Talk:Muse (band)/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Length? Unnecessary detail

This article seems a bit long and there are too many unnecessary details,

e.g. "In 2006, Muse announced that they were to release a new album (produced again by Rich Costey) titled Black Holes and Revelations. The album leaked onto the Internet on June 7. The album was released officially in Europe on July 3, 2006 and in North America on July 11, 2006. It was released to the Japanese market on June 28, 2006. The Japanese edition included an extra track, "Glorious", which is only available globally as the b-side to the "Invincible" vinyl."

Is it really essential information to know that the album leaked on June 7 and that the japanese edition included a bonus track. This information can be included on the album/discography page; the band page should include only important information. Stanlavisbad (talk) 20:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. I think whoever wrote that wanted to extend the article but didn't have much to say. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 08:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

This is a good example of how recentism spoils an article. The content in this paragraph was added when all that fans knew was that there would be an album and then that it had been leaked, and so on. It's starting to look a little neater now but it still has a way to go. BigBlueFish (talk) 15:26, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The paragraph can be shortened, but the information about the track 'Glorious' should be retained. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.115.238 (talk) 03:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

GA on hold

• rock band - I'm sure you can be more specific (eg. new prog band)

The lead genre reference has been a constant source of debate which is why the generic "rock" is there, but more specific detail is listed in the infobox. Besides, the lead goes on to explain what genres they fuse together to form new prog... -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 09:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, that's fine then. I should probably read the talk page first :S Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 00:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• You should reference either everything or nothing in the lead - not a mixture.
• "Formation and early years (1992-1997)" - first paragraph unsourced. Also, the past members noted there should be listed in the infobox (using the past_members parameter, I think)
• "Interestingly, Bellamy's father, George, was the rhythm guitarist in The Tornados, who were the first English band to have a U.S. number one, with "Telstar"." - What's that got to do with Muse?

 Done.

• "The band had a significant meeting with Dennis Smith, the owner of Sawmills, a recording studio in a converted water mill in Cornwall." - ref needed
• First 3 paras of "First EPs and Showbiz (1998-2000)" unsourced
• Same with the last para of that section
• "Their second album was Origin of Symmetry, again produced by Leckie." -merge this into a paragraph

 Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 15:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• Ref 6 has two external links, you only need one

 Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 10:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• "This album was described by Neha Nimmagudda" - change "this" to "the". And who is Neha Nimmagudda??

 Done. Couldn't find a source anywhere so I axed the quote.-- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 09:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• Refs 7 and 8 need publisher info etc.

 Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 16:37, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• "The album might have led to Muse" - this needs numerous citations (for the "might have")
• "Muse decided to release a live CD and DVD" - Ref?
• "while maintaining a sense of the band as a three-piece. - possible POV statements like this need refs
• "The song "Ruled By Secrecy", for example, takes its title from the Jim Marrs book Rule By Secrecy about the secrets behind the way major governments are run." - another ref needed
• "The band played at the Glastonbury festival in June 2004..." - quotes in this paragraph need refs
• "Muse continued their tour..." - refs needed for awards and stuff in this paragraph
• "did not endorse the release." - ref needed
• Ref 13; is MuseWiki a reliable source? [1] contains some other sources which you could use instead...

I found this but the gallery might well require a login - will try later Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 09:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• "Absolution eventually went gold in the US." - ref?

 Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 12:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• First 2 paras of "Black Holes and Revelations (2006-2007)" section unsourced

 Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 11:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• Starlight (song) is a GA (my work! :D), you might find some more sources/useful info there
• "the latest installment to the increasingly popular Guitar Hero series of rock music simulation video games." - NPOV statement, not really needed

 Done.

