Talk:List of L.A. Guns members

message: Lots of good information here.  Unfortunately its unfairly slanted in favor of the Phil Lewis lineup.  I took the liberty of making it more neutral.  If you're going to write a wikipedia article do it right for goodness sakes. SleazeTease 07:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Woknam66 (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow! Thanks! :D Xanofar (talk) 01:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

message: Does anyone still think it's "written from a fan's point of view, rather than a neutral point of view"? Would anyone have a problem with me removing this template?:
Woknam66 talk  James Bond 22:24, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Fan's point of view template

message: I disagree with the idea mooted that this page should be merged with the L.A. Guns page. It would be too long for that page, with the members chronology being as extensive as it is. Furthermore, other bands, such as Guns N' Roses and Kiss, have separate pages for members where the members section would otherwise be too large to incorporate into the original page. However, there are some edits I suggest be made. These are as follows:
# Guns N' Roses lineups shouldn't be included on this page at all. They are lineups of a different band, and where the merge between L.A. Guns and Hollywood Rose occurred, an explanation of what happened could be placed in the table over the time L.A. Guns were non-existent, as is done on other band's member pages (particularly when a band is disbanded or on hiatus for an extensive period of time).
# The chronology from "First Generation..." through to "Phil Lewis' L.A. Guns" should flow without break. During the time the band was non-existent between first and second generation, an explanation for the band's non-existence could be given (as explained in edit 1 above). The break between "Second Generation..." and "Reunion" is wholly unnecessary anyway, as the band did not break-up at all, but reverted back to the classic lineup, and the point about it being a reunion could be made in the year column (i.e. having "reunion" in brackets under the year of the reunion). Again, there was no break between the "reunion" period and the foundation of the Phil Lewis-led version of the band, which is in fact a continuation of the original, as there was no schism in the band during this time, the band didn't split in two. Again, this could be explained by labeling the band as "Phil Lewis's L.A. Guns" in the year column. The only series of lineups that still would need to be kept separate are the Tracii Guns' lineups of the band, as this is, in essence, a new and completely separate band.
# The members section at the bottom of the page should be placed above the chronology, as is the norm on similar pages, although this is not an important edit. I suggest that the timeline stays where it presently is.
# Finally, the written content proceeding each major change in the band's history is unnecessary as all of this information is covered on the band's main page. There doesn't need to be a regurgitation of information on this page, just a chronology that shows the different lineups of the band spoken through on the other page.
Any comments/suggestions would be welcome. Regards, Burbridge92 (talk) 17:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to page 

message: Rick Marty did a couple shows with one of the versions of L.A. Guns before telling them to take a hike. 
I guess that doesn't qualify him for this list?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:983:8001:5B1E:8C55:5FEE:DDF8:81D1 (talk) 02:25, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rick Marty (aka Maddog)