Jump to content

Talk:Jonas Brothers/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

Picture?

Who took away the picture? It should be put back on. nobody cares about that fag69.219.160.227 20:15, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It appears it has been deleted due to bad Fair use rationale. Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 20:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

the page looks boring without picture the picture has a link, doest seem to be working we really need a picture, but the page is now protected!

New Album

They Have a New Album coming out on August 7th. I dont no what it is called thou. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ndrebel2011 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

It's called Jonas Brothers(also known as the jonas fags). I saw that somewhere, it said "And their new self-titled album comes out on August 7th."

And the album debuted at #5 on Billboard 200.

Unlock

I think you people are overreacting over one vandal. Not everyone likes this untalented "band". OfficerPhil 19:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

It was actually semi-protected due to multiple (at least 4) different IP vandals vandalizing the article over a period of a week or so. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 21:57, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

The question was peculiar anyway; what does it matter whether one likes the band (I'd never heard of them)? --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

All I want to do is add that Nick Jonas has announced that he has type 1 diabetes. Gosh!Jonasgrl9 22:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

why does joe jonas have a link back to the same page, and nick jonas link to a slightly different page (the names are just different) ? this article really needs revising 24.96.12.41 15:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I am so sorry. I edited the page once, but they were all useful facts. The page seemed like it hadn't been edited in a while so I added a few new, true things. I'm sorry if I caused locking this up. JamaGirlBritt 20:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


where's the pic

I want the picture of the jonas brothers there and there isn't one. I am getting mad!!! I really want to see it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.74.47.117 (talk) 02:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC).

Try a fan-site. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 09:42, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I posted a picture

But it's not showing up...it's a picture of them at an MTV Promo, it's from 2006

You need to upload the picture to Wikipedia to post it on articles. Plus you have to provide a valid copyright permission to use it. Just posting an image you found somewhere is not enough. Thief12 17:16, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

J.O.N.A.S. Pilot

The article refers to this new show airing on Disney Channel. This is untrue. Many pilots have been shot and never seen the light of day - that is exactly what a Pilot is. For example the pilot Aly & AJ shot last year.

Disney Channel has not confirmed any of this info.

Or this one. WAVY 10 19:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

However, their show is expected to premiere in 2008 if it goes through (which is expected.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.44.12.104 (talk • contribs) 00:48 20 August 2007 (UTC).

"J.O.N.A.S!" is to be on Disney Channel, set to premiere in 2008. It says so on IMDB.com. Unintended Disaster.Stands for Junior Operatives Networking As Spies


On 'Disney Channel's Happy U Year' when they were showing what to ecpect in 2008, they played a brief clip of it. It hat 'J.O.N.A.S!' across the bottom. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MusicBoi94 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Why wouldn't they air it? They're incredibly popular right now. They have a new album, a new tour, two shows and Camp Rock. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.234.115 (talk) 21:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Christian Rock?

Judging from what I've been able to find, including them in that category seems even more dubious than keeping Aly & AJ, who have had at least one single that could justify their inclusion (Never Far Behind). In addition, I don't remember hearing ANYTHING about their faith. WAVY 10 19:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

They are! They said they are and Nick sang a song called Dear God so HA-HA! Twilight Sea 15:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)Twilight Sea

"Dear God" could be an expression of any god-based religion or just an expression of exasperation. "They said they are" might not quite meet Wikipedia's standards for citing references. I won't get into "HA-HA". Ninquerinquar 19:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

They are,they pray before evey show you can watch them on youtube thank you very much Twilight Sea 04:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Twilight Sea

I don't see "Dear God" on either album so far, so unless you're talking about Nick singing the song at a concern, Twilight Sea, I hate to say that there's not much of a leg to stand on. WAVY 10 13:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

They have a CD that only Nick sang on it Twilight Sea 22:47, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Twilight Sea

Which one is it (or is it on a yet-to-be-released CD)? WAVY 10 14:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

its nick first album wich eh did by himself. and they are christian they as she said pray before every show.

Since a large percentage of Americans identify themselves as Christians, that is not sufficient to say any music they perform is Christian music. The music should talk to their faith in some way. A mention of Jesus or Christ somewhere would cement it. God is much too generic as mentioned above. I see none of this in the Jonas Brothers music.

Well they are christians because they wear purity rings which says they will be true to their faith and not have sex until they are married. like God tells us in the bible! Also in Popstar! magazine they asked them what they would save if their house was on fire and Nick said my gutiar and bible!!Twilight Sea 23:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Twilight Sea

The fact that they are Christian is not the point being disputed. That is what they are. It does not follow that that is what their music is. How is their music different from Pop Rock or Punk Rock? Religious music of any type is music ABOUT the religion, not music just created by people who practice a religion. Or is there some definition being used that I am not aware of? --NrDg 22:29, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


They aren't Christian Rock. The possibility that they are Christian is another story. They are not Christian Rock and should be removed from the project. Twilight Sea is just a crazed Jonas fan. There is a Nicholas Jonas CD never released. It was done in the style of a young Michael Jackson. It flopped in the production stage. Maybe someone should find out what happened with their father and Wyckoff Assembly, the church they used to pastor...—Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.88.222.30 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 15 August 2007 (UTC)


I guess what they mean by christian rock is that some of the lyrics in their songs talk about christianity like in underdog they say the last will be first which is from the bible and in Time for me to fly they say "Time for me to open up my heart and knock on heavens door" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.72.125.29 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 16 August 2007 (UTC).