• "in August 2006[16]. " - ref after full stop

 Done. -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 09:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

• Make sure all refs have publisher info

 Done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 16:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

• Fix redlinks in "Awards" section, and source all awards

Redlinks  Done, sourcing  Not done -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 09:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Leave a note on my talk page when you're done. Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 05:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, well, sourcing still not done. I'll fail it for now, bug me when you get around to it :) dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 10:13, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

New Interview

Just a contribution. I'm not going to go and edit the entry myself, but some of you Wiki gurus can go ahead:

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/music/a85297/muse-new-lp-may-be-50-minute-symphony.html

It's not exactly hard evidence of anything new, but it is pertinent to the "Next studio sessions" section of the entry, and in my mind should at least be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris1215 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Triple J award

Unless there is a biography of Muse which cites the Triple J award as a significant milestone for Muse, please don't readd it. It is an award for one of their songs, with an article where that award belongs - the band as a whole have far too many accolades for this to be relevant. The fact that it is their most recent award makes no difference to its importance. BigBlueFish (talk) 15:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

For the record, and if anyone's interested, here's a cite: [2]. How goes the GA stuff? Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 06:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I still think that there is a lot of useless information in the "Black Holes and Revelations (2006-2007)" section. There's no need to enumerate the datas of every video that came out or CD, that's for the Muse discography article. There isn't really anything valuable in that section. Nothing really notable. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 07:28, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The Triple J Hottest 100 is the worlds largest "best song" countdown listing that is voted on entirely by the listening public. As such, the number one song award for 2007 for Knights of Cydonia (awarded Jan 08) should be listed in the Awards section. Although not a recording industry award like a Grammy, the Hottest 100 is a bigger and better reflection of the bands status in Australia than Australia's grammy equivalent - the ARIA.

203.1.21.12 (talk) 02:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)Chris Lamb, Australia 13/03/08

Members

When live they usually use an extra member, on keyboards, anyone know who this is, or if it's the same guy all the time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.190.102 (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• It's Morgan Nicholls, he's pretty much a permanent temporary member -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 21:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Sourcing

What is it that needs to be sourced? Do we have to source all the awards? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 18:06, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, along with the other stuff that was picked up in the GA review -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 18:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds hard. I tried looking for some sources on the awards. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 22:18, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I know, I sourced most of the ones that have refs at the moment :P -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 13:18, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Date of founding

It was 1994, not 1997. The band were named "Rocket Baby Dolls" as a concept for one battle of the bands inside the Broadmeadow Sports Centre. They named themselves Muse sometime before the end of March, in which they played at Dawlish Sports centre accompanying a roller-disco. Matthew Bellamy once said that they renamed "about" a year afterwards, but that was a misrecollection as it contrasts with all the other recollections by the band's members.

Any objections? --Tene (talk) 00:52, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

We want proof, and lots of citations. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, call me an idiot, but I believe you. And so I changed this on every single Wikipedia, hehehe. MuseWiki says 1994 so it's gotta be true. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 06:36, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

New album

Sorry im no Wikipedia editor, but new info has come to light on the new album and muses 2008 plans. http://www.xfm.co.uk/muse-talk-supermassive-ufos — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.132.218 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

H.A.A.R.P

Can someone tell me why its called HAARP please? Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.122.143 (talk) 12:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

     Check out the HAARP page on wikipedia ;)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.116.1.128 (talk) 11:13, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 

Well, there is a picture of the HAARP complex in Alaska on the inside of the booklet to Black Holes and Revelations, beside the lyrics to "Exo-politics," I believe. A mock-up of the HAARP antennas are seen onstage with the band in the HAARP DVD as well. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 15:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Bellamy personal section

Shouldn't the following bit be in a personal page-- "Muse are best known for .. .. and frontman Matthew Bellamy's eccentric interests in global conspiracy, extraterrestrial life, paranoia, theology and the apocalypse as well as his use of falsetto singing and vibrato"

seemd a bit unfiar on Dom and Chris that Muse are best known for Matts religious beliefs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simona1919 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Doesn't really make sense having that in the opening paragraph. 30December (talk) 17:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

so quit discussing it and change it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.63.24 (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Members and instruments

I think it's best to only enumerate the instruments the members play in studio, in the intro of the article and leave the details to the members section. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 04:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Chris does the backing vocals in the studio and I think Matt only do the piano not the keyboards on studio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.242.192 (talk) 22:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Can you point me to a song with Chris's vocals? Why wouldn't Matt do the piano on the albums? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 22:43, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Supermassive black hole, sing for absolution, map of the problematique, plug in baby and I'm sure there are more. Matt plays the piano on the albums, but he doesn't play the keyboards on the albums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.242.192 (talk) 00:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, now you're messing with me. I can't hear anything on "Sing For Absolution" and in "Plug In Baby", there's just one voice, no backing vocals, so where does Chris fit into the picture? I don't know about "Supermassive Black Hole". It's possible that he does the electronic voice or something. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 18:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

