Talk:Kings of Leon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Alternative music (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Alternative music, a group of Wikipedians interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage of articles relating to Alternative rock. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

2009 Brits[edit]

I just herd there acceptain speech for a brit award, and forget about the rest of the countrys that make up the uk, and if they do have scottish roots, mores the shame on them.(Rivas182 (talk) 21:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC))

Oh please don't write any articles here. Things are bad enough as they are.

Quality concerns[edit]

I just fiexed some unsourced assertions in the other media section. We are not here to jump the gun and guess as to the reason for the bands US tour cancellation. Drug use, personal issues, whatever it may be the official was released by the band and on twitter. There is no need to jump to conclusions. Furthermore, this is an informational page about the band. Not a forum for as it happens gossip.

Origin[edit]

Their origin states Glasgow, Scotland, yet this isn't mentioned in the article - there is no mention of Scotland at all. Given that wikipedia "prides" itself on sources, shouldn't this be removed / replaced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.28.218 (talk) 14:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Edited[edit]

Did someone edit out incorrectly the part about them going to new york, and their influences? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.193.93.90 (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Artists[edit]

Shouldn't Nathan and Matthew get their own wikipedia pages, because Caleb and baby Jared do?

Violent Content[edit]

I think there should be some mention of the graphic content of their songs, with NPOV. Trani, 4 Kicks, Soft, Joe's Head. It's often directed towards women, and it's a unique characteristc for a band with such a blues-y, southern rock feel. I'll added soon, and contributions would be appreciated. FerventDove 22:19, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Their songs aren't that graphic, well possibly with the exception of Soft, but even that, especially in comparison to most mainstream rap songs and even some pop songs is not that bad.

From Red Morning Light 'I hear you're blowin' like a feather And then they rub it in your face'

Sounds pretty graphic to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.80.15 (talk) 03:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


FAIl —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.192.151 (talk) 04:51, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

"Be There"[edit]

I'm pretty certain that the song supposedly first played in Newcastle, Australia is called "I'm on Call" and has been played previous to this gig. I was at this gig, and the new songs I heard I had heard before on YouTube from previous gigs. Should we delete that part of the article? Seeing as no sources are sited anyway. Leif Erikson 05:19, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


U.K./U.S. popularity[edit]

is there any justification for the distinction that they are far more popular in europe, as is currently made twice in the article? seems to be someone's opinion. i think they are fairly popular here in the U.S. too, at least in indie circles. Jwigton 17:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Not number 1 album popular. :p

They have never charted in the US. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 14:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
They hadn't up until the release of Sex on Fire - that has been considered their breakthrough single and has led to mainstream success in the US. Prior to that they were already huge in the UK and particularly in Ireland Dokerz (talk) 18:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

28 million records sales?[edit]

I have a hard time believing that KOL have sold 28 million records. For comparison, Nickelback (ugh, but well-known and successful) have sold 25 million records. Someone want to provide a link to back up the 28 million claim? That whole paragraph is poorly written and sounds totally fanboy-ish. Prove me wrong. Greg Salter (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

With no backing references, removed the material. In fact, I did find one sales figure that gave the first album sales of 500,000; in other words, the second and third albums each averaged about 14 million each? Completely unrealistic. Prove me wrong. Greg Salter (talk) 16:25, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

SSCS[edit]

The SSCS link in the article points to a disambiguation page, with no clue as to which of the articles it actually refers to. What is it? - Estesark (talk) 00:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Indie rock???[edit]

Is this a Joke? Kings of Leon are not and never were 'Indie rock', they are part of a major record label, because of their Southern rock style the a classed alongside some of the dross associated with that label, they are totally different, and are a major Rock band. To attach that label [Indie] with Kings of leon is absurd and it is done all so easily simply because they are not a metal/screamo band or a freak show. I think this label is offensive to real KOL fans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.31.206.40 (talk) 09:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