These could also be literary allusions to the bible. I still think this is too week to classify them as musicians who specialize in performing music about the Christian faith.--NrDg 16:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

We should not be attempting to make our own judgment on whether they're Christian Rock or not. If reliable sources identify them as such, that what we'll say. If not, we can't go making stuff up. Friday (talk) 16:17, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, find some published article identifying them as Christian Musicians and we can add it to the article with attribution. Our own judgment would be original research which we are not supposed to do. --NrDg 16:21, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Just to add, I did a fast web search to find a reference. There are lots that say they perform Christian music but every website I found would not pass Wikipedia's rules for a being a reliable primary or secondary source. A user comment on some page is definitely unreliable. I also class religious sites as being unreliable as they have a self-interest in claiming them as one of their own. We need something like the Jonas Brothers themselves identifying themselves as performing Christian Music or an article in some major newspaper like USA Today making the same classification.--NrDg 16:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


I don't think we can automatically class "religious sites" unreliable. I think it has to be taken on a case by case basis.
After all, if we accept your thesis, NrDg, then logic forces us to extend this dubious (imo) "unreliability" to religious believers themselves. Also, we must include atheist or atheistic sites (i.e. Driveby Media sites). So where would it end?
This is a perfect example of what lawyers call the slippery slope. PainMan 22:22, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
My point had nothing to do with beliefs, it was more with whether or not those sources of information are neutral players in all this in classifying the Jonas Brothers as performers of Christian Music. I agree we need to look at them on a case by case basis and if some reliable secondary source that happens to be a Christian publication classifies them as such we could probably use that. Most of the sites I saw in my quick scan would not meet that standard, but I have not done an exhaustive search. --NrDg 23:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Nick who is married to jackie had an album that was going to be released, however, when the producers of the album heard all 3 of the brothers together, they dropped Nick's album and signed all 3 brothers right on the spot. Nick has many songs on that album that are about his faith and they were somehow leaked onto the internet, giving crazed fans something else to listen to. Among those songs are "Dear God" and "Don't Walk Away" which has to do with not walking away from your faith. While Nick's album was faith-based, the JONAS BROTHERS two albums are pop rock and don't discuss the issue of faith and Christianity.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.44.12.104 (talk • contribs) 00:48 20 August 2007 (UTC).

Christianity may be their faith but they are classified as pop/rock nevertheless. 67.184.223.232 23:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The Jonas Brothers are Christian. They pray all of the time and they wear purity rings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tremorcat8 (talk • contribs) 19:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Here: http://www.crossrhythms.co.uk/articles/music/Jonas_Brothers_Its_these_guys_not_Busted_who_hit_in_the_US_with_Year_3000/27777/p1/

This should clear this up. It's the best interview/article I've ever found on them. They discuss their faith and it's influence on their career and their music. Nick's first album was a Christian album, but it was either not released or had a limited release.

http://www.fye.com/Nicholas-Jonas-Front-Page_stcVVproductId2981774VVcatId455366VVviewprod.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexis92ocs2010 (talk • contribs) 18:41, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

It clears it up. Major quote was "Kevin explains. 'With our music we're trying to be successful. It's definitely a pop record. It's a pop/rock record for the mainstream.'" --NrDg 18:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Also the album site lists Nick's first album as Genre: Gospel, not Christian. A nit but it seems to be important to the people who classify music. --NrDg 19:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Can we REnominate this for deletion?

Not only is this article substandard, but this band in no way deserves a wikipedia article. I hadn't even heard of them till I stumbled across this article.

This article needs to GO! It's an embarassment to the entire wikipedia project to have this kind of fan bilge.

My wife says, "What about New Kids on the Block?" Despite the extremely low quality of the music, lyrics and choreography, they were a legitimate economic phenomenon and sparked the last wave of Boy Bands (along with Menudo and New Edition; one could argue that "New Kids" was the "Elvization" of the previous two bands...).

These dudes simply aren't worthy. But what music since 1991 is???

PainMan 22:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion in Wikipedia is not an "Honor" for something that is "worthy", it whether or not is meets the Wikipedia inclusion standards for notability "A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject." I believe that this article meets that standard. We need to be careful that we don't let our own values of worth cloud our judgment too much. --NrDg 23:30, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with NrDg. I would also like to point out that they're a fairly new band and there for won't have a large fan base. Also Disney has been doing a lot to promote the Jonas Brothers so just about any one who watches Disney will know about them. Alright this is the last thing I would like to say just because you don't know about them doesn't mean there not a good band or that they don't deserve a page on wikipedia.Smileyface 12 91 09:03, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Smileyface_12_91 and NrDg. Isn't wonderful to have new bands to be introduced to on Wikipedia - Wow. I believe the Jonas Brothers have a great sound and you should give them a chance. Disney approves of them as they did Nsync, but I don't recall them approving New Kids or New Edition. I am a few years older then PainMan and enjoy the music from the Jonas Brother as well as music from the 80's and 90's, Don't you think that the Jonas Brothers are targeting a younger age group then myself and possible you and your wife considering that the music you prefer is from before 1991.216.134.174.246 21:57, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Smileyface - the very phrase "targeting a[n]...age group..." is the very problem. Art should not have to run the gauntlet of marketing hacks, focus groups, test audiences and everything else that Floyd mercilessly criticized in the famed song, "Have a Cigar" from Wish You Were Here; Rush did the same in "Superconductor" (from 1991's Presto).
There are a small number of songs post-1991 that I do enjoy, but not many. Living here in Vegas, we've had the opportunity to see the Eagles, U2, Rush, Stevie Nicks, Harry Connick, Jr, et al--all of whose shows were outstanding (none more so than Rush's three-hour extravaganza). Obvious there's always going to be an element of the generational divide in musical taste (my father can't stand groups that you and I, probably, consider to be the greatest in pop musical history).
The problem is that the groups and signers who dominate the charts today simply can't compare in the quality of lyrics, composition and musicianship. How can anyone seriously compare Stevie Nicks to La Spears?
PainMan 05:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


I used "worthy" in the sense that this "band" is not significant enough to warrant an article on them. I've never even heard one of their songs. I didn't mean it as a value judgement.

