock music, unlike orthodox heavy metal.
*I agree. (68.153.178.5 17:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah that's true, Emcee Lynx is bigtime commercial. Look, no genre is defined by whether or not it has an "inherently commercial ideology". Crass and the Buzzcocks are both punk, Metallica and Poison are both metal, Promoe and 50 Cent are both rappers, Melvins and Silverchair were both grunge, Ednaswap and Britney Spears are both pop, and so on. Some fiercely independent nu metal band from Liverpool are still nu metal. ~ Switch (✉✍☺☒) 09:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nu Metal isn't metal 

message: You guys can edit or add anything you want. I just added it because I thought it was missing the theme for the genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dragon-Knight3 (talk • contribs) 
I simply cannot say based on what i have read in the past 20 minutes. Korn and SoaD are so different. Some of these bands i never thought to be mu metal actully i only thought SoaD was.  I presumed that all the others where mid to heavy metal.  Apparently i was wrong.  nu metal could be broken into many catogories. i thought that what Soad did was nu metal it self. you knw strongly political, somewhat high pitched voices, songs so catchy you could play them over and over for or even days on end, they are still like that on their solo tours(serj and scars on broad way, i havent anything from shavos thing yet)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.175.210 (talk) 17:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added Nu Metal Theme 

message: Why see also coldwave? What has coldwave to do with nu 'metal'?
Slowgaze 13:14, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coldwave? 

message: Not only is Nu-metal more related to hard rock (and rap for that matter), it's just plain gay.  Not that I wanna step on anyone's toes here, since I know how other Wikipedians feel about reporting offensive stuff, and I don't want to be offensive, or reported for that matter, but nu-metal has got to be one of the worst types of music ever.  The article should at least say, as it once did (I believe), how much people look down on this genre of music.  I have a helathy respect for most types of music, but not this.  Hell, I'm a fan of black metal, so there you go.  Nu-metal is annoying and almost all metalheads believe so.  Mallcore is an abomination.  The members of the bands try to act so goddamn cool, partly because of their label companies pushing their mainstream status, and they try to act like they're badass or "evil" or something, when they are absolutely not.  Now I know I'm showing serious bias here, but all of the metal world (except the fans of nu-metal)looks down upon nu-metal, hence "mallcore," and I believe this article should reflect that to some degree.Navnløs 22:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye you've got nothin better to do   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.207.65 (talk) 00:46, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Well who cares? George W. Bush is plain stupid too, but should his article be written in a derogatory matter? No. Wikipedia is about information, not POV opinions. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 22:43, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

text: You addition to the article was pure OR, so i have reverted your edit. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 23:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

text: The HMM article states this as a note on the side, just like it should be. Your added section on the other hand cut the article here in two halves, one that describes what nu metal is, one that explains "how much it sucks". While we both know the importance of the MA within the community, it is not a reliable source and fails WP:RS, and is therefore not usable to make a point like that within this article. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 19:27, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Yet again, i had to revert your edit. The sentence you added is completely biased original research. Please stop adding controversial content if you can't provide a reliable source. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 21:45, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nu Metal is just plain stupid

message: In this is article are alltogether mentinoed about 5 bands all along. This is not good... There are much more important Nu Metal acts.. as form for examle Cavalera's "Roots" and later Soulfly up to for example Machinehead' Nu Metal experiments (as lots of Nu Metal bands are). Actually Nu Metal is a big thing, but this article is very small...--Lycantrophe 11:42, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tend to agree. The article sort of makes an impression as it presents a small number of newer acts (actually, those who made the genre much more famous by entering or starting at mainstream media, which has nothing to do with the behinnings of the musical genre) as the perfect definition of what nu metal is. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 12:09, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

text: If you have no intention of contributing to this discussion, please stay out of it. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 18:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Generally.. 

message: I put a recent quote to what Korn has often said about being called nu metal. I also did that because the former passage about that needed citation, but that one dated back too around 1996 and no one's gonna find a quote for that one so removed it with this new passage about a quote I did find. (its from Korn's Wikipedia where I also put it)86.80.121.33 05:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Korn on the term nu metal 

message: This is becoming a bit town long.  What do you say we archive?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamanadam (talk • contribs) 00:08, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive

message: I put the sign for controversy here, because nu metal has often been degraded and the article vandalized by some of the extreme metal fans. If you wish to remove it, do so and leave a reason for removing it under this topic. Prepare to be Mezmerized! :D 21:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversial Topic?

message: Should we include a section on how and/or why nu metal had decline in popularity and also more about its peak? Pathfinder2006 14:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Inclusion of its declined mainstream popularity?

