Talk:Queen (band)

Genre

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. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 17:15, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

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)

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. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 07:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

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)

New lead singer?

I've heard that Brian May and Roger Taylor are considering a new lead singer for this band. Can someone tell me his name? BulsaraAndDeacon (talk) 02:47, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

300 million?

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)

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)