"Major Rock band"? Never heard of 'em. Rock band, maybe. Major, not really. Proxy User (talk) 21:53, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I think you'll find they are major duhhhh. Im changing the genre, its offensive and ignorant and we've had several complaints- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukestar1991 (talkcontribs) 22:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

theyre not exactly rock ...rock is stuff like guns n roses, van halen and bands like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.165.150.88 (talk) 05:54, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

KoL are exactly rock, same as GnR, VH, CCR, Who, Led Zep, Rush, Stones, etc. But if the article states that KoL is an inide--INDEPENDENT band--no, they are not 'indie' rock, having signed to a label. 68Kustom (talk) 06:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia should just follow what reliable sources describe the band as.--Commander Keane (talk) 06:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Alt Rock?[edit]

Nothing alternative about this band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mare vitalis (talkcontribs) 17:40, 11 September 2008 (UTC) Cant find one inch of indie in KOL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.89.126 (talk) 19:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Caleb used to be anorexic[edit]

Says so on http://www.spinner.com/tag/KingsofLeon/ . --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 07:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

And? —ŁittleÄlien¹8² 11:02, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't hurt to add it in the article, unless you think it's an unreliable source. Anorexia is pretty serious, it's not like adding in the article what his favorite color is. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
Probly better to put on his own page, it's not really specific to the band. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.227.2 (talk) 14:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Copy and pasted section.[edit]

the background, influences and style section is just a copy and paste from http://www.absoluteradio.co.uk/music/artists/kings_of_leon/biography/3.html which is also reference 13. 98.196.78.26 (talk) 04:27, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Interestingly the absoluteradio page mentioned above says that it's content comes from Wikipedia, they seem to be referencing each other... (80.7.57.174 (talk) 01:32, 31 January 2009 (UTC))

UK photo[edit]

The Leeds photo shows only a backlit audience, a blob of stage lighting, and some venue gear up top. I don't see the band in it, so can someone put up a better shot? Also, the lead photo shows only three band members. 68Kustom (talk) 06:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Then go find a better one Dokerz (talk) 18:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Page has been maliciously altered[edit]

I am unable to perform a rollback, but someone has changed the band member names in the first section, as well as changing all "Sex on Fire" references to "Jeffs on Fire", as said, I cannot rollback, if somebody else could? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingy0489 (talkcontribs) 03:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

-I tried to revert the changes just by deleting the wrong information and replacing it with the right stuff, but wound up messing up a good portion of the page, and i dont know how to fix it now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.216.156 (talk) 03:48, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Award win![edit]

A winner at the 2009 Meteor Awards tonight! --Candlewicke ST # :) 02:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Live Performances[edit]

This headline and information subsequently following should be removed as it does not meet notability guidelines, and it's only purpose is to advertise/promote, which is not a valid use for a Wikipedia article. SlimXero (talk) 00:38, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

kings of leon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.240.171.66 (talk) 11:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Full Content[edit]

This article seriously needs work, not on the existing parts but on content. The discography is great an all but the article gives no sense of who the members really are. I'm not the best at composition but I do see a real need here for someone who can really make this article as great as the artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TauntingElf (talkcontribs) 06:20, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

All contributions are welcome... Instead of complaining that the article is not up to scratch focus on suggesting new material that can be added, search for reliably sourced material, research the band, etc.Dokerz (talk) 18:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Kings of Leon "is"[edit]

