Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Queen/Archive

Template
I added the template to all songs listed on all albums listed on the template. Billvoltage 20:29, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Great, Thanks - Mtmtmt 09:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It is indeed great work, Billvoltage. -- S iva1979 Talk to me  14:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but I wish to help more, is there any other way I can?? Billvoltage 02:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles
Hi, I'm just dropping by to say good luck with your Project. WikiProject The Beatles has been running for a while now and we have a good infrastructure in place, so if you need any help or advice come visit us at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles. Feel free to copy any of our pages but if you do please credit where you got it from in the edit summary :) Good luck. --kingboyk 04:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems to me the structure has been copied directly off that project… With a bad result, I may add; the page seems cluttered here, having a lot of unnecessary sections. This talk page is also quite cluttered – it'd be good if someone cleaned it up a bit. Jon Harald Søby 11:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It is possible that the structure was copied from the standard project. It brings in a lot of stuff. We at WP:Beatles initially hid a lot of it as we didn't need it (just comment it out) but then brought some back as we found uses for it. Anyway, I'm excited to see another band project get underway, Queen is a fave of mine (not as high as Genesis or The Beatles, mind you) and I wish you all good success and happy editing. If there is anything I can do to help please ask. In particular if you decide to do article classification I'd be happy to generate your initial article table for you.  + + Lar: t/c 12:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks more like a default WikiProject, yes. I don't see enough members or involvement right now to be honest, I think you really need 10 or 15 members to make a Project work... --kingboyk 02:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

May I be bold and offer a few words of unsolicited advice? Take it or leave it :) Hope I haven't overstepped the mark and that my suggestions are of use. --kingboyk 02:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC) P.S. I was at the Freddie tribute in 1992 and can be glimpsed in the film :)
 * I think you're wrong to have some sort of requirement for membership. I'd suggest removing it, and take all the help you can get!
 * Songs which weren't singles or otherwise notable are better covered in album articles. There is no need to have a blue link for every song Queen ever recorded. (I hope to put this into practice at the Beatles Project, so we're kinda shooting in opposite directions here). See WP:SONG for notability issues, and note that an album track by Dido is currently doing badly at WP:AFD. The logic is quite simple: it's better to have a thorough high quality article on an album, than it is to have 10 stubs. Of course, if the song is notable and can be fleshed out into at least a Good Article then go for it, I'd just urge caution in your approach that every song should have an article.


 * Thanks for your comment - I fully agree! Candyfloss 14:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with you here up to a certain extent. The reason is because on a personal level, I feel that all songs recorded by VERY notable groups and artists should be have their own articles on Wikipedia. But I also understand that this is against the official guideline of WP:SONG. Well, I hope that this would change in the future. -- S iva1979 Talk to me  14:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
 * An article isn't a badge of honour. I'm thinking here of article quality primarily. Hey, I have every Queen album on CD (the wall-mounted boxset), and I certainly consider them to be one of the more notable bands. If there's a glowing article to be written on every song, go for it. My experience from looking at many Queen and Beatles articles, however, is that most songs articles are crap, because there's not much to say about a generic album track. I'm suggesting it would be a better use of Project time to clean up what you have than to make creating stubs a priority (and indeed, when I wrote, a requirement of membership). --kingboyk 16:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


 * *I think you're wrong to have some sort of requirement for membership. I'd suggest removing it, and take all the help you can get!
 * I have removed that and am trying to work somthing out.
 * Mtmtmt 01:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Article project box
This box: Queen WikiProject... has a Queen crest in it. I beleive that image is fair use only, and cannot be used except in article space to illustrate directly relevant things. You may want to seek a different image (the WP:Beatles project had to do so as well) Hope that helps.  + + Lar: t/c 15:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Song Infoboxes
I added a song infobox to the "Doing All Right" article. I didn't use the Song Infobox template because I wanted to use the same colors as the boxes on the A Night at the Opera song articles. I also added a small box to the "Keep Yourself Alive" article with links to the previous and next songs in the album, so one could browse through all songs from an album without having to return each time to the album article. Please tell me if this looks OK, and if it is, I'll proceed on adding boxes to the other song articles. --Kristbg 15:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. You may want to see Queen for a list of songs and albums. - Mtmtmt 15:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, all song articles have songboxes and album listing infoboxes now. I'm a little unsure if I should add album listing infoboxes for tracks from Live at Wembley '86, Queen on Fire - Live at the Bowl, Return of the Champions, and from the compilations. I think it would end up cluttering the article, especially in songs like "Bohemian Rhapsody", which is present in all of these albums.
 * I noted that a lot of song articles (particularly those from the earlier albums) don't have a lot of info (actually, aside from the infobox and template, they just say "XXX is a song by Queen, it is the Xth song from the X side of XXX album."). Those articles usually get deleted in no time (I think some were deleted already, actually...)
 * Some songs from Made In Heaven were a little tricky. "Heaven for Everyone" and "Too Much Love Will Kill You" now have singleboxes, but they don't look so good, since I had to add info from both the solo release and the Queen release...
 * I guess the priority concerning the song articles right now is to expand the ones which have little info, and to clean up the ones with too much fancruft...
 * I'll try to work on the album articles and the band members now. --Kristbg 14:07, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * A merge template was put by another editor on Fight From The Inside and on Sleeping On The Sidewalk. If those articles don't get any more content, they will get merged to the album pages (and, I suspect, more will follow). --Kristbg 02:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)