No, just checked MuseWiki, it's Dom. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 18:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

yeah, chris does this line on supermassive:

Glaciers melting in the dead of night
And the superstar's sucked into the supermassive

and the repeating line of 'supermassive black hole' at the end of the song. I was wrong about sing for absolution & plug in baby, it was matt who sing the song entirely. 69.118.242.192 (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Queen Comparisons

This line appears in the article in the Origin of Symmetry section:

Muse have been compared with Queen, although this is partially due to their way of working the stage, with Bellamy's style reminiscent of that of Queen's Brian May.[11]

In my opinion, the comparison goes deeper. The place I hear Queen the most in the music is in the background vocals, Bellamy's falsetto vocal delivery, and in Bellamy's fleet-fingered piano playing. Not to mention that the back cover of the booklet to the Black Holes and Revelations CD bears some resemblance to the Queen II album art/Bohemian Rhapsody video. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 19:25, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Additionally, check out the repeated line "There's no justice in the world" near the end of "Soldier's Poem." This is done in the style of "vintage Freddie Mercury" harmony vocals, ala "You Take My Breath Away" from the Queen album Day At The Races. It is also reminicent of the intro to "Bohemian Rhapsody," where Freddie Mercury is harmonizing with himself. Also, in the Muse song "Assassin," the background vocals are reminicent of the Queen song "Somebody to Love," or even the more chaotic Queen song "Ogre Battle." The vocals are similar, not in choice of notes, but in timbre, phrasing, and style. The "No one's gonna take me alive" section of "Knights of Cydonia" is also very Queen-like in the harmony vocals, at least.65.248.164.214 (talk) 15:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

This sounds like original research to me. Andrea (talk) 15:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

No one said it wasn't. If I could cite it, it would be in the article. :P 65.248.164.214 (talk) 16:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I thought you were discussing it here because you wanted it included. Andrea (talk) 17:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries. I'm not trying to make trouble. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Please don't compare them to Queen. While I have to admit the same thought once crossed my mind, it was only because of the arrangement of background vocals. Matthew Bellamy is a universe away from Freddie Mercury, and unless we have (ideally) more than one legitimate sourced article citing the comparison, there is little cause to substantiate, is there not? I have to admit I am compelled as a big fan, so I had to chime in. 69.176.226.200 (talk) 21:17, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

The Intro

Hi, I'm new to all this so I haven't edited the article, but I'd like to suggest some changes to the intro. First up, what is the relevance of the comment about the band forgoing University? This seems quite a subjective piece of information to me. I tracked down the article on nme.com that is cited (http://www.nme.com/news/muse/29016) and it makes no reference to this, it's all about the Wembley shows.30December (talk) 15:59, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

As no one has responded I guess I'll just go ahead and make the edit to the article. 30December (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I see my edit has been reverted by Bornfury. Even though the citation may refer to the magazine article, I still think it's an irrelevant and subjective piece of information. I may be misunderstanding what Wiki articles are supposed to be about, but I thought they were supposed to be relevant and concise. The information about University appears later on in the article in a place where it makes more sense. Does anyone else agree? Can we discuss it?30December (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Morgan

I also just noticed that 'guitar' has been removed as an instrument played by Morgan. He actually continues to play bass when the band perform Hoodoo and at the Royal Albert Hall he played the Ukelele during Megalomania... In case anyone wants to add these details.30December (talk) 16:08, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, is there any reason why my addition about Morgan playing the Ukelele was removed?30December (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Getting Signed to Maverick

Just found this article in Ticket master website: http://www.ticketmaster.ie/artist/944747 Some interesting new info there about getting signed, I think it says that the CMJ festival in New York was where Maverick discovered band. Probably worth a mention? I added the line, can someone put a citation in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaypriests1984 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Genre, yet again

I would like to take issue with Bornfury's removal of "rock" as a genre describing Muse Music. Please see 5 references stating that Muse are a 'Rock band' (a small sample of endless references). My favourite reference is the 5th one - it has been taken from the opening line of Muse's wiki entry!

I will add 'Rock' to the list of Muse genres. BornFury, please do not change back as I have now supplied references, if you do it is a direct violation of wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4780985.stm http://famous.y2u.co.uk/F_Muse_Alternative_Rock_Band.htm http://www.topix.com/who/muse/2008/01/muse-are-an-english-rock-band-formed-in-teignmouth-devon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muse_%28band%29

I also take issue with stating that Muse mixed different musical styles "TO HELP FORM THE NEW SUB GENRE OF NEW PROG". It cannot be proved that this was their intention and there is no citation stating that they intended to create a new genre. Unless you can provide a citation showing that Muse INTENDED to create a new genre called 'New Prog' I think it should be left out. I will remove it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaypriests1984 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Style

Having a style section is great but isn't the current one quite poorly written? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 03:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that it sounded like it was written by a member of the Church of Bellamy... :/ Seriously, there are two other people in the band who aren't Matthew Bellamy, and they make big contributions to the overall sound of Muse too. 68.221.217.141 (talk) 03:28, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Plus, it's folly to assume that "style" refers to only the sound and timbre of the band - compositional style is a massive part of the music, and it'd be a little shortsighted to miss that out when they sound like, as one reviewer put it brilliantly once, "Rachmaninoff against the Machine." C'mon, The Small Print's melody is Liszt's Liebesträume No. 3 in A Flat Major, for the love of Beethoven. 86.8.76.216 (talk) 16:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Newton Abbot Demo?

Recently, an old muse demo from 1997 was sold on ebay to members of muselive.com, it featured many previously unheard songs and older versions of songs appearing on later albums. This is indeed significant, but do we place it in the early years section, or the Black holes and revelations section since this is when it was uncovered? JAK2112 (talk) 03:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Fifth Muse album PROD

I've PROD'd Fifth Muse album for the following reason:

• Work has only just started on this album, as of yet it's not notable. Even the band don't know what it's going to be yet,[1] so Wikipedia shouldn't either

Posting here for wider discussion. Place discussion @ Talk:Fifth Muse album. -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 16:46, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

External links

A few of the external links - Last.fm, Open Directory Project, MusicBrainz - to Muse's user pages were removed. Was that in some way offically approved or a one man's decision? --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 00:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Classical influence

can we please rewrite the statement regarding muse's classical influence? it's unfair to say that they blend the style, mainly because classical music covers a rather broad range of music. it's unfair, for example, to compare Handel's repertoire to that of Debussy or Burgmuller. muse draws very little influence from the actual classical or baroque era, but more from the modern romantic era, drawing influence from composers such as Rachmaninoff and Grieg. Itachi1452 (talk) 19:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Classical is a very broad word, and Muse have drawn from different styles of classical music, from pianists such as Rachmaninoff (Butterflies and Hurricanes), to using entire orchestras in their compositions (Exogenesis: Symphony). Keytar Shredder (talk) 11:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Album Art

It is also a very notable point that the artwork for the albums, "Absolution," and, "Black Holes and Revelations," and the single, "Butterflies and Hurricanes," was done by Storm Thorgerson. Thorgerson is the visionary graphic designer who concieved the album cover for Pink Floyd's, "Dark Side of the Moon," (arguably one of the greatest album covers of all time), amoung countless other works. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.105.208.248 (talk) 00:02, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Vocal style

I've removed the thing that says Matt sounds like Zack de la Rocha because, well, frankly, it was really stupid. They sound nothing like each other; I've yet to hear Zack sing or Matt rap. I've replaced it with "Jeff Buckley", who Matt ACTUALLY sounds like. Charlycrash (talk) 16:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Plurality of Muse

Why is this article written as if Muse is plural? Actually, I notice that some band articles on Wikipedia (e.g., Linkin Park, Metallica, Megadeth, Shinedown) treat the band name as singular (e.g., using "is") and other band articles (e.g., Muse, The Who, Smashing Pumpkins) treat the band name as plural (e.g., using "are"). Personally, I think a band name is singular, but I may be wrong, so I would like to find out what the English language says about such things before I get the idea of changing anything. Rktur (talk) 05:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