I stand by my opinion that this article should be deleted.

To quote Neil Peart:

Art as Expression not as market campaigns...

(The Disney Machine is the very embodiment of the mass production of music, movies, TV shows such as this band or High School Musical, etc.)

PainMan 05:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to revisit the decision see Wikipedia:Deletion review for details on how to challenge it. This article was nominated for deletion on February 22, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonas Brothers for details. In my opinion, notability is much greater now then it was in February. I strongly doubt there could be a persuasive argument made to delete the article now.--NrDg 14:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Yep- this article won't (and shouldn't) be deleted. We should keep the crap out of it, but we should not delete it outright. Friday (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)


I know a losing battle when I see one. I was being somewhat hyperbolic when I suggest a renomination for deletion.
However I will check the relevant article; I have no intention of challenging the original decision to keep.
I still don't think they warrant an article but I'm obviously in the minority on this one.
PainMan 05:38, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

You are very much in the minority on this one. They have a No. 5 album right now plus the number 1 single on I-tunes as well as having a No. 31 song in the Top 40 from their first album that did much worse and just the Disney connection alone would warrant it. How about trying to delete one hit wonders which have had way less impact like Charlie Dore, Faith No More, Benny Mardones, The Korgis, and so on? Even in those cases it would be wrong to do so. 70.152.197.21 08:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

They so deserve a wiki page. They play their own instruments and write their own music together. They have a #6 music video on TRL for their hit "SOS" that the youngest one, Nick (age 14, mind you) wrote himself. In nine days, they sold out the Gramercy Theater in NYC three nights in a row, the Palace Theater in PA a few days later, and then the Palace Theater in Syracuse the night after.
They warrant an article. Just because they were born after all the bands you name, doesn't mean they can't be any good. Stop being so narrowminded, that's not what an encyclopedia is about. It's about getting the facts straight and giving as many facts as possible, about as many topics as possible. That's what Diderot tried to do in 1751, and I believe that that's what Wikipedia is trying to do as well.
Write your own narrowminded dictionary for people who are trying to hide from modern music. The 80s are gone, get over it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexis92ocs2010 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Assume good faith; please don't call other editors "narrowminded." It fails to add any substance to a debate. A short summation of their successes to date would be a much more effective means of making your point. Snood199 (talk) 05:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

People need to stop adding stuff about how they hate the jonas brothers because NO ONE CARES!!!! Keep your opinoins to yourselves!!

WP:BLP violations

I have had to remove multiple statements from this article and this talk page multiple times as they were in violation of WP:BLP. Any statement about a living person needs a source, especially possibly controversial ones. Continued WP:BLP violations may result in the article being temporarily full-protected. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 15:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

This is the type of edit I'm talking about. One more WP:BLP violation in the next 24 hours and I will fully protect this article. WP:BLP is a policy to be taken seriously. Mr.Z-man 02:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Jonas Brothers Live

The Jonas Brothers opened up for Jesse McCartney on the Right Where You Want Me tour. Could someone put that in?

Rubybubbles 23:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Picture

Were did the picture go??? This page has had about a hundred so what's up???Smileyface 12 91 08:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

For real people we effectively need a picture taken and uploaded by the same person and properly licensed for use by Wikipedia. Any commercial picture that is found on the web is EXTREMELY unlikely to be usable by copyright rules and will be removed. Basically if you want to see a picture of a real person here YOU have to take the picture and upload it and give wikipedia free use of it or find someone to do it. --NrDg 15:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I see. Well everything makes since now! I guess someones going to get a picture of them eventually right.Smileyface 12 91 23:53, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

The JOnas Brothers also opened for one of their many bffs Miley Cyrus on her HAnnh montana/ miley cyrus best of both world tours. 75.140.17.147 (talk) 00:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)Dnb33 20 Febuary 2008

Sales

I have noticed that for the "Jonas Brothers" sales, it displays that the album has sold +220k in the US, but I thought I should inform you that the album has actually sold more. Soundscan as of last week:


42 JONAS BROTHERS JONAS BROTHERS 18,460 18,567 -1 270,941 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.201.227.97 (talk) 16:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Other Band Members

Jack Lawless, the drummer. he has a new wikipedia page and they should link his name from the Jonas Brothers' page to his page. Just a thought —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonasfan21 (talk • contribs) 22:55, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Films

we should add: Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus: Best of Both Worlds Concert Tour and their epiosde of hannah montana in a nice, neat table —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.186.237 (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


Thank You

Thank you who ever rewrote this article. I tried several times but never seemed to hit the right format and get my ideas straighted enough to be a ligit article. Thank you for adding the Guitar/Bass/Drum players and keeping my bits about the guitars. Also thank you for adding the album history; that's important. --74.79.77.193 01:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Band In A Bus-JoBros' next album!

http://www.bandinabus.com/ that site is the official jobro band in bus site and it tells you about how they're recording their next cd in the bus on tour with miley! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.220.140 (talk) 05:38, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Credit Due

To whoever is in charge of the article, first of all...great job. I was wondering if you could add a credit to the song "Joy To The World (A Christmas Prayer)." It was produced by Raymond Boyd. So it could read, "Joy To The World (A Christmas Prayer)" produced by Raymond Boyd.