I am Irish and therefore collective nouns take the plural version. As such I (personally) would say 'Kings of Leon are an American rock band, etc'. However, since they are a US band the article should be written using American English, where the collective noun takes a singular form. Please debate here whether or not this should be the case before you change the article (note: this debate happens over every article involving conflict of the US vs UK english - ref: U2 for an example) Dokerz (talk) 22:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Dokerz, I'm American, and I'll tell you honestly, I doubt most Americans (or Brits, Australians, or others for that matter) actually know this rule. However, as KOL is an American band (even though most of their initial recognition came from outside the US), I appreciate your diligence in pointing out that this should be in the American variant, and the rule that applies in this case. Thinking about your comment, shouldn't The Doors read "The Doors was..." To my native AE ears, that sounds just plain odd. Cheers, Edhubbard (talk) 23:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Americans would not say "The Doors was...". Ray Manzarek, their keyboardist, who still refers to The Doors in the present tense (because he and the other surviving bandmembers occasionally get back together and do stuff, like jamming live with the Dave Matthews Band, etc.), says "The Doors are...", not the "The Doors is...". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
The name is plural because the subject is "Kings", which is plural. Plural band names are alway treated as such in US English, ie. The Smashing Pumpkins. It's like how you wouldn't say "The New York Yankees is . . ." WesleyDodds (talk) 23:06, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm... WD, you're definitely right about what sounds normal to my ears for the Yankees, and as I noted above, to say "The Doors was..." also sounds wrong. But, doing a little looking around, it seems like Dokerz is right about things like "the couple is/are..." or "the family is/are" or "Cambridge is/are ...". In all these cases, although they are collective nouns, the nouns treated as singular in AE, but not in BE, and there is a specific warning against confusing "the group of students" since the head of the NP is the group (singular) not the students (plural). So, the key here is the head of the NP? Whether it's singular or plural, so "A Flock of Seagulls is..." but "Kings of Leon are.."? Edhubbard (talk) 23:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
The thing is "the family" refers to more than one person, but the word itself is a singular grouping. "The Doors" means more than one Door, so it is treated as plural. So yes, "A Flock of Segulls" would be singular because the subject is "Flock", but "Kings of Leon" is plural because the subject is "Kings", even though both refer to groups of mroe than one individual. WesleyDodds (talk) 23:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
WD, I don't know if either one of us counts as a reliable source, but your examples, and reasoning sounds right to me. Noting Dokerz' example above, as an American, I would say "U2 is..." but understand that in the UK, given these rules, "U2 are..." would be the correct way to go. Dokerz? If we have consensus, we can try to add a more explicit hidden comment that captures this reasoning. In fact, in this case, it seems like AE and BE would converge, so perhaps it's not necessary? Cheers, Edhubbard (talk) 23:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Obviously, you can't cite me in an article, but I do have a B.A. in English, so in theory I know what I'm talking about :) WesleyDodds (talk) 23:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 :-) Edhubbard (talk) 23:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
The subject is 'group', not 'Kings', or something else. In American English, it is always '...is a group.' You can look on the majority of articles following this style. Group is singular, but their name suggests a plural noun. Hakeem (talk) 22:09, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Well the examples of "The Doors" given by Edhubbard is a bit different, because of the word "The" making the band's name plural. "Kings of Leon" is the band's name, not "The Kings of Leon", which makes it singular (AE) and of course since the band is the subject matter then 'is' would be the most correct option. I of course find this completely wrong, but in the interest of improving the standard of the article i feel it should be written correctly! Dokerz (talk) 22:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

UK slant[edit]

From the lead on down, there is a strong UK slant to this article, despite this being an American band popular in the US. What's up with that? It would be like doing an article on New Order and covering very little but their US chart placements and reviews. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 21:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It would be because of the band's immense popularity in the UK and Eire. However I would agree with you SMC, the article needs to be Americanized in many ways while still incorporating the importance of the bands success abroad Dokerz (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

So every no-name band on myspace gets their own Wikipedia page now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.48.54 (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

No just the good ones 213.202.141.55 (talk) 19:58, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Breaking in the UK[edit]

I've read the comments above and am surprised as to me as it stands the article doesn't emphasise enough the fact that the KOL became huge in the UK very early, while being pretty much ignored in the US (just look at thier chart positions in the Kings of Leon discography page), and I think their championing in the UK was very important and has been downplayed in this article. 81.157.195.129 (talk) 12:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Genre[edit]

So the comment in the page says to not change the line "american pop band". but the genre's are completely not pop in the slightest. which leads me to confusion. lolwut? Abhishek.mukher.g (talk) 04:18, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Obviously someone did change it, because it originally read as "American rock band"

Father's Name[edit]

Minor detail, but the article refers to their father as Leon rather than Ivan (...for a week or two wherever Leon was scheduled to preach). Leon was the grandfather of all four of the members. Ivan's middle name was also Leon, but they chose Leon as a reference to their grandfather which is their closest blood link. I'm fresh off a rolling stone article so happened to catch the detail.