message: On Encyclopaedia Metallum (which is linked to on a large number of Wikipedia articles), it refers to nu metal as mallcore. Should this be noted as a term also used for it? -Allhailtuna (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can write it in an encyclopedic manner and reference it well, please do. ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 08:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Mallcore'? 

message: I felt that the origins of nu-metal in this article is a little sketchy. I dont think kurt cobain has anything to do with nu-metal. anyway, i have always felt that the Antrax/Public enemy colarberation "Bring the noise" was the starting point of nu-metal as it was the first mainstream song to fuse rap with metal. And it was quoted in a interview in a doco about metal with anthrax that they claim it gave birth to nu-metal. I forget which doco it was tho. what do you think 124.197.5.165 (talk) 09:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Origins

message: Th  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.170.169.21 (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: RATM and Alice In Chain influence on Nu metals

message: First, listen to real alternative metal (alice in chains, ssoungarden and the hip hop-influenced faith no more), one question: faith is nu metal?????? or an ALTERNATIVE(alt-rock influenced) metal band????????? alternative metal, but why??? Alternative metal has an SOLID influence coming from theAlternative rock.
Like Funk metal, Rapping is common but is NOT IMPORTANT in nu metal, examples:Coal Chamber and Korn, they make use of turntables and/or rapping???? NO. They´re alternative metal??? NO (see above). They´re Nu metal??? YES! Think about it......................  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nu89 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 19:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A better definition of nu metal 

message: Many fans give credit to Nu Metal and Alt Metal also for all that matter as a transition/gate way to other forms of heavier metal. Should this be noted?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.135.215 (talk) 01:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gateway To Metal 

message: Of course it is, just another style than the one preferred by the people that buy the music mags. Are Korn, Limp Bizkit, Deftones, RATM, etc. loud, heavy, guitar driven bands with loud, heavy, guitar driven sounds? Yes. Then they're Metal.
  
There is no other "true" defintion of Metal music, it seems, as bands from G'N'R (eclectic blend of pop, blues-rock, and punk influences) to Black Sabbath (slow and grinding, dirge-like sound) to Metallica and Megadeth (extremely fast, technical sound) have all been considered Metal in the past despite having little more in common than heavy (-ier than classic rock or pop), loud, guitar-driven sounds. When Van Halen and that Scandanavian death crap share the hyphenated designation of "-metal", the genre is big enough and varied enough for Korn, etc.
-Troy  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.220.187.114 (talk) 06:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Theres plenty of loud, heavy, guitar driven music that isn't metal. Inhumer (talk) 02:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

text: Sorry to be blunt, but: Who gives a crap anyway? ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 21:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

text: I agree, Its definitely Metal. People are just bitchy about the fact that it isn't conformist metal like all the other bands. Creativity is a bad things in the eyes of a lot of people. I don't know what causes people to bitch about this genre so much, jealousy? Somebody give me an answer cuz I got nothin. In my opinion, NU Metal is one of the best things to ever happen to music.--75.139.103.133 (talk) 16:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enough "This isn't Metal" garbage posts. 

message: I've add the information about some bands who are slowly migrating from nu metal scene to an Alternative/Hard/Post-grunge music performance, such as Staind, Linkin Park and P.O.D., whose nu metal songs are being as less usual as the time passes.
Robfbms (talk) 08:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Migration of some bands from nu to alternative m/rock 

message: How is Nu Metal Dead when Limp Bizkit, Crazy Town and Slipknot still have rap in their metal.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.243.88.114 (talk) 03:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nu Metal is not dead 

message: Show me some proof that Nu Metal exists as a legitimate genre rather than a vague, undefined term being used by every major critic to describe a random slapshot of completely unrelated bands in various genres ranging from alternative rock and hard rock to experimental metal, industrial rock and rap rock - what, exactly do Korn, System of a Down, Snot, Hed PE, Slipknot, Ill Nino, Papa Roach, Linkin Park, Deftones and Rammstein have to do with each other? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. There is not one shred of evidence that Nu Metal is an actual genre. There are no clear, definable traits to define any of these bands within one genre. A lot of these supposed Nu Metal bands aren't even metal! Anyone who knew anything about heavy metal would tell you that Papa Roach is not metal - in any way. Is Primus nu metal? Fantômas? This article isn't taken seriously because it treats ludicrous claims of legitimacy towards a supposed traits that are neither clear, nor do they define to every band associated with this supposed musical genre. EVERY RECENT BAND, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE ACTUALLY METAL IS REFERRED TO AS "NU METAL"! Everything from Body Count to Blink-182 has been referred to as "nu-metal"! This is not encyclopedic! This is not a genre! This should not be on here! "Nu Metal" doesn't exist! And by the way, anyone who knew anything about music would know that the claim that all of these bands empathize mood and texture over complexity is crap. System of a Down and Deftones are pretty damn complex, meanwhile some of the most simplistic bands out there are attempting traditional heavy metal, because without a wide range of influences, your music sucks! Bands who listen to 100% heavy metal turn out some of the most simplistic crap I've ever heard, whereas bands that listen to a wide range of genres from classical and reggae to country, hip-hop and funk can turn out something INTERESTING!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.146.34.160 (talk) 11:09, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Take a look at WP:OR and WP:RS for us, please. This kind of argument has been made before, dozens of times, and you're not going to change anything. = ∫tc 5th Eye 12:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: This is not an actual genre!