It would be nice to give credit to the producer that helped get them signed.

Thanks, JoBro Fan

Wikipedia should add how Joe Jonas (what a name!) fell at the AMA's and cut his hand and knee while preforming S.O.S. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.190.191 (talk) 00:52, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Joe Jonas/Amanda Michalka

Joe Jonas wrote the song "MOVE ON" to Amanda Michalka, and AJ wrote the "Potiental break up song" for joe —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.125.20.189 (talk) 06:06, 27 November 2007 (UTC)


R U serious? --Meliss402 (talk) 21:09, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

NO! Neither of them wrote either of those songs for eachother! That is very bad rumor that has been going for a long time. They did not have this huge tragic break-up everyone says they did just because they want some drama. Joe and AJ BOTH have said they did NOT write those for eachother! Their break-up (as Joe says) was because of the long distance thing. It was hard to stay in contact and they agreed it was time to move on. Move On and the Potential Break Up Song ARE NOT FOR EACHTOHER!! JBF.org is a link (as seen below) 71.158.193.222 (talk) 20:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)


thx 4 clearing it up!--Meliss402 (talk) 21:14, 15 February 2008 (UTC) Yea they should also add more about joe and kevin in general! I mean its mostly an article about nick not that nick isnt awesome its just i luv them all!!

Grammar

It was supposed to be followed by a December release of a self-titled solo album, but the album had been pushed back.[17] But did get a limited release.[18] Nick, along with Kevin and Joe, had written several other songs for the album.[10]

"But did get a limited release." This is not a complete sentence. If someone could fix that, I would be appreciative.

Jedii42 (talk) 08:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Joe also plays the keeboard. Nick also plays the piano. I went to their concert.

jonas friends

according to people magazine, they are family friends of the cyrus family. and miley and nick MAY have a relationship in the future. we should put that down. and that the girl from the song mandy, who's named mandy, are the boys's best friend, joe's ex-girlfriend AJ dated Joe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.189.96 (talk) 01:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

This article is primarily about the band, not the people in the band. Gossip definitely does not belong here. --NrDg 01:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
We should make three new pages-one for joe, one for kevin, one for nick. then we can put it there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.224.224.169 (talk) 23:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

a little more information about there show and movie please!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.148.249 (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Platinum

They have finally went Platinum, its on the billboard official page if you need proof or source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jammy2 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

please add ru:Jonas Brothers link —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonasrussia (talk • contribs) 21:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

To find out some other information about the Jonas Brothers you could go to their myspace page www.myspace.com/jonasbrothers or thier youtube account www.youtube.com/jonasbrothersmusic

The Jonas Brothers just put up some of their new tour dates for their new tour "When You Look Me in the Eyes". You can but thier new cd in any store that sells cds, and you can also but their Bonus Jonas DVD. Jonas Brothers are Hawt!


Jonas Brothers are working on their brand new cd that will come out in 2008. They are going all over the country, see if thier coming to a city near you!

Check back soon for more information to follow! Hoped it helped you to go and see them in concert! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.141.99 (talk) 01:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Their new movie called "CAMP ROCK" will be premered on Disney Channel in June. Not only a movie, but a BRAND NEW SERIES! It's called J.O.N.A.S. and it'll be premered in the Fall of 2008. It is about three rock stars who are secrelty undercover spies! It will also be on Disney Channel. More information to follow.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.141.99 (talk) 01:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Best of Both Worlds Tour

The Best of Both World tour is still under future projects or whatever it is called but the Jonas Brothers are done with it now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.138.164.107 (talk) 20:24, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


maybe??

the jonas bros r on the breakfast breakes add should that be added??

--Meliss402 (talk) 21:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Single Pages

shouldn't nick, joe, and kevin [maybe even frankie] have their own page instead of grouping them all together? then they could have their own stuff like personal life, etc... Shaynatoh1997 (talk) 15:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)shayna

Small Error in Nick's Birthday

8:30am Feb 16, 2008 Near the bottom of this article, Nick's birthday says 1992.. Given his extensive involvement with Broadway, etc... I believe it should be 1982.. Isn't he the oldest in the group?

NO ERROR

Sorry, theres no error , nick was born in 1992. hes 14 years old, so its ok. hes the youngest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.42.86.210 (talk) 21:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Cheers 65.27.159.49 (talk) 13:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Info in article is correct and referenced. September 16, 1992. --NrDg 16:41, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

♥ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.7.227.202 (talk) 21:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Please Stop Editing !

people keep editing this article and i am trying to use it for a speech! does anyone have any respect for people using wikipedia any more? Now it says 'stupid' jonas brothers in the first paragraph, i don't know what information is real anymore!