I read the same article in rolling stone and I can confirm that this article does reference their father as Ivan "Leon" Followill. However just like the band members he is known by his middle name, not his first name. ("The three Followill brothers spent much of their youth traveling around the Southern United States with their father, Ivan "Leon" Followill, a traveling Pentecostal Church preacher...", taken from the beginning of 'Early Years 1999-2002') Dokerz (talk) 01:00, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

KoL Split?[edit]

Have Kings of Leon really split? Is MetroLyrics really a trust-worthy source when there's only one source for this information? Especially when quotes used are exactly the same as those posted in a 'clashes' (read: not split) article on Yahoo! News hours earlier? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattcoxonline (talkcontribs) 22:24, 12 October 2009 (UTC) Insert formula here

I think when Metrolyrics says that they are 'split' they mean 'split over who's going to control the next album because some members are worried about other ones getting most of the royalties'. So from the sounds of this they are having a bit of an argument, rather than having broken up. I wouldn't jump the gun and say that its the end of the band; you know, they're still ordinary people who'd get into arguments from time to time. Hitthat (talk) 05:29, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Pooped off stage[edit]

What really happened at the * concert at Verizon Wireless Amphitheater Friday night?

What we know is that Kings of Leon left the stage abruptly after three songs, and the concert was canceled. Safety concerns were cited.

It's the why where things get crazy.

The most popular explanation involves, of all things, bird feces. The Web and social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter are abuzz with the idea that bird feces fell onto a band member, which doesn't seem entirely preposterous.

A Tweet attributed to the band's drummer, Nate Followill, said that a pigeon had defecated on bassist Jared Followill.

"So sorry St. Louis. We had to bail, pigeons (expletive) in jareds mouth. Too unsanitary to continue," reads @doctorfollowill's Tweet.

After an explosion of online derision came another Tweet: " Don’t take it out on Jared, it’s the (expletive) venues fault. You may enjoy being (expletive) on but we don’t. Sorry for all who traveled many miles."

Followill's Tweets are now protected and not visible to non-followers.

Steve Pick, a freelance reviewer for the Post-Dispatch, said that the bassist for one of the two opening bands, The Stills, may have been hit by bird feces earlier in the night.

Bassist Oliver Corbeil had been standing a few feet back from where Jared Followill would later stand, Pick said. After he moved, singer Tim Fletcher "kind of laughed," and said that Corbeil was standing in a “(expletive) spot,” and that something had come down from above, Pick said.

The Stills then finished their set, Pick said.

The other opening band, The Postelles, reported no problems, at least on their Twitter feed.

Verizon representatives did not return emails and calls seeking an explanation of the cancellation Saturday morning.

There were also rumors that the band received a death threat, and that extreme heat, which overtook Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers' Mike Campbell earlier this week at Verizon, was the real culprit.

Pick said that after the third Kings of Leon song, the band members handed their guitars to roadies and sprinted off stage.


Pick said that he and fellow concert-goers wondered, "Is this a joke? Is this a weird piece of performance art?”

After the concert was canceled, concert-goers began chanting an expletive and calling for a refund, Pick said. There was a moment when it seemed like "things could turn ugly," he said, but Verizon security had quickly lined the stage.

A statement from the concert's promoter, Live Nation, didn't give a reason for the abrupt end of the show. But the company was quick to let fans know they have a refund coming.

Here's the Live Nation statement:

Due to the unexpected abbreviated Kings of Leon performance at Verizon Wireless Amphitheater, Live Nation is issuing refunds on all tickets.

Purchases made at the box office and outlets, will be refunded at point of purchase starting Monday, July 26. Purchases made online and via phone will be refunded starting Monday, July 26.

