Talk:Son of Dork

message: Part of this article was merged with Son Of Dork following this AFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:47, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've merged the histories into this one per naming conventions. Flowerparty■ 19:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've changed the reference in the "Musical Styling" section from The Starting Line to New Found Glory. I don't really see any comparison between TSL and SoD at all. If anyone disagrees I am happy to discuss this further. Timb0h 14:31, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TSL / NFG 

message: I can't find any information on SoD changing record label or being dropped, so if you wish to add this information please cite some references.
SoD are with James record company sicpuppyrecords.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.53.36 (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing record label 

message: The video also features a De Lorean car, a probable reference to Back to the Future, a film which seems to feature in many of James Bourne's projects (for example the Busted song Year 3000 and the band name of McFly).
...Except James wasn't in McFly - although he was close friends with the members, I doubt he influenced their name. Does any source say he did? --Joewithajay 05:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error? 

message: I love Son Of Dork so much. When are they coming to Australia or even being released here? I heard them while i was in the UK on holidays and got back to Oz and had to download their stuff illegally so i could hear them. When can i buy their CD here?? 
I love James and Dave equally then Steve and then Danny and Chris....
CAN THEY PLEASE VISIT MELBOURNE SOON SO I CAN GO TO SEE THEM? 
...I CAN PROVIDE THEM WITH A PLACE TO SLEEP!!! ...(my bed... lol)
I suggest you look at their official site, otherwise Wikipedia can't really help. User:Green01 2:51, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest you stop using Wikipedia as a forum for idle discussion. read this guidline Matt G (talk) 22:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MY FAVOURITE BAND 

message: Only Bourne has a page for himself. I think there's enough stuff on them for a page each. User:Green01 11:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think the other band members are notable outside of their membership in this band. Timb0h 11:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Profile pages for band members 

message: The musical styling section reads like it has been written by a 10 year old, and is based pretty much solely on pov —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.195.219.209 (talk) 00:46, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musical Styling 

message: :Image:Welcometoloserville200.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Welcometoloserville200.jpg

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:11, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Had a little clean up of this page, reducing some of the sectioned bits and removing any unsourced sentences. Popped Possibility of a reunion under split as a reunion is not looking likely. Let me know if you have any questions! Does anyone have a pic for the page? Bottomlivefan95 (talk) 15:24, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean up