There are really no reliable sources to support the contention that Queen have sold 300 million records worldwide - everyone who cites this figure seems to have got their information from this article. <b>[[User:Radiopathy|<font color="#006600">R</font><font color="#0D8147">ad</font><font color="#009966">io</font><font color="#009999">pa</font><font color="#1E99CC">th</font><font color="#67B2DE ">y</font>]]</b> [[User talk:Radiopathy|•talk•]] 05:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
There are really no reliable sources to support the contention that Queen have sold 300 million records worldwide - everyone who cites this figure seems to have got their information from this article. <b>[[User:Radiopathy|<font color="#006600">R</font><font color="#0D8147">ad</font><font color="#009966">io</font><font color="#009999">pa</font><font color="#1E99CC">th</font><font color="#67B2DE ">y</font>]]</b> [[User talk:Radiopathy|•talk•]] 05:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
:EMI quoted their sales as 300+ million long ago [http://www.emigroup.com/Press/2009/press17.htm]. Sony supported this in their product description for ''[[SingStar Queen]]'' (I have replaced the Amazon cite with a reliable [[IGN]] one). The BBC said yesterday that they had sold 300+ million records - you may claim that they took their information from this article but if you had not hastily removed cites you'd have noticed that their comments on Queen (songs, live performances, originality and showmanship) were taken FROM a noted BBC article on Queen which has been used to support this article [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6224235.stm]. The BBC is as reliable a cite as any and if their air a sales figure to the nation, then it can't really be challenged, regardless of your opinion. There are dozens of sites out there, which are not Wikipedia clones, who support 300+ million albums, but it's arguable whether they are notable enough to use as cites. [[User:Llenden|Llenden]] ([[User talk:Llenden|talk]]) 12:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
:EMI quoted their sales as 300 million+ long ago [http://www.emigroup.com/Press/2009/press17.htm]. Sony supported this in their product description for ''[[SingStar Queen]]'' (I have replaced the Amazon cite with a reliable [[IGN]] one). The BBC said yesterday that they had sold 300 million+ albums - you may claim that they took their information from this article but if you had not hastily removed cites you'd have noticed that their comments on Queen (songs, live performances, originality and showmanship) were taken FROM a noted BBC article on Queen which has been used to support this article [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6224235.stm]. The BBC is as reliable a cite as any and if they air a sales figure to the nation, then it can't really be challenged, regardless of your opinion. There are dozens of sites out there, which are not Wikipedia clones, who support 300 million+ albums, but it's arguable whether they are notable enough to use as cites. [[User:Llenden|Llenden]] ([[User talk:Llenden|talk]]) 12:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Revision as of 12:56, 7 November 2009
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Queen (band) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Queen (band) is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Queen, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.QueenWikipedia:WikiProject QueenTemplate:WikiProject QueenQueen articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Progressive Rock, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Progressive rock on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Progressive RockWikipedia:WikiProject Progressive RockTemplate:WikiProject Progressive RockProgressive rock articles
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music articles
Refs 2-5, 26, 81, 82 need extra information on them, currently they're just links. Author, date etc.
Refs 16 and 101 have been marked as dead, these need fixing
Disambiguation links bring up Amandla, Band Aid and Dave Stewart, point these in the right direction.
Alt text needed for all images.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
First off, yes I did go through the archives. It seems there was a huge consensus for various genres, including (in order) glam rock, heavy metal, progressive rock, and more. While the latter two are certainly song to song, I know for a fact that thousands of sources call Queen glam rock. Is there a reason why the genre is just rock? Sure it's all encompassing, but it is also generic and nonspecific to this artist. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲτ¢17:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus here and at the Queen project discussion page was and always will be that the band covered many different musical styles and that it was simply an accurate umbrella to cover all of them by saying rock. The rock description is 100% correct and, as one can see in the article edit history, any time anyone tries to cruft of the field with a long list of superfluity it always gets reverted back to rock. The only lasting rule for the genre field in the template instructions is "aim for generality". If a band, like Queen, covers many musical landscapes then that band usually has a "musical style" section as part of the main body of the article.queen sucks And this one does. Fine details, with references, go in the main body of the article. Not the box. The boc is supposed to be general. Every Queen related article has rock in the genre field. Othr than occasional IP genre trolling that has been the way for a long time. No valid reason to change it now. GripTheHusk (talk) 19:25, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If this is the case then each album needs to have a blurb mentioning the various influences it displays if they are all being labelled. Some Queen albums can certainly be summed as rock, but many others are very distant from plain rock, which is what the current genre selection annotates. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲτ¢07:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Album info and slight genre info at the top
Hello, Album info and slight genre info was added to the top, as the mix genre of Queen is kinda hard to explain,
as they Rationalized on The Led Zeppelin page that due that Bands with such a diverse style could incorporate a bit more info on the subject at the top. (Feel free to discuss this - And maybe if u disagree take it onto the Led Zeppelin Page too).--DavisHawkens (talk) 11:31, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are really no reliable sources to support the contention that Queen have sold 300 million records worldwide - everyone who cites this figure seems to have got their information from this article. Radiopathy•talk•05:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
EMI quoted their sales as 300 million+ long ago [1]. Sony supported this in their product description for SingStar Queen (I have replaced the Amazon cite with a reliable IGN one). The BBC said yesterday that they had sold 300 million+ albums - you may claim that they took their information from this article but if you had not hastily removed cites you'd have noticed that their comments on Queen (songs, live performances, originality and showmanship) were taken FROM a noted BBC article on Queen which has been used to support this article [2]. The BBC is as reliable a cite as any and if they air a sales figure to the nation, then it can't really be challenged, regardless of your opinion. There are dozens of sites out there, which are not Wikipedia clones, who support 300 million+ albums, but it's arguable whether they are notable enough to use as cites. Llenden (talk) 12:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]