Box office hours are Monday- Friday 10 a.m.-6 p.m. and Saturday 10 a.m.- 2 p.m.

Post-Dispatch pop music critic Kevin C. Johnson contributed to this report. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.163.18 (talk) 19:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


  • I kind of think the final version describing the events of the St. Louis concert last night should be debated. The current text is essentially the band's official press release. No one from the two opening bands nor the venue has officially commented. As the other post noted, considering the Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers heat exhaustion experience just 5 days earlier, and the sole-source information available at this point, we may want to monitor and amend if more information becomes available. Prairiestate (talk) 04:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC) prairie
  • I support Kings of Leon in leaving the stage. Being intensively shit on by pigeons is not an allowable normal hazard of a concert venue. Feral pigeons carry diseases. IANAL, but I still say that its management should have ensured hygenic conditions for performers. There are ways to move feral pigeons out of premises, see bird control; e.g. Manchester United has routine measures to chase pigeons out of their grounds before football matches. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 09:49, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Fifth member[edit]

Quite a few bands have these kind of semi-hidden members... ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/u2logcom/26409526/ ) I noticed that the Kings of Leon's cousin and guitar tech Christopher 'Nacho' Followill ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/28397090@N04/4466335433/ ) has been playing a bunch of instruments on stage with the band. On the BBC music show Later... with Jools Holland - (Series 37 - episode 8) Nacho can clearly be seen playing percussion, some kind of glockenspiel and also keyboards. http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/video-kings-of-leons-guitar-rigs-revealed-204902
http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/news/kings-of-leon-following-msg-sellout-with-1003939375.story#/bbcom/news/kings-of-leon-following-msg-sellout-with-1003939375.story The band are up front about it - perhaps it's worth mentioning in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.178.242 (talk) 08:44, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... looked again: there is definitely an occasional fifth member, but for some reason he doesn't look like 'Nacho' - did a screen grab from the Jools Holland show here: http://i55.tinypic.com/2yw9u0p.jpg Whoever he is, he's playing a frikkin' guitar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.178.242 (talk)

Fashion and Style[edit]

In January, the Kings of Leon joined forces with cool Parisian brand Surface to Air to distil their rock ‘n’ roll aesthetic into a collection of clothes. The ensuing excitement was testament to the band’s impressive influence on men’s style. http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/daily/100107-kings-of-leons-fashion-collection-.aspx

In November 2010, Vogue.co.uk named the collection as one of its biggestfashion moments of the year: http://www.vogue.co.uk/celebrity-photos/101115-2010-fashion-moments.aspx —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buttercup79 (talkcontribs) 15:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Search in Google[edit]

Searching "Kings of Leon" on Google here is the text that is generated for the Wikipedia entry: "Kings of Leon is an American group of douchenozzles that formed in Mt. Juliet, Tennessee in 1999, consisting of brothers Anthony Caleb Followill..."

I don't know how to fix that but someone should make a correction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.186.33.48 (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

When google gets its snippets from the web, it stores a local cache of the webpage from when it last "crawled" the web. Occasionally, a vandalized version of a Wikipedia article gets cached at Google. There is absolutely nothing that we at Wikipedia can do about what happens at Google. The problem will go away when google recaches the Wikipedia page, which happens every day or so. So a) there's nothing we can do about it here at Wikipedia and b) it will go away on its own over at Google. --Jayron32 15:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Inadequate "Early Years"/personal information section[edit]

These guys are playing in Ireland tomorrow, in Slane, and are all over the media at the moment. I came here looking to find out about them, specifically the people in the band. I quickly discovered that the articles on each of the band members have been deleted leaving this article alone to tell us about them. While it is good at telling us about the evangelical background to their names and their formative music influences, it doesn't tell us about the origin of their most unusual surname, their religious beliefs (if any), their drug addictions and rehabilitations (if any), their personal crises/girlfriends, involvement in political campaigns (if any), and much else. 193.203.156.180 (talk) 18:06, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