 * And My Melancholy Blues. --Kristbg 21:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Welcome letter?
What is this welcome letter, and may I distribute it to the two members that have yet to recieve it (one of whom is me)? Billvoltage 22:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes you may distribute it, sorry about that. I'm working on an official one Template:Queen WikiProject welcome . - Mtmtmt 05:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Now What?
Now that Queen (band) is a good article what should we do? Any ideas? Should we focus on making Queen (band) a featured article or another article a good article - Mtmtmt 11:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I believe that we should do both of these, we should make all four of the members (Freddie, Brian, John, and Roger) good articles, and we should try to get Queen (band) as a featured article... Billvoltage 01:36, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we should all focus on turning one of the band members' articles into a good article. The most obvious choice would be Freddie's, of course. --Kristbg 01:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree, I think we should work on the band members first and then the albums. Queen (band) doesn't need that much more work to become a featured article. - Mtmtmt

God Save The Queen
Candyfloss is right, we shouldn't have a separate article for Queen's cover of "God Save The Queen". I added instead a small infobox to the article on the British anthem (I don't think it'll stay there for long, though). --Kristbg 02:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Stubs
We shouldn't have three or four stub categories in a single article. It's unnecessary it clutters up an article which is already short. If we already know it's a Queen song, there's no need to tell that it's a song or that it's a rock song.

Just trying to help. --Kristbg 21:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * On behalf of the Stub sorting project please DO NOT remove the extra templates! Not everyone who is interested in cleaning up song stubs does so on a group-by-group basis. A lot of editors work on songs of a particular style or of a particular era. As such it is very important to leave the by-decade and by-genre stub templates still attached to these articles. Grutness...wha?  11:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Could we keep just the template then? Then we would have a single template on the article, and it would be enough for the editors to identify it. --Kristbg 12:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I will be adding the fallowing to all 1970's Queen song articles that are incomplete.
 * Queen-song-stub
 * Rock-song-stub
 * 1970s-rock-song-stub
 * And single-stub to singles.
 * This way more people can find them easer. - Mtmtmt 13:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Queen Main Page and Freddie
There are two on-going problems with the two articles stated above; with the first, there is a history problem, and the second has a referencing problem. I think that we should work on getting both of these fixed, however the history problem is, seemingly, about to be over with. Whast do you think? Billvoltage 22:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Request
As per a request on the Freddie Mercury talk page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Freddie_Mercury#Appearance ) I am asking us to add pictures that show "the change in hair, dress, build, the mustache, and the alteration of his image in general." What do you think? Billvoltage 21:32, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Article on Mack
I created the stub, assuming that Mack the Producer is really Josh MacRae (the drummer for The Cross, of course, not the scottish folk singer or any of those fucking guys popping up on Google). I got this information from AMG. It would be great if someone could contribute to the stub, because I can't find any credible information on this guy. Thanks a Lot and Good Luck! Fenrir2000 08:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)


 * WHY do you create a stub if you "can't find any credible information on this guy"??? Josh Macrae and Mack are different persons who have nothing to do with each other. - Candyfloss 10:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Going forward
I was asked if I could give some advice about how this WikiProject can go forward (see User talk:Kingboyk) from my experience at WP:BEATLES and elsewhere.


 * The most important thing for a WikiProject is to attract new members. Make sure every Queen-related talk page bears your WikiProject template. Include an invitation to join. Make the template vibrant - can you find a free image somewhere? (no fair use images on templates)
 * Keep your members interested by sending out newsletters. Keep them even more interested by having them help write the newsletters! Remember, community spirit is what you're aiming for. See WP:TBN for The Beatles newsletters.
 * A state of the art WikiProject is involved with Wikipedia 1.0 assessment. I'll implement the code you need for this (I have a copy of your template in my sandbox and am working on it right now). (See WP:TBA).
 * The project leader might find it worthwhile to sign up at WP:COUNCIL where WikiProject representatives come together and discuss things just like this.

Hope that helps. --kingboyk 18:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've added the assessment code for article quality to the project's template. I realised when I'd finished that I'd forgotten to add code for article importance, but I'm too tired to do that now - will add it tommorow. I've created WikiProject Queen/Assessment and will now create the necessary categories.