This article is written in British English, which treats band names as plural, as opposed to American English, which treats them as singular. In the case of The Smashing Pumpkins, it's probably because of "pumpkins" being plural. Jamesr66a (talk) 15:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

As pointed out already, surely the opening line (commented with < !-- DO NOT CHANGE "are" to "is" without discussing first on the talk page, or it will be reverted back quickly.-- >) should be 'is' as Muse is a band, one band, one idea, one collective, singular, therefore 'Muse is an English rock band...' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theonlydavewilliams (talk • contribs) 02:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

In a word, no. -- M2Ys4U ^(talk) 05:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

i totally agree on that.. a band is singular...shouldnt it be Muse is???talk

i just have to say, i am usually fine with british english and all, but a singular name being treated as a plural really makes me twitch. its almost as bad as using "an" instead of "a" before h words like history. the h is not silent, and muse is a singular entity made up of three people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.60.12.119 (talk) 05:18, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

'Muse' is a collective noun, so referring to it as plural is correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.13.129.58 (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I am British, and have always been told that treating collective nouns as plural is colloquial. I'll put in a vote for "is" in the context of an encyclopaedia. --Mike C | talk 13:07, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Another Brit voting for "is" NinjaKid (talk) 15:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

To ensure consistency, which is desirable, although difficult to achieve, this would mean changing project-wide consensus. Perhaps a proposal at the Music Project or Manual of Style for musical articles would be a good place to start. Rodhullandemu 15:59, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Genres

There have been a few edits recently on the genres of the band. As I write this, currently there are rock, alternative rock and progressive rock. Pop rock is one that has been there a few times. Now for my opinion...

Rock should obviously stay; it's a general umbrella classification like pop, country or jazz. Alternative rock should stay, as should progressive rock. Muse have been described as new prog so that could come in somewhere possibly. Pop rock, I don't think should be there. Anymore for anymore? Andre666 (talk) 07:11, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the three you've highlighted should stay, although the argument is over prog rock. I don't see anything wrong with this, NME (don't know if this counts as a reliable source) has described some of Muse's songs as prog. Can a reliable source be found saying Muse aren't progressive? Without sources, PloKoon13's arguments are POV which has no place in the article. Nev1 (talk) 14:07, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

One always has to be careful with genres on Wikipedia. Personally, (our personal opinions count for nothing, by the way) Muse really aren't Pop rock. The genres Andre highlighted above are great; Rock, alternative rock, and progressive rock. NME is a reliable source so that's okay. All music guide is not a reliable source, so we can't trust that one. Neither their Myspace or official site offer us anything (that I can see) about their genres. Generally, if we can decide on the above 3 genres here then we're okay via consensus. But if there is no consensus on their genres then 'Rock' would take precedent and be the only genre in the field. Per this, we should aim for generality. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 14:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

The band's official MySpace page actually lists alternative, progressive and rock as their genres. The skin hides it but you can see the proof on your browser window. "MySpace.com - MUSE - UK - Alternative / Progressive / Rock - www.myspace.com/muse"... proof enough I think. Andre666 (talk) 12:59, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Definitely. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 13:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

So just because an egocentric band say they're progressive means they're progressive? :S If they told you they were Japanese Rap or the Pope would you believe them? PloKoon13 (talk) 14:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

It helps, yes, but it's not definitive. What is are the third party reliable sources that have been provided supporting their claim. Can you point us in the direction of some saying they aren't? Nev1 (talk) 14:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

First party takes precedence over 3rd party. !st party comes straight from the item in question, 3rd party is accountable to POV, the MCR genre is a great example. They say they are not emo, and that overrules what others say. We can probably skip the progressive part though.--Jakezing (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I think we should go for what Muse say. Since I don't remember anybody notable challenging Muse's genres. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 17:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't listing Muse under new prog kind of make the inclusion of progressive rock in the genre box redundant? Obviously if they're new prog they're also going to be progressive rock. Also, it seems that metal has somehow come to be listed, which is of course ludicrous as I don't think anyone would argue Muse as being metal...bob rulz (talk) 07:48, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