These would all be interesting, informative and valuable additions to the article. Please research them, write them up and add them to the article. Why not create a "Family and Personal" section and include all of your suggestions in there? Cottonshirtτ 06:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Looping Blue Links[edit]

Band member blue links such as Caleb Followill and Nathan Followill lead directly back to the same article, so it makes sense to remove them. If anyone objects (of which I am not expecting anyone to, due to the recent article merger of the band members), feel free to discuss. Your Trusted Friend In Science (talk) 09:37, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

wrong word under "Commercial peak 2006-2010" header[edit]

In the second paragraph, first sentence under that section, it currently reads: "Although it was louded by some critics..." -- The word "louded" is incorrect in this context (indeed, it's not even a word) and should instead be "lauded," meaning "praised." I can't figure out how to edit via mobile, so throwing this out here in case someone else would care to make the correction. 72.53.194.237 (talk) 15:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Origin of the name[edit]

ORIGINS

Are they from the Brown place down near Walnut Creek, just outside Albion on Highway 271? I read /Albion/ and /Talihina/ as their place of origin. Albion is in Pushmataha County and Talihina is in Leflore County. They are about 10 miles apart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.151.31.56 (talk) 17:43, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


The article reads "The group is named for their grandfather Leon from Talihina, Oklahoma.[1]", where [1] is Rolling Stone article "Kings of Leon Revealed: 13 Things You Didn't Know About Rock's Hottest Band". However, I just read it and found nothing about the origin of the name "Kings of Leon".-Ignacio Agulló — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.165.151.69 (talk) 02:29, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Members articles[edit]

Isn't it a little ridiculous the members don't have articles? After all, Kings of Leon is one of the biggest rock bands in the world right now. Just because the band members attained notability because they were members of the band does not preclude independent articles. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 16:02, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I fully agree. ~MiD (talk/contribs)~ 23:28, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
I agree too They are rock stars, and there are far less famous musicians without individual articles. ~bugo (talk/contribs)~ 20:47, 09 January 2013 (UTC)
okay, so since two people agree with me, I'll take it upon myself to recreate the articles. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 21:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
What it comes down to is the question whether or not if they are notable by themselves. Caleb's personal problems might be noteworthy to mention because they were widely reported in the media, what about the rest? Him getting married? Or Jared's preferred playing style? Or Nathan and his nasty words about Glee? Matthew in particular lacks any notability whatsoever. Granted, these articles haven't been updated for a while, but I find it hard to believe that any real substantial information can somehow make these articles notable by themselves. But if anyone can find the sources, go nuts! --Soetermans. T / C 16:08, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
Look, I haven't memorized the notability standards for individual musicians, but I think these guys fit the bill. Kings of Leon have to be one of the top ten rock bands in the world right now, and the individual members have been the subject of a very entertaining HBO documentary. I'm sure i could find plenty of biographical information on each. Granted, it will probably focus on the band contribution, but who cares? Jared in particular branched off and started a new band, so I think I'll recreate his article first. As for the rest, I'm sure I could find stuff on them as well. ~EDDY (talk/contribs)~ 01:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The main reason I undid your edits earlier was because you only reverted them. If you re-instate the articles, make sure you expand on them as well. Maybe WP:WPMUSIC can help you out if you drop them a line? --Soetermans. T / C 13:50, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
It's five days short from a month's time since my last message, and none of you took the time to expand the articles. I've reverted them again. It is better to have no individual articles, and a good main aricle, than four articles with no substantial information. You can undo my edits when you actually take the time to improve them. Thanks, and happy editing. --Soetermans. T / C 09:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

The band members have their own pages, but the links to them always redirect to the Kings of Leon article. The articles for the individuals in the band are more than adequate to not have this be this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.41.214 (talk) 21:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi 24.23.41.214 First, sorry for editing your subsection, I feel it is part of this here discussion. Second, no, they aren't substantial at all. Another editor undid the redirects, and nobody in over a month time added any substantial information. If you feel you are up to the task, be my guest! But don't just revert the redirect, do some constructive editing. --Soetermans. T / C 10:50, 7 August 2013 (UTC)