Talk:Queen (band)/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 10

Influence (Re: My Edits on 10/29)

Being a huge fan of Queen, and having read so much about them, I know which of the artists listed truly have cited the British band as an influence and which haven't. Thus, I've thinned the list down a bit, and also got rid of the more dubious inclusions. I also deleted the naming of the songs; anyone truly interested can check out the albums/do a bit of research. The naming of titles for each of the near-dozen genres mentioned just disturbs the flow and makes the section unwieldy and hard-to-read. I also got rid of the "source/cite references" thing, because of all the reasons stated above. A minimal amount of research on each of the bands can verify the claim that QUeen influenced them, however to do it for each of those individual bands would take a great deal of time and is unneccesary for an encyclopedia. CinnamonCinder 18:37, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, the article has Queen cited as a rap influence, how did that work out?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.34.91.96 (talk • contribs)

...it goes back to a Rolling Stone review of the Innuendo album where the reviewer claimed that Queen influenced the rap genre without justifying his claim. I personally think that any claim that Queen influenced rap should be dropped.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.217.76.77 (talk • contribs)

No, I don't think it has anything to do with the RS review. In 1980, "Another One Bites the Dust" was a very big hit in the U.S. This song certainly had some influence on hip hop musicians. For example, the classic 1981 single "The Adventures of Grandmaster Flash on the Wheels of Steel" used samples from "Another One Bites the Dust". Queen's music was, for example, also sampled by hip hop group Public Enemy. - Candyfloss 12:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Heehee...and this opens up the debate about how much AOBTD owes its existence to Good Times by Chic. I guess it is difficult to pin down what 'influence' means and whether sampling can be classed as an influence. Also, I dont think Judas Priest were influenced by Queen.

I agree with Judas Priest not being influenced by Queen, they were formed 5 years before Queen released their debut album. Queenfan4ever 14:02, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying that Judas Priest were influenced by Queen, but why exactly is it impossible for a band's later albums to be influenced by a band who became famous after they did? Knight of Ashitaka 21:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I dont think Metallica was directly influenced by Queen and recall the drummer saying words to this effect. He did say how they had great repect for them. Also I am curious how The Smiths/Morrissey are influenced by Queen - can anyone enlighten me.

I'm not sure that allmusic.com is a reliable source to support the claim that these bands were geniunely influenced by Queen. The reference/source links to allmusic.com don't lead to direct quotes from members of other bands stating that Queen had an influence on their particular sound, live performance, or recording process. - TJLink 23:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Ben Folds Five: ?
• Def Leppard: Cited Queen as an influence during the VH1 Rock Honors.
• Extreme: Guitarist cited Queen as an influence.
• Guns N' Roses: "If I didn’t have Freddie Mercury’s lyrics to hold on to as a kid, I don’t know where I would be. It taught me about all forms of music. It would open my mind. I never really had a bigger teacher in my whole life." - Axl Rose[1]
• Kansas: See 'Quotes about Queen'.
• Metallica: ?
• The Smashing Pumpkins: ?
• Styx: ?
• Sweet: ?

— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 01:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I read an article somewhere where Billy Corgan of the Smashing Pumpkins said he was influenced by (or a fan of) Queen II. EDIT: I found it on the Queen II page and will incorporate it into the main article. - Zone46 01:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Article infobox.

This article, currently listed as an "example" article on the Template:Infobox musical artist page, does not properly follow the infobox guidelines:

• The genre lists about a half-dozen different subsets of rock. The infobox specifically states to "aim for generality" (specifics of exactly what type of rock a band plays can be explained -- with examples -- in the text). A simple "rock" will suffice here.
• Is Queen still an active group? My overview of the article didn't make this clear to me. If so, who is in the group, or do they play with only two people?
• Former members belong in a "former members" section, even if they are Freddie Mercury. If David Ruffin can survive the indignity of being referred to as a former Temptation, Mercury will be just fine.

...and a minor gripe, which isn't part of the guidelines, but one of professional taste: is the logo really necessary to have in the infobox?