 * With any luck, Mathbot will find the Queen categories overnight and tommorow these links will be blue: Queen articles . In the meantime, here's what The Beatles articles look like: . --kingboyk 20:22, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much.--Miketm 22:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Compilation albums (new and old)
Just started a page for the new Freddie release, Lover Of Life, Singer Of Songs - The Very Best Of Freddie Mercury Solo, and it's EXTREMELY bare-bones at the moment.

Also, The Solo Collection boxset needs a page, too. Jason 16:59, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I also posted on the QueenOnline Message Board regarding these articles - this may produce some unwanted junk edits, but there are some knowledgeable people on the forums who could add some important info.Jason 15:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Queen Symphony
Is there scope for the Queen Symphony (by Tolga Kashif) based on the music of Queen to be covered by this project? Mdcollins1984 13:52, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 21:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Fix/Add
Just fixed the The Freddie Mercury Album entry, and added its counterpart, The Great Pretender - both articles need to be assessed and modified if necessary.Jason 21:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I moved "The Great Pretender (Freddie Mercury album)" to "The Great Pretender (album)."— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 21:41, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Project Directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:
 * User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
 * User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
 * User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
 * User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Freddie Mercury Article
I'd like to get some comments regarding the Freddie Mercury article. I've attempted to order quotes about him, starting with those who have worked closest with him, followed by that who are closely associated with his music, followed by others in what I perceive as order of notability on the topic of Freddie Mercury. That ordering keeps getting undone by a lone editor and I'm not in the mood for an edit war. Discussion here. Thanks. *Sparkhead 21:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia
Beginning cross-post.
 * See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★ MESSED  ROCKER ★  23:51, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

''End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.''

Merged articles template
I came across the template WPQueen on the page Talk:The Prophet's Song. This template incorporates a variety of wikilinks to other articles (at least one of which is also a redirect, so the Talk page gets picked up on Special:DoubleRedirects). However, there is some indication from the developers at Wikipedia talk:Redirect that templates (or anything else) appearing on a redirect page after the actual redirect should not include any "ordinary" page links; category links are OK. I didn't want to muck about in a project that I'm not familiar with, so I left the page as is, but wanted to raise the issue here so that those who developed this template can address it. --Russ (talk) 16:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 18:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merge
I've just argued against a proposed merge at Talk:It's a Hard Life. I can't see any good reason for it, but could be persuaded. I've not come across this project before, but I'd welcome input from your members. --Dweller 12:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * See Talk:It's a Hard Life.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 13:01, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Outside view
I've looked through a smattering of the articles on Queen. Some things seem to be missing, which seem to me important (if not easily cited for; looking thorough some reviews from the period would probably help):
 * In the discussions of individual songs, there is very little discussion of them as music. A lot of these songs are interesting musical compositions, but you'd never know it from reading our articles.
 * Queen occupied an interesting position in that they had influenced from both progressive rock and musical theater, but rarely fell into the utter pretentious bloat that commonly befell similarly influenced bands (and when they did get pretentious, it was usually undercut by humor).
 * There is also surprisingly little about, well, queerness. There is something absurd about discussing "Killer Queen", "Flick of the Wrist", and, so help me, "Son and Daughter" without talking about portrayal of sexual identity. Much of the glam rock pose involved a certain sexually ambiguity, usually portrayed by straight (Mark Bolan) or largely straight-identified bisexual (Bowie, Lou Reed) men. Queen stood out for being gay or gay-identified, especially in the early 1970s when this was far more risky than today. Surely some of this needs to make it into the articles.

I'm not working much on Wikipedia these days, but thought I'd drop this here as a few thoughts someone might want to follow up. - Jmabel | Talk 23:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * In regard to sexuality, Mercury was the only non-straight member of the band.— miketm - Queen WikiProject - 13:35, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I wasn't around in the 70s, but I've never had the impression that Queen stood for anything in particular regarding sexuality. Freddie Mercury was openly gay/bisexual, but sexuality doesn't necessarily define a band. They were very theatrical, and very camp, but that was an aesthetic style rather than a political statement. Being gay and being theatrical are two totally separate things, Tom Robinson sang extremely political songs about gay rights but they weren't camp songs at all. As I said I wasn't there in the 70s, but going by how Queen are regarded today I've never thought of them as a "gay-identified" band, whatever that means. They were a rock band that had straight and gay members playing side by side, writing great music that appealed to anyone regardless of their sexuality. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.146.47.250 (talk) 10:52, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

Genres
Hi, I've seen today that some anonimous changed the genre of "slighly mad" to psychodelic rock. Not sure that I agree though it has some points of it. Previously it was pop rock, which when you read the artcile is a very broad field, and well I guess it's true. It covers glam rock and arena rock among others as subgenres.

Anyway the main point is should we make some focus on the genres of the songs? and then if we put them to be something to leave a comment in the code to come to some page to disscuss if someone dissagrees. Or is this really not that important? Donny (talk) 22:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)