Separate articles for Joe, Kevin, Nick

Periodically over the last year separate articles have been created for each of the brothers including just recently. These articles have been redirected back to this article as there is nothing in the separate articles that is not already in or could be added to this article and there is nothing that shows individual notability separate from the group notability. In the past the separate articles have had the redirects protected to prevent article re-creation and I have restored that state. --NrDg 20:36, 7 March 2006

But, now that the Jonas Brothers are starring in movies, like Camp Rock, and they all have different roles, we should maybe separate them into 3 articles? It's just a suggestion but maybe we can do it like how they did for Aly & AJ, where they have 2 separate articles, Alyson Michalka and Amanda Michalka. Would anyone add to that? Thanks. xo ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 22:45, 8 April 2008 (UTC)Calliegal

Are they notable as individuals though? They've only acted out in four films, and two of them as themselves, as s Bro. Alyson and Amanda Michalka are notable as actresses, being in many shows, acting out a character. --staka (T ・C) 00:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds doubtful to me. Can you find any articles about one of them that isn't an article about the band?Kww (talk) 02:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.20.21 (talk) 04:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Good points. Remember, the Jonas brothers are only notable as a group, not as individuals yet. Aly + AJ are completely different. That group is the coalescence of a person who has already achieved notability on her own (Alyson Michalka) and her sister. If you use a boolean google search and search for Alyson michalka and return hits that don't include her sister, their are tons of pages about just her. Try doing that with the Jonas brothers, they star in movies together, sing together, and most importantly got famous together. If one of the brothers died in a tragic accident, that would make him notable. As would if one of the brothers got nominated 10th or so in like a "maxim's top 50 teen stars" list and start to differentiate himself from the group as being the most-talented or commanding double or triple salary for a role, than his brothers, or other evidence that one's star power is developing at a rate distinguishable from the group, then this talk page is the place to make a case for it. We're not against making 3 separate pages for the brothers, lets just wait until its justified. I'll support the idea once they fit wikipedia's encyclopedia guidelines. Sentriclecub (talk) 01:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I think at first it wasn't necessary for separate articles. But I think as time has gone on they are starting to come into their own as individuals. For instance there's tons of info about Nick growing up, going through Broadway, and starting the band that could be used. And when their show J.O.N.A.S! comes out they will all have their own characters. I have LOTS of information about them separately and if you started new pages for them I could contribute some very valuable info. 74.142.205.253 (talk) 00:14, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

This Jonas Brothers article should be fundamentally about the group and what it has done together as a group. Then there

needs to be seperate biography articles for each individual. But for the group article, one glaring hole: A picture identifying the three brothers with the name that goes with each person. This would answer the starting question of "WHO" are they? And with the names, the dates of birth. That is because people want this fundamental question answered, how old are they? Rickster77 (talk) 13:23, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

SEPERATE ARTICLES DEFINITELY NEEDED IN MY OPINON. ALSO, SOMETHING OUGHT TO BE SAID ABOUT THE MOVIE THEY'RE GOING TO BE IN, CAMP ROCK. AND WHY IS THIS TERRIBLE DISSAGE IN THE ARTICLE BEING TOLERATED?! :O —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.222.237.191 (talk) 02:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

can i write the seperate articles? or can i write 1 of them? Joe's article? (can you give me instructions? plz) JULI
I agree we have to separate the articles. I think we should split them after the Camp Rock movie. I would be happy to create one of the articles. But it's still not decided if we should separate them. I personally think we should separate it after the movie goes worldwide. --RyRy5 (talk) 05:59, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I think there is a misunderstanding here that we're afraid to ask. Does it say something that each of the Jonas brothers dont have their own article? Does it mean they haven't reached a distinct level of accomplishment? Does it mean that they are less successful than other biographies who have their own wikipedia article?

Of course not! Each one of the Jonas brothers have lived an admirable life. They have worked hard, played by the rules, stayed out of trouble, and been excellent role models for America's youth (and abroad!). Whatever decision comes out of this, I hope no fans are disappointed with any temporary decision (remember, a decision to keep the brothers grouped together is only because of wikipedia's policies at any given time--not permanent! don't give up!).

Look for example at Donald Trump, Jr. who is obviously no where near the popularity and fan-base of any of the three Jonas brothers. The Jonas brothers are a household name, they are right up there in celeb soap box status as Miley Cryus or Vanessa Hudgens. If you're concerned that your duty as a fan is to spread their web presence and make every significant detail about them part of the sum total of human knowledge then try out a user subpage wp:sp or make a myspace.com account dedicated to them, or a geocities website all about their every move!

Saving the best part for last-- if you really want help from a experienced wikipedian and just want to know the "secret method" to successfully pushing your agenda, I can possibly point you on the right track...

If you read my edits to science, biology and chemistry you will see my mission is to make wikipedia better, just a tiny bit at a time. I'm not especially involved in this Jonas brothers case one way or the other. If we find that the Jonas brothers each getting their own page meets the goals/guidelines of wikipedia and makes the encycylopedia stronger then great! Your best bet to make a strong argument is to make a comparison to an analogous situtation, and mitigate away the differences, and ultimately try to make the case that the seperate articles are justified above and beyond the analogous case. For example, if the Jonas brothers faces resistance due to "well, they only got famous as a group-never as individuals" then try to provide a counter-example which the resistant argument would apply to, yet the consequent is broken. In other words, turn it around! Say "well IF individuals of a group who aren't notable as individuals have a group page and they have individual pages THEN wtf".

This is valid because its a valid syllogism - one of the strongest logical arguments (deduction). I read on this page a strictly weak analogy, when the Jonas brothers were compared to Aly+AJ. This is a weak analogy because Alyson Michalka has achieved notability on her own, with no assistance from her younger sister. Anyone wishing to make a very strong and convincing case for the expansion of the Jonas brothers to include individual pages should start with Hanson (band).