All that being said, I'm replacing this page on the template example page list with a conforming example. --FuriousFreddy 06:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

I think rock music and pop music (or pop rock) should be the genres to go in the box. - Zone46 20:56, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Chart positions

I suggest that chart positions be keep out of the introduction as only a small sample of countries are available. Also, new bands tend to have a rapid rise/fall whereas older, established bands often have a more gradual path through the charts. Hence it is not a piece of reliable information.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.55.123.159 (talk • contribs) .

Paul R. and singles in the box

I was thinking that maybe we should have Paul Rodgers listed as a member. Although he is a Queen+ project, they have been together longer then most other Queen+ acts. Also, some other band articles have the bands singles in the box at the bottom, should we do that with Queen? Queenfan4ever 12:14, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

No, Rodgers is not am member of 'Queen'!

No, I don't think the singles should be added to the box. - Candyfloss 14:01, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Film & television

In this section, maybe there needs some mention of Starfleet, Metropolis, Biggles, Zabou, Hotel New Hampshire, and perhaps someone knowledgeable might tell us about Spiderman 2, and Pinochio which Brian may have been involved in.

We only want to have things Queen did as a whole in this article.Queenfan4ever 21:42, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I can't work out whether or not the linkage between ANATO & ADATR and the Marx Brothers movies should get a mention.

Influence on Rap and Rolling Stone Review

Are we really going to say that Queen influenced the rap genre? Keep in mind, the Stone review that claims that they influenced the rap genre also completely trashes the band and, like most Rolling Stone reviews, shows that the reviewer doesn't really know jack about his subject. As a life long Queen fan, I think that claiming that Queen influenced the rap genre is ridiculous, and relying on Rolling Stone reviews for proof is self-defeating. TheImpossibleMan 12:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I removed it after reading the article a few days ago, but someone reverted it. I vote on removing it again. - Zone46 20:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, whoever keeps adding it back should step forward and say why Queenfan4ever 22:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

As instrumentalists

Is it just me or is the "As instrumentalists" section really ugly? What should we do with it?— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 12:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Make it pretty? - Zone46 14:06, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

We should probably just remove it and put it in the band members seperate articles.69.68.160.160 22:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree too! Let us 'integrate' it into the band member pages. Can some brave soul hit the delete button...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.55.44.39 (talk • contribs)

The member pages need some work. If anyone is willing to do some major cleanup on the pages and merge this it to them it would be great.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 12:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

References

There have been many books written about Queen (ie.Queen: As it Began), if any one has any of these books please cite them in Queen articles. And remember to use {{Cite book}}.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 06:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

<ref>
{{cite book
|last=
|first=
|authorlink=
|coauthors=
|editor=
|others=
|title=
|origdate=
|origyear=
|origmonth=
|url=
|format=
|accessdate=
|accessyear=
|accessmonth=
|edition=
|date=
|year=
|month=
|publisher=
|location=
|language=
|id=
|doi =
|pages=
|chapter=
|chapterurl=
|quote=
}}
</ref>

Books

Should we try and give a more comprehensive list of books put out on Queen?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.54.68.233 (talk • contribs)

Yes.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 08:45, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Return of the champions

Should we really have return of the champions on this page or should we move it to the Queen+Paul page? 69.34.88.183 12:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

It should be on both pages, a brief entry here, but a more in depth one there... It does, afterall, include Queen in it. It should also be on the Paul Rodgers page, if it is not. Billvoltage 23:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Punk rock?

This page says: "Queen wrote songs in many different genres ... For example, glam rock, psychedelic rock, hard rock, progressive rock, punk rock ..." Can anyone name one of these punk rock songs that they supposedly wrote?

Sheer Heart Attack.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 04:17, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have slightly rephrased that opening sentence. We must remember that Queen were classified as 'dinosaurs' when punk arrived even though they were still quite a young band. Hence most punk bands of that time were a reaction to the established and passe bands. Moreover punk was openly against the monarchy and aristocracy and so if your band was named Queen...

• I still wonder if this is slightly misleading to someone unfamiliar with Queen's output. IMO Queen are about as far as it's possible to get from punk rock while still remaining in the rock genre. They are the total antithesis of punk. I know there is a "tongue-in-cheek" qualifier, but even so I'd be tempted to remove the reference to punk altogether, or give more explanation if it's referring to just one song that satirised punk. However, I'm not an expert so I'll leave it in the hands of others... Matt 11:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC).

