Talk:Pain for Pleasure

Update
Ehm... update this. --Scotteh 15:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * "Pain For Pleasure started after Steve Jocz wrote the lyrics to Pain for Pleasure in five minutes while taking a crap..." -- I mean WTF?? --Scotteh 17:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

¿?
Pain For Pleasure was formed as itself in 2000 when Sum 41 were looking for a way to play metal and punk because the musical preferences of the members of the band... what is that about Pain is dead and that they formed en 1960s, the article also talks about hippies... I don't understand
 * In the free dvd which came with the special edition version of 'Does this look infected' it had a documentary on Pain for Pleasure. It explains that they met at a hippie commune and that Pain died in hoping to become a legend, but he failed to come back to life Khurs (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * this 'Documentary' was fictional. [ The Spooky One ] | [ t c r ] 05:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I am aware. The part of 1960 formation was to do with the fictional side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khurs (talk • contribs) 21:46, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Eh?
"Reportedly, Pain is dead now with Pleasure's departure being described as him being "nowhere to be seen"." Eh? What is that supposed to mean? I didn't see any mention of Pain or Pleasure being actually people.... 75.177.131.250 (talk) 03:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite
this article really needs to be re-written. With a new lead and a new body section. - - [ The Spooky One ] | [ t c r ] 20:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge
This article's content would be more useful in Sum 41 than as a freestanding article. Pain for Pleasure seems to lack notability separate from Sum 41. To quote the description on (the now-deleted) File:Painforpleasure.jpg,"...they are an alter-ego band, who doesn't play live. They are featured in a Mockumentary on a bonus DVD from a Sum 41 album. This is really the only coverage they have had."If this is correct, the treatment of Pain for Pleasure as a separate entity may be an in-joke, and therefore not suited to a freestanding article on Wikipedia. Regardless, this article would still fail WP:GNG (and probably WP:MUSIC) due to lack of coverage in independent, third party sources. / edg ☺ ☭ 12:16, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. The alter-ego band is not notable enough to have its own article. I'm fine with merging it with Sum 41. Tim  meh  !  20:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

If you were to merge it with Sum 41 then that page would be too confusing. Besides, they claim to be sepereate band, although composed of the same members. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.133.12.108 (talk) 14:59, 21 July 2009 (UTC)