I feel reasonably confident that no one can make a argument for notability of the individual Hanson brothers, but not the individual Jonas brothers. Even their one-hit song MMMbop has its own page, which is okay, but they even gave their associated album underneath its own page, which contains nothing beyond what is already listed on the MMMbop page. So if anybody wants to continue the case for expanding the Jonas brothers, attach the Hanson brothers analogy to the argument. That way, anyone who wishes to deny the expansion must affirm why each Hanson brother is more notable than each Jonas brother (which is definitely an argument I wouldn't want to have to try). Its an uphill battle, whoever wants to continue the argument comparing individual statistics between the two groups of brothers should be able to do so without much resistance as long as you include some data, and respect the opinions of whomever disagrees with you. Sentriclecub (talk) 10:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

The arguments on this page are baffling. I came to this page trying to find out how old these kids are, and left confused, as a reader and editor. You are in serious need of a neutral opinion, which I have. There is no reason not to make an individual page for each brother...or you could have one page for the band, and one of the brothers, two brothers, or three brothers. Basically, one brother's individual page should be completely unrelated to the others', so the fact that the other two have basically no individual accomplishments is a moot point when considering Nick. I'll say it again, aside from the problem of factual overlap, which can be easily addressed, the brothers' individual pages should have nothing to do with the band's page. Wikipedia is not a fansite or soapbox, and their accomplishments are completely irrelevant to this situation. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. What matters is whether or not there is enough information to physically create individual pages for them. Clearly, there is. Let's get this straight one more time: The "notability" issue is a moot point, and anyone pushing it might need to be accused of wikilawyering. These kids are "notable" to millions of adolescent teens, much more so than Bryophytes are notable to the small group of scientists that actually care, or Yvonne Sciò is to Naomi Campbell fans. Whether or not you perceive these topics to be "notable" is an entirely separate issue. The "jonas brothers" page, as it is, is a dysfunctional mess. The "Nick Jonas" section does not flow at all into the next, it's as if the other two brothers and band's formation came out of nowhere. Not to mention that simple information, like their ages, is nowhere to be found. To start, try re-naming "Nick Jonas: Discovery and solo album (1999-2005)" to "The Jonas Brother: Discovery and Solo Album," this will make it slightly less confusing until you sort out this mess... JohnnyCalifornia (talk) 13:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

ok i think that the jonas brothers are sucessfull enough to have their own seperate articles, i mean other bands have seperate articles for the members so why not the jobros?? plus i think that each jonas brother is unique in his own way, they have their own personality, not to mention they play different insturment and their roles in the tv shows and movies are not the same! someone should start the seperate articles.... thank you! —Preceding Jonasbrothersfan122 comment added by 72.140.46.83 (talk) 01:43, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
what are you guys talking about?? there is a seperate article for joe jonas! u can check your self —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.46.83 (talk) 23:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
There should be separate articles for separate people. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.95.139.248 (talk) 14:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I say that just because the "monkey-see monkey-do" effect has come upon this discussion, it doesn't mean they have to create articles to please the fans. It should be for the entire community, and I feel it would take too much work to stop attacks from four articles at once.--Kermit4Prez (talk) 06:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I think we should merge the articles at the moment. They are only notable for being in the band, if they have done nothing else, it wouldn't exactly comply with Wikipedia policies. Until they become notable for individual works, then we could split the articles. Qsung (talk) 15:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Punk? Excuse me?

Alright, I'm not really sure what "pop-punk" is. All I know is what the pop-punk article says, which doesn't answer my question, but it mentioned Green Day. And I take from that fact that either A) this article is horridly wrong in calling the Jonas Brothers any kind of punk, or B) Pop-Punk is really just Pop with a different name...Could someone please explain? 69.236.76.121 (talk) 00:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Pop-punk is a musical style that usually has fast, up-tempo beats, with heavy usage of power chords and distorted guitars, with melodic vocals. The songs are usually relatively short, between a minute and half to three minutes, and are set at a blistering pace, but with a light hearted pop lyrics and melodies. Pop-punk differs from normal punk because the vocals are usually less melodic in punk and more abrasive, and the lyrics are also usually more obtrusive and violent. Both styles have very high-tempo rhythms though, and often rely on similar power chord and distorted guitar tones. On a whole, normal punk is much more abrasive then pop-punk. Blink 182 is another classic example of pop-punk. I feel like the Jonas Brothers fall under the category of pop-rock, not pop-punk. I hope that helps, I can clarify more if you want. (WaltBusterkeys (talk) 01:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC))
Pop-punk sounds like the same thing as power pop to me. I suppose the point is that they are a rock- and pop- based boy band in the Osmond Brothers tradition as opposed to a R&B-based boy band in the Jackson 5 tradition. Timothy Horrigan (talk) 23:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Recently, I've been seeing a lot of Wikipedia articles on different bands that are not associated and have different styles to Pop Punk being labeled respectively as Pop Punk, and its truly annoying.

while Pop Punk is a musical style there is a scene that normally follows it and they clearly are not part of the punk rock scene, and although some of their songs have similarities to Pop Punk, they should not be labeled as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.2.109.22 (talk) 16:09, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

JONAS BROS ARENT POP ROCK!Vitual aelita (talk) 16:10, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

PUnk and pop punk are more like:Green Day/Blink 182/Sum 41/Fall OUt Boy

The jonas brothers are more like pop like:Metro station/Chris Brown/Coldplay/Britney Spears

Im sorry but I have to say I'm not sure what genre of music the Jonas Brothers play, but I really don't think its Pop. Pop music makes me think of 90s boy bands and the Jonas Brothers' sound is totally different than that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kgreg10 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I mean come on, you cant work for disney and still be punk 99.139.234.11 (talk) 19:07, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