Lets take punk rock out.

"Can anyone name one of these punk rock songs that they supposedly wrote?" Yes. "Modern Times Rock 'n Roll" from Queen (1973) and "Sheer Heart Attack" from News Of The World (1977). 82.176.211.33 20:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

In Film and Television section

Where is Queen's music in the Super Mario Bros. movie? Lemmy12 22:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for this question as I wanted to start a thread on this topic! What are the grounds for a song appearing in a film to warrant inclusion in this section? One Vision was used prominantly in Iron Eagle but Tie Your Mother Down was barely audible in Super Mario Brothers.

John Lennon

Can someone provide us details of what Lennon said about Crazy Little Thing Called Love in Rolling Stone in 1979/1980? I think we could include it in the 'Influences' section. Briam mentioned it a while back on brianmay.com. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.86.41.188 (talk) 06:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

John Deacon on At the Beeb

I was just listening to "Modern Times Rock 'N' Roll" on At the Beeb and I am certain John Deacon has a line. Its about 45 seconds in.12.65.48.88 06:52, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, that's not John. That would be Mr. Brian May with pinched nose. 82.176.211.33 20:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Why this band is called Queen

Hello,

I'd like to see a word about why they decided to call their band Queen. Is this possible? Rosenknospe 15:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Mercury named the band. They all agreed on it because it was a universal word that most everyone around the world would know. Or something like that. - Zone46 21:07, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Flag

I removed the England flag from this article according to WP:FLAG and a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Music#Flags. I see an anonymous editor has replaced it. If there is no consensus here that we need a flag in the infobox, I will remove it again. --Guinnog 12:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. Well it has popped back up there. I wonder if there is a consensus that there should be a flag here (as far as I know Queen never represented England at Eurovision), and if there needs to be a flag, why not a UK one? --Guinnog 21:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Or even a Zanzibar flag to represent their late lead singer? --Guinnog 21:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Because the band is referred to as an English band in the first paragraph, the infobox (per origin field), the categories and so forth. You might also want to consider that suggestions like the one regarding the Zanzibar flag might not prompt people to take your efforts or intentions seriously. - Cyrus XIII 21:37, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Interesting point. However this just lets the flag agree with the infobox, and answers none of my questions. Do you think there needs to be a flag? Is it intended for people who are not familiar with England as a word, but need the added help of the little St Georges flag to recognise it? Or is it just decoration? And who decides on the nationality of a band? Did Queen themselves refer to themselves as an English band (rather than a British one)? If not I suggest this is original research. --Guinnog 21:46, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I have already directed you towards my comment on that matter at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style during our short conversation via talk pages, but if I have to, I might just repeat what I have previously stated: It makes sense to combine textual and visual stimuli in places where people would like to obtain information fast (like infoboxes). If you do not feel that this is true or warrants the use of flag icons in infoboxes, then we should just agree to disagree. However you should also refrain from attempting wide-spread changes of the status quo based on an opinion, because that's what WP:FLAG is at this point and neither a guideline nor a policy. - Cyrus XIII 22:02, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. Well we can agree to disagree if you like, and I have of course continued to contribute to the discussion page. I just wondered if you had any actual reason to revert my change beyond your stylistic preference. I think from your lack of response to my questions above you have answered that too, in a way. --Guinnog 22:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Good article Review of GA status

This article is being reviewed at WP:GA/R for possible delisting of its Good article status. Teemu08 20:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

That's probably a good idea. This page has gotten progressively worse since the removal of the history section. – Zone46 23:28, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Should the history section be reincorporated? Someone has tagged it with {{merge}}.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 11:11, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

We should merge it, clean it up a bit, and get rid of the brief summary on the main page (obviously). The live performances article could use a re-write, too. – Zone46 13:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've reincorporated the history section and am doing some cleanup.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 15:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding pictures

I think the old layout was perfect. Having all the album covers clutters the page in my opinion and I guess I'm the only one who likes the picture of the band in 1990. – Zone46 17:45, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

See Pink Floyd.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 17:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