message: Having these sections often helps to settle a lot of disputes, many pages have them too. We would just need to make sure it stays objective. I'm no fan of Nu Metal, but wikipedia doesn't need anyone going on there putting things like "Nu Metal is total SHITCORE."  Objective criticisms should not be deleted either just because a Nu Metal fan gets annoyed at them.. I think if we do it right these sections could be very helpful. Any thoughts on this?
:There should only be a section on controversy. Criticism would be overkill and invite trolling.Outlaw-Viper (talk) 10:49, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why Not Add Sections On "Controversy" and "Criticisms" ?

message: This is about the "other names" part of the lead sentence. Now, while i have read "new metal" and "nü metal" before, I think they are border terms that are rarely used. Yes, even some major websites or magazines make that mistake, yet, the genre is genuinely and linearly referred to as "nu metal". Please do contradict if you feel i am mistaken.
Moving on: Now, on the other hand, "NU-metal for New Urban" i have never heard of before. I believe this to be complete neologism, although, obviously, as always, i could be mistaken.
My suggestion would be to remove the whole part in the parenthesis, as it doesn't really add anything, and i don't think the terms are used commonly enough to warrant them being mentioned.
Discuss. ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 16:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: i agree never heard it refered to as new urban, and the alternate spellings should also be removed also does not add anything--Wikiscribe (talk) 17:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neologism and border terms 

message: This was up for deletion a while back, and everyone said "keep it, it's a commonly used term, but it needs serious cleaning up" It's been 5 months, and the article is still terrible. When reading the article, it gives the impression that there is no real definiton of nu metal. It includes many 'it is common to have this' and 'some do this... but most do this...' type statements, but no real definition is given. In the definition section, it says 'nu metal is hard to define'. What the hell kind of definition is that? if there is proof of this being a genre, rather than an early movement of 'the new wave of american heavy metal', please present it, or I will put it up for deletion some time in the new year.
For it to be even called a gerne, we need to include...
1) defining characteristics
2) musical traits that each band share
3) sourced roots, and how they have influenced the genre
I'm aware that the bulk of the article is 'musical traits' but it is entirly unsourced and rather than listing the traits that each band shares, it has traits that is shared by a few, or sometimes even one band.
Also, to call it a metal subgenre, we need to include a piece on...
1) the traits it shares with traditional metal
2) explain how the genre as a whole (as it says in the article) is influenced by 'various heavy metal subgenres such as groove and industrial)
I'm not against the articles inclusion, but this article is highly unsourced and doesn't do the most important thing a article on a genre should do: make the reader be able to define the article after reading it, even if they know very little about the genre. 122.57.30.224 (talk) 04:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The article indeed does need heavy cleanup to be done. Yet, there is no valid reason for its deletion, so putting it up for deletion discussion is a rather senseless thing to do. PS: Nu metal is a commonly used term, NWOAHM a neologism. Not the other way around. ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 13:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Well, it isn't. Besides, global public establishment of the term which undoubtedly exists does (i think) outrank what many people would call "fact". And yet again, your reason for deletion is, that the article is biased and the information is not correct. This is not a valid reason for its deletion. Does the article need heavy work? Yes. Does it need to be rewritten from scratch? Probably. Yet still, none of you guys made any argument for its deletion that matches the deletion policy. ~ | twsx | talkcont | ~ 04:27, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

text: That is what Nu metal is, its a rock sub-genre that uses these influences together or most of them to form nu metal i.e linkin park, limp bizkit, papa roach and P.O.D all play nu metal why? coz they incoperate hip hop into their music along with one or two others. EverBe you said nu metal is a term for hard rock bands.......do you know what hard rock is? hard rock dont have any hip hop elements or grunge like nu metal does so nu metal bands cant be hard rock unless they ocassionally play hard rock or switch to hard rock. This article needs to be improved but not deleted just like u can't delete President of the United States coz the artilce is crap and confusing. Pro66 (talk) 11:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean up this article, or REMOVE IT