I have no anti-Jonas bias but I would say, as someone who enjoys pop AND pop-punk, that I would not consider the songs I've heard from the JB to be pop-punk. If someone seriously disagrees, I think they need to provide specific examples of Jonas Brothers songs which exemplify the genre. GBrady (talk) 14:23, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

In the Nokia Green Room, one of the bands asked the Jonas Brothers what type of music they played. they said they played pop-rock. there's the proof. if they say their music is pop-rock, then i think it is pop rock. so the article is correct.

what if they called themelves digital hardcore techno? would that make them a tecno band? harlock_jds (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

they are pop-rock but I do agree that they are NOT pop-punk. They are not just pop. (and I don't know how to sign this so can someone do it for me?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patches9713 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, guys JB is Pop-Rock, so stop arguing... i know this cause i listen to green day too - Sasha

O rly? I listen to Dethklok, Dream Theater, and Alice in Chains. Does this mean the Jonas Brothers are Progressive-Death Metal-Grunge? Your dear friend, --98.217.61.141 (talk) 22:39, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

The jonas brothers are not punk but they are condidered a pop band. And by the way... Metro Station is counted as an emo band. At least that is what everyone I know says. Don't blame me... I am just the messenger!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.242.95.139 (talk) 20:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

The jonas brothers are a pop band with some eliments of rock. Think about it, they work for disney and have other people write their songs that contain catchy and poppy tunes (by the way REAL artists write their own songs). Pop punk would be bands like blink 182, green day, cartel, simple paln, sugarcult, exc. PUNK would be bands like pennywise, anti-flag, operation ivy, misfits, rancid, exc. the jonas brothers don't sound like either of those genres, they fall into the same catagory as kelly clarkson, miley cirus, bon jovi, exc. these are all pop acts that have some eliments of rock. And to the person above who said pop music is only groups from the 90's like n'sync and backstreet boys, YOUR AN IDIOT!!! Pop music cannot be characterized bt a decade of boy bands. Pop music is made up of catchy songs that lack substance, usually written by a hired song writer for someone who is pretty to sing, and have one purpose, to make money. Pop spans all decades and many genres, thats why you have pop rock, pop puck, pop rap, pop country, pop r&b, exc. As long as people are willing to mock the art of music to sell records, we will always have pop music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.166.32.220 (talk) 18:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

JB? more like BJ amirite?

I'd say they were more power-pop, if you ask me. (Chris Henniker (talk) 21:54, 27 June 2010 (UTC))

Charts

Jonas Brothers' songs, S.O.S. and When You Look Me In The Eyes charted on the Channal V's V Countdown. S.O.S. highest peak is #8, now at #11, when it debuted, it peaked at #10, if I'm not wrong. And for When You Look Me In The Eyes peaked at #13/#16. I think we should at it on the charts part, because it's the first time Jonas Brothers' songs charted in Asia. Oh, and When You Look Me In The Eyes also charted at #10 on one of Indonesia's radio station, the name is Ozon FM if I'm not wrong. The highest peak is at #4. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.124.184.92 (talk) 09:58, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The "prom-themed" tour was actually called the "Marvelous Party Tour".99.144.251.85 (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Really? That is interesting and I'll add it in once we can find a reference for it. If you got one and would like to contribute, please add it in somewhere in this discussion. Thank you, ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 03:38, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Calliegal
Never mind, i found it. ♥, calliegal_x (talk) 03:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Calliegal


Burni' top the char on channel V for a week and love bug went to about number 10 i think also for best music vdos of 2008 burnin' up was on the 4th i think —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.7.180.79 (talk) 14:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Cheetah-licious Christmas Tour 2005

The boys also were special guests for the Cheetah Girls' Cheetah-licious Christmas Tour that took place in December of 2005. I don't know if that's notworthy enough to be part of the tour section, but that's around the time they first started touring.

Grammar

I would change "The band started out as a solo project of Nick Jonas and ended up being a collaboration between the three brothers." to "The band started out as a solo project of Nick Jonas and ended up being a collaboration among the three brothers." this comment by JCDarrow, miscredited during vandalism correctionsKww (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC))

Rolling Stone magazine

It should be included that the Jonas Brothers appeared on the cover of the August 7th, 2008 Issue of Rolling Stone - Issue # 1058. Nick Jonas is one of the youngest artists to grace the cover of the magazine (althought not the youngest) and being on the cover of RS is a career milestone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wennergal (talk • contribs) 18:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

This line needs to be corrected: Throughout 2005, the Jonas Brothers had went on several tours, to either: the Jonas Brothers have gone or had gone or better yet= have been on several tours —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.153.65 (talk) 18:57, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Boy band

Changed rock band to boy band, who agree? The sound doenst like rock or fit in any rock genre. The Boy band article also has Jonas Brothers in List of Boys bands. Say this guys are a rock band is in insult to american rock bands. --Ciao 90 (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I would support adding boy band to their list of genres but not removing pop rock entirely. They have a few key elements of boy bands(follow fashion trends, manipulated image, marketed towards teenage girls). Chocolite (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the Chocolite, as they still have a small pop rock element. Qsung (talk) 15:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
THEY are not boy band! they're a pop rock band —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.46.83 (talk) 03:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
The Chicago Tribune thinks they are. So does the Harrisburg Patriot-News. And the Sunday Mail. And Newsweek, USA Today, The International Herald Tribune, Access Atlanta, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, China Daily, The Insider, CBS News, and a few others (some of them reliable sources). But, since some anonymous editor says they aren't, I guess those other sources are simply wrong. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm uncomfortable with the designation "boy band" for this group, but I see from the Wikipedia article that it has broadened considerably. When I think of "boy band", I think of a group of singers that rarely, if ever, touches an instrument, and focuses on choreography nearly to the exclusion of musicianship. I think those news articles are an example of sloppy reporting. Unfortunately, on Wikipedia, things are what reliable sources say they are, not what I think they should be.Kww (talk) 20:37, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Personally, a boy band, to me, does have them playing (or pretending to anyway), hence "band". I tend to think prefab, where the "band" is recruited based on looks, dancing or similar (heck, maybe they just fit the outfit). So there you go. Reasonable people can disagree, but when the largest media outlets around the world speak, Wikipedia agrees with them. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I definately think the arent a boy band. They are more talented than that.... :o) abc (talk) 03:32, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Evangelical Christians?

