Talk:Towers of London (band)

message: Donny Tourette being challenged to a boxing match by lead singer of the Cockney Rejects, Stinky Turner, and completely bottling it?
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.18.2.199 (talk) 02:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why is there nothing here about...

message: * "shows members of the band beating up a drunken chav" The language is inconsitent with an encyclopedia and is not NPOV. Princess Tiswas 11:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: cults & chavs

message: This is a dispute about the language used to describe a video clip -- 14:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for Comment : Use of language for Youtube video 

message: User:Deathrocker, please stop reverting edits without supporting your actions - such action is tantamount to vandalism. Citing "anti-Towers" motivation is a straw man arguement - the edits are being made due to POV comments & unencyclopaedic language - Tiswas(t/c) 14:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Repeated unsupported reversion

message: Enough with the edit war on the word 'controversial' in the opening sentence already!  For the life of me I can't understand why you all feel so strongly about it.  Have a discussion about it instead.  Personally I would probably lose it as I think it's a bit strong and vague at the same time, but I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. Thermaland 09:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversial controversy

message: If there is no recognised UK Indie Chart per WP:A, there is no scope for including a chart position for it - Tiswas(t/c) 13:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[UK Indie Chart]] 

message: This band is "punk rock"???  They have more in common with Motley Crue, Faster Pussycat and other glam metal bands than they do with The Clash or the Sex Pistols.  It's funny but even in the article  it is quoted how they are influenced by Nikki Sixx of Motely Crue.  To call this "Punk rock" is an insult to Punk rock. They should be classified as what they are, a "glam metal" band.
:Instrumentally, they're a combination of hard rock & glam. The reason they're classified as punk is Donny's vocals are punk rock vocals, the rest of the band are hard rock musicians. Bucketheader 15:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Punk Rock???

message: Is it just me who detects a huge bias in this section? If I remeber correctly there was only one joke that was "premeditated" (the one about TV series that don't turn into record sales) the other ones were  
returns from Donny trying to insult them. This section tries to paint him as some rebel hero when really he came across as a bit of a joke Agent452 17:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If nobody objects I'll try a bit of editing on it. I'll leave it as is until Monday and then do it if nobody has objected by then Agent452 19:40, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your edit was POV, perhaps you would be more interesting in investing in a blog as a podium to spout your bias garbage instead of editing Wikipedia? - Dolled Up. (talk) 12:08, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donny Tourette's Never mind the buzzcocks appearance 

message: How can this article claim to be NPOV, if in the opening paragraph, the band are referred to as 'a pretentious, unintended joke'? The existing statement that they have divided the music press, with both positive and extremely negative reviews, is much more appropriate.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.52.219 (talk) 01:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  opening paragraph. 

message: Considering their total lack of activity anywhere..
Their myspace page is dormant and hasn't been updated for months.
They have no record deal.
Their members have left and joined other bands publically.
Their official and un-official websites have long closed down.
Their last tour was 7 months ago.
Their last official album was deleted last year and is currently unavailable anywhere.
No sign of their 2010 "tv show"..
Much talk about a "spin off" band.
86.44.107.126 (talk) 10:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  HAVE THE TOWERS OF LONDON FINALLY CALLED IT A DAY..? 

message: Their websites (both England and America) have long closed down.
They been dropped by 3 separate labels.
They have "parted company" with at least the same number of managers.
They have lost all their band members.
Their lead "singer" wants to forget he was even in the band.
They haven't bothered any charts anywhere for years.
They have stopped touring a long time ago.
They are seen a a forgotten hype from a few years back.
Not missed by anyone.
Shouldn't it be removed and save space for real bands..?
89.101.183.29 (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  SHOULDN'T THIS DEAD WIKI FOR A LONG DEAD "BAND" BE CLOSED DOWN AND REMOVED..? 

message: change 'indie' to 'punk rock' in the first sentence.
change 'The Kooks and Razorlight music with 1997 style Britpop' to 'rock and glam metal music with 1977 style British punk.'
change 'The band have divided the opinions of the British music press since their emergence in early 2004, gaining positive reviews from some music news media (Popworld) and extremely negative reviews from others. Their music was widely regarded as tired and dated.[1]' 
to 'The band have divided the opinions of the British music press since their emergence in early 2004, gaining positive reviews from some music news media[citation needed] and extremely negative reviews from others.[1]'
under members change 'Paul' to 'The Rev' Jonny Klone (talk) 14:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. RudolfRed (talk) 21:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: All done. Thank you Jonny Klone (talk) 17:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2024