They have a lot of uses of Electronic elements.(just like radio hed)I thought maybe the genre should contain Electronic music as does Radiohead's.And I agree they are not much a pop rock band but some of their songs(for example many songs in Black Holes and Revelations retail ) does sound very pop rock and even Dance Electronic Music.Solino the Wolf (talk) 23:22, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any sources to support your assertion? Nev1 (talk) 22:45, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes.I have a source for electronica.Solino the Wolf (talk) 22:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Picture

Shouldn't the picture in the infobox at the top of the page have the whole band in it? Or have I been asleep for a week and missed the news that Bellamy left? Cadan ap Tomos 19:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

• I was the one who changed it. I changed it because the previous image was a terrible, dark, grainy thing that only actually showed two of the band members (the drummer being obscured by the drumkit) and even then they were only just visible. I think a good image of two of them is better than a really crap image that is of two band members + 1 instrument. Just my $0.02. Please feel free to suggest a better alternative. naerii 21:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Aight, I'm working on making an image like the one in Radiohead instead. naerii 21:20, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Radiohead influences

Radiohead has not influenced Muse. It's just something people used to say about most new bands in those days. If you played rock, you'd be copying Radiohead. [3]. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 22:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Muse sound and always have sounded exactly like Radiohead during their OK Computer period. It's a shame Radiohead couldn't have made more albums in this style, rather than the off-the-wall stuff that followed this great album.

While they may not be a carbon copy of Radiohead, they are undeniable somewhat influenced by them. Matt's falsetto is especially evident of this. --PJDEP (talk) 06:07, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I first listened to Muse and then Radiohead. When I listened to Radiohead's OK computer it did sound me like Muse. And as Radiohead were first, I agree on the big influence of this band, not only vocals but instrumentally too. Of course Muse isn't Radiohead but it is like Radiohead in some parts. Manoalorts (talk) 19:51, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I have to dissagree with PJDEP & Manoalorts, Muse has stated multiple times that Muse don't is influenced by Radiohead, they says that is because both bands have common influencess, mind you, artists like Jeff Buckley, Sonic Youth, Nirvana, The Smashing Pumpkins, Jimmy Hendrix, Queen etc... if you give a look to the artists that Muse states as influences you'll see where they got their inspiration. Carnotaurus044

Semi-protection

This page really should be semi-protected. When you can look at the revision history and 4/5 of it are vandals and reversions to vandalism, it's time to lock the article. Anyone disagree? KhalfaniKhaldun 02:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I totally agree. I have had this article protected round 4 times, personally. It's completely intolerable. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson (talk) 22:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I've recently requested page protection again, since the last one was only a couple weeks, and clearly it didn't take long for the vandalism to start up again. If anyone would like to second this nomination, or maybe suggest it be upgraded to an indefinite semi-protection, please feel free to add a comment on the requests for protection page. KhalfaniKhaldun 02:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Twilight movie

I think reference needs to be made to how much Muse's songs have influenced Stephenie Meyer's Twilight series, and the fact that the song Supermassive Black Hole is going to be included on the first movie's soundtrack and in the movie as well. -007bond aka Matthew G aka codingmasters 10:14, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I removed this because if we list one movie which has a muse song in it shouldn't we list them all? There actually was a section with all the movies/tv shows which included muse music but it got removed a while ago. Wouldn't it be better if this was on the twilight page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.188.197 (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be mentioned that Stephenie constantly mentions Muse and how she thanks them. :] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.222.143.48 (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Surely that would be more relevant to her article than to the Muse article? Beve (talk) 15:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it needs to be mentioned that Twilight has effectively ruined Muse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.229.3.97 (talk) 17:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The fact that they are specifically cited as inspiring the Twilight series is worth mentioning! It's understandable that die-hard Muse fans would not like this connection, but there are a *LOT* of people who have come to Muse due to Stephanie Meyer's acknowledgement in the book and their inclusion in the soundtracks. It's definitely significant! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.101.100 (talk) 06:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Reference

Reference 5 has been vandalised: "^ a b "Muse", nme!, twats" While I wholeheartedly agree that the NME are twats, it probably should be changed back. 93.97.113.147 (talk) 15:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, it's now been corrected. Unfortunately that vandalism has been there since early September. Nev1 (talk) 15:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)