Can anyone find a reference for them being "Evangelical" Christians? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wackojacko1138 (talk • contribs) 04:25, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Russel Brand

Seeing as Wikipedia is supposed to be non-editorial site should Brand's comments really be described as 'cynical'? The fact that the comments were framed as a joke surely means that to signal a specific intent on his part would be conjecture. Couldn't the quotes just be put in this section which would allow people to interpret them for themselves?

J.O.N.A.S.! premise change

I read in an article that the Jonas Brothers's upcoming show, J.O.N.A.S.! was being changed to a biographical premise, describing the boys' life on tour. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.64.84 (talk) 14:57, 16 August 2008 (UTC) 24.29.4.83 (talk)11/04/08

The show's idea was changed from spies to the boy's actual life. It will still be scripted, however. The reasoning was said to be that the boys have grown up and their success lately prompted the writers and directer to change the concept.

I don't think that's right.... That's "Jonas Brothers Living The Dream". J.O.N.A.S. is a scripted T.V. show that will be them playing these boys that are secretly agents. abc (talk) 03:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Immortalized in Wax at Madame Tussauds

The Jonas Brothers life-like wax figures were unveiled earlier this week at Madame Tussauds Washington D.C. The brothers were greeted by swarms of girls as they were there to stand side-by-side their figures - pictures are uncanny! --CapnGargi (talk) 03:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Change the Photo

Can somebody please change the photo. When somebody comes to this page they are not really seeing a picture of the subject, but a picture of a crowd. Its a pointless picture in which you can hardly even see all the boys! FIX IT Tiah12345 (talk) 08:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Not so easy getting free photos you see, I found some free pictures of them on flickr, but next time you can try to help us and find a free picture :) --Kanonkas :  Talk  19:00, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
A free, decent quality image of the band with Celine Dion was found on Flickr and uploaded yesterday. I've now added this image to the article, so fortunately there shouldn't be an issue with the low-quality picture anymore. Jamie☆S93 15:31, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Refs format

Do we still need the refs problem tag ? thisisace (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes. We need twenty references problem tags. --Kermit4Prez (talk) 20:11, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on getting all of the references formatted with the {{cite web}} template, as well as improving the article in general. I suppose the maintenance/problem tag could be removed now, but once the refs are formatted I'll be removing it anyway. Thanks, Jamie☆S93 15:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

POV

By claiming that Brand's comments were 'cynical' in the section on their personal lives the article adopts a POV. Suggest we simply remove the word 'cynical' as it is not needed for sense and erodes the impartiality of the article. --MJ

Agree. Struck characterization.—Kww(talk) 02:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration with Demi Lovato

The Jonas Brothers were featured in Demi Lovato's On the Line off of her new album, Don't Forget. Also, where was it stated that Nick made an appearance in Demi Lovato's Get Back?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.248.186.73 (talk) 13:57, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

on the line yes they did but not sure on the get back thing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.46.83 (talk) 04:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

24.29.4.83 (talk) 21:38, 4 November 2008 (UTC)11/04/08

yeah, not sure about the get back thing.. but it should also be mentioned that Demi Lovato opened for the boys on the Burnin' Up Tour and co-stared along the boys in Camp Rock

wait...wait... it was confirmed that nick jonas's voice was featured in "get back", demi stated it in a magazine article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.248.186.73 (talk) 02:48, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

But there's like no male voice in Get Back... confused??? yes. abc (talk) 03:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

He was a background singer in the song, listen carefully and u will hear him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.140.46.83 (talk) 17:37, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Greg Garbowsky

Greg Garbowsky was given the nickname "Garbo." If we include "Flawless Lawless", we may as well add in Garbo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.248.186.73 (talk) 02:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Rock & Roll Hall of Fame

Should the tidbit about the band being eligible for the Rock & Roll Hall-of-Fame in 2030 be included considering it will be over two decades before eligibility? WAVY 10 Fan (talk) 18:40, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

No. Including that would be absurd. We would end up including the same basic info in several thousand articles. Additionally, what about how long after their deaths until they are eligible to be shown on U.S. Postage stamps? Should we mention that they are currently eligible to be nominated for Nobel Prizes? They're too old to join Menudo? Paul can run for President starting in 2029? - SummerPhD (talk) 13:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Notability Disussion

I feel the jonas brothers should be notable as individuals. I feel this because they have done solo jobs. For example: nick was on broadway, Kevin was doing commercials. I think the are very notable for being individuals even though they have done many things together as a group; as one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.14.100.211 (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Honor Society in acting

Why is honor society in acting its about a record label and that section is about acting The jonas records should stay completely seperated from the jonas brothers article, because they don't own the company it's a part of the hollywood records corp. King007ofrock (talk) 19:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Jonas_Brothers/Archive_1&oldid=1142766048"