We can't use album covers in this way in band articles. It is a breach of the fair use conditions. See the boilerplate text on any album cover image. Sorry. --Guinnog 18:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Provided that the content of the albums is discussed and the covers aren't sheerly used as a decoration, then using albums in band articles is acceptable. See recently promoted FAs Pixies or Megadeth. Teemu08 23:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

This page is so cluttered with every album cover on here. I was trying to go back to something similar to the layout that originally got the page good article status back in May, but whatever. And yes, I would say some albums are more important than others. Is "Queen II" as important as "A Night at the Opera"? I love both albums, but I doubt it. – Zone46 17:01, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

That's your opinion. Maybe some people think Sheer Heart Attack is better then A Night at the Opera, or Hot Space is the best album they ever made, but that doesn't mean they can remove the cover for ANATO or remove all the covers except Hot Space. Once the "Finding there sound" and "Breakthrough era" sections are filled in more it will look fine just look at Pink Floyd.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 18:45, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

I downsized the images to 125px. I agree the images where cluttering the article, but its a bit better now.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 19:29, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

no need

I really don't think theres a need to have a huge list of people who feel they've been influenced. Just cut it down to several well knowns. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.236.72.25 (talk) 05:15, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Even though I find the quotes section quite interesting, I don't think it is warranted in this article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.54.201.47 (talk • contribs).

A Kind of Magic?

Why AKOM is not in the list of #1 singles?

A Kind Of Magic, released in the UK on March 17, 1986, reached #3 on its home chart but was a #1 hit in thirty-five other countries. While charting well everywhere else, it peaked at #42 in the USA and has been played on radios mostly in New England (Similar to their first single Keep Yourself Alive). Russell Mulcahy, director of Highlander, directed the song's accompanying video. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.197.105.96 (talk) 21:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

"was a #1 hit in thirty-five other countries." ...in which countries?? - Candyfloss 23:21, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Also, it would be interesting to see in what "European territories" 'I want it all' topped the charts in (as stated in the booklet to the platinum collection).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by MatteusH (talk • contribs).

GA review

This article has been delisted in a 2 to 0 vote, for a, well, multitude of reasons, it might be faster just to check the review at Wikipedia:Good articles/Disputes/Archive 13 :). Homestarmy 20:59, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Which is a shame, as I've found it to be one of the most enthralling articles I've ever read on wikipedia. Hopefully the 'problems' can be fixed without carving out too much of the good parts. --139.142.212.129 06:59, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

GA

All the members of the Queen WikiProject need to set a date and come together and bring this article back to GA status (or maybe FA), if we all work together it CAN be done. Who knows maybe this can become a regular thing and we can bring other articles to GA or FA status (e.g. Freddie Mercury).

Some things needing to be done:

• Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
• Expand the 'Finding their sound' section.
• Add more information on the band's history not just information on each album.
• Add many more references.

— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 22:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Infobox issues

There appears to be a disagreement over the inclusion of the Queen logo (text only) at the top of the infobox. Now, looking around on articles about other notable bands (such as Led Zeppelin, Metallica and Nirvana), the practice of including a somewhat consistently used logo appears to have become rather common. Not to mention that every band name also constitutes a brand (for which a logos are used anyway, see Adidas and Microsoft).

Certainly not common is the practice of throwing no less than nine genres (!) at the unsuspecting reader. Right through the infobox and with references. A far more reasonable (and common) approach would be to trim this list down to two or three entries and then elaborate on Queen's stylistic diversity and development in a dedicated section. This would certainly enrich the article more than mentioning 30+ bands and musicians who happen to cite Queen as an influence. - Cyrus XIII 22:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The logo in already in the article under the section 'Logo' there in no reason to have two logos.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 22:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I was not referring to the full crest, but the text-only variant, which is used individually in several instances, i.e. the band's official website and posters for the musical. And I take it, you are not going to address the other points I have raised regarding the article? - Cyrus XIII 23:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the list of genres should be eliminated and dedicated section should be created then put 'See: Section name' in the infobox.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 23:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I have created a respective section. At this point it is little more than a list, but it appears to be well referenced right away and I am sure people will turn it into a well-bodied text rather sooner than later. The "Various" entry in the infobox links to that section and I would suggest to keep the genres listed there down to two, plus the section link. To be honest, I am not entirely sure whether hard rock and progressive rock could be considered the two most defining genres, my experience with the group is somewhat limited (that is, listening to Greatest Hits 1 & 2 for like a hundred times). Now that the size of the box has been significantly reduced, there should be size-related concerns regarding the logo. A "Former members" slot for Mercury and Deacon has also been added. - Cyrus XIII 11:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

It hardly surprises me that the article lost its GA status, if even minor changes which reflect common and sensible practice are being regularly reverted and have then to be discussed at length. I am referring to the recently removed distinction between "members" and "former members" in the infobox. Freddie Mercury died over 15 years ago, John Deacon has been retired since the late 90s. Aside from a romantic, yet certainly not NPOV compliant perspective, it makes no sense to still list them as members of the band. Queen, as of February 2007 are Brian May and Roger Taylor.

See also:

• AC/DC
• Kiss
• Lynyrd Skynyrd
• Metallica
• Skinny Puppy

- Cyrus XIII 20:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

The Doors article doesn't list Jim Morison as a former member and the Grateful Dead article doesn't list Jerry Garcia, Brent Mydland, Vince Welnick, Ron McKernan or Keith Godchaux as former members.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 21:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Neither is John Lennon listed as a former member of The Beatles, apparently to reflect the group's lineup at the time of its dissolution. Yet the manual for the infobox template explicitly suggests to list all members of a presently inactive group as former members. - Cyrus XIII 22:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I have come from your listing at WP:3O. I think that they should be former members, unless the band is no longer active and they were alive at the time of the bands disbandment. So, they should, in this case, be considered former members. ffm ^yes? 22:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Also from WP:3O. If the band is still active, and these people are no longer members, then they are quite clearly former members. Just my two cents. Luna Santin 23:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

3rd opinion Do you have any sources that called them either "retired" or "former members" how do these band members refer to themselves if they are still alive? I think it is important to make the distinction between people who left the band or died and people who stayed with it. The descriptive terms should reflect those used in music publications or by the musicians themselves. futurebird 23:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Another 3rd opinion: It appears from the article that Queen post Freddie is considered to be a different band - Queen +. If that is the case then the membership of Queen should be as with The Beatles - no retired members. Some source material would be useful. SilkTork 23:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hm. Open-ended question: would that indicate we might want to split the articles? Or is that a whole new can of worms? ;) Luna Santin 00:24, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Sort of, I guess. Usually I try to separate style from content discussions and since the article's text considered the group as active ("Queen are..." as opposed to "Queen were...") the Queen - Mercury = Queen+ equation had not really crossed my mind. Now, I really don't think we are dealing with two different bands here, the plus sign is merely the group's way to denote collaborations following the death of their lead singer. Also, I have to agree with futurebird, a source confirming John Deacon's retirement status would really help clearing things up. - Cyrus XIII 00:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Featured Article nomination

I've put this article up for nomination at the FAC. Please comment/support/oppose as you see fit at the nomination page. XXSaifXx 03:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Music samples

I've uploaded and added music samples from Queen's most well known songs into the article. They're fair use and almost every good music article has a few. The article is almost ready for featured article status... XXSaifXx 11:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Nice selection. May I suggest a few samples which rather cover later parts of certain songs, in order to represent them better? The opera/hard rock transition in "Bohemian Rhapsody" comes to mind. - Cyrus XIII 14:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I have removed the samples section. See List of songs by Queen.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 13:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm okay with that, but I object to the removal of the amount of records sold from the intro. The Pink Floyd article, which by the way, is also a featured one, has this information in the intro. All featured article candidates should have three lead paragraphs which explain why the band is so important, so I'm putting it back in there, but if you can show me the logic why I shouldn't I'll undo it. XXSaifXx 14:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Ah nevermind, I won't bother reverting. But atleast please try to make a replacement paragraph. =P. XXSaifXx 14:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

What exactly is the reasoning behind removing the samples section altogether, as opposed to just replacing the new samples with the ones already linked to in that list? - Cyrus XIII 17:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)