Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Saga (singer)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Majorly (Talk) 16:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saga (singer)[edit]

Non-notable artist. Mainstream coverage is less than 90 seconds on the Discovery Times Channel. There are claims on the talk page she has been covered in nationalist and neo-Nazi magazines, but no details are provided and I wouldn't consider them to be particularly reliable and independent sources. One Night In Hackney 04:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 90 seconds is a long time on a mainstream TV news feature. We're are not trying to establish prominence, just notability. The neo Nazi publications are not being cited as references within the article, the nominator criticizes U-Tube below, which again is not one of the references used at the article; the U-tube links are for song samples etc.. --Kevin Murray 19:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Discovery Times Channel is not "a mainstream TV news feature". WP:MUSIC states Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio or TV network, if you think that is unreasonable, then try and get the guideline changed. One Night In Hackney 23:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rebuttal I think that you are misinterpreting this section. If someone had that length of coverage they would be automatically notable. She is not automatically notable because of the Discovery documentary, but it is one solid brick in the wall. --Kevin Murray 00:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If she was interviewed on Discovery that gives some indication that she is notable. There is a link, now at the article, to the Minnesota Public Radio website where she is mentioned as an example of White Power artists. I would err on the safer side of keeping this social phenomonon.--Kevin Murray 20:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC) In addition to the Discovery Channel segment, there is recognition in multiple and diverse media including: the liberal institutions: US National Public Radio and The Southern Poverty Law Center Intellegence Report and ultra conservative (reactionary) sources including: The National Alliance and Resistance Magazine. Guidelines call for non-trivial and independent sources. There is no specification that the source be independent of her political beliefs, just independent of her control. This subject should be evaluated not only based on the musical relevance, but also as being politically notable (updated) --Kevin Murray 18:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE Kevin Murray was not involved in the article until AfD, although I have heavilly edited it since mostly for NPOV and referencing. I am not a fan of nor politically aligned with Saga etc. But I do feel that it is important that WP Standards be evenly and intellegently applied and that we be an excellent research resource. --Kevin Murray 19:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:MUSIC gives guidelines on notability for music acts, she doesn't appear to meet any of the criteria. One Night In Hackney 06:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see the notability here not strictly as a musician, but but as a representative of social movements, both in nationalism and in racism. That her notability has penetrated to the point of being mentioned on US TV and as deep within US culture as to be on Minnesota Public Radio (known as a liberal medium), is significant. Perhaps a more pertinent article would be about Swedish nationalism or Swedish neo-nazism. To me an internationally recognized Swedish neo-nazi singer is of notable concern--Kevin Murray 20:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Saga hasn't been on Minnesota Public Radio. A link to the article in question [1] shows it is an interview with the owner of a Minnesota based record company, and the only mention of Saga is when the owner states There's Czech bands, Italian bands, you've got Valkyrian and you've got Saga -- female Swedish folk tunes. It's a trivial mention at best, and can't be used to argue she's notable. One Night In Hackney 21:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. CRGreathouse (t | c) 10:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Much revised, although I'm not entirely convinced of the notability. CRGreathouse (t | c) 03:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Definitely, I agree with keeping her on wikipedia; she does have some influence in the White Power scene. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Groar! 21:56, 28 December 2006

Comment In that case, please show evidence of the influence citing reliable sources. One Night In Hackney
Comment Well, a few YouTube videos focus on her. Additionally, she created a tribute to Skrewdriver longer than any other band thus far (4-5 albums. Just look on such WP websites, namely MiceTrap.net and other WP music distributors). Moreover, a page for her Symphony of Sorrow project exists on Encyclopaedia Metallum (or Metal-Archives.com). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Groar! (talk • contribs) 02:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Comment YouTube isn't a reliable source. Companies that distribute her music aren't reliable sources. At this moment, Encyclopaedia Metallum is down due to bandwidth problems, but as their site is based on user contributions any claims or her influence can't be classed as reliable, and merely having an album listed on there doesn't make her notable. One Night In Hackney 02:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as insufficiently notable. No evidence that artist "has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." -- Satori Son 03:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The criterion cited by Satori Son is only one among several within a list at WP:MUSIC where the instructions clearly specify: "meets any one of the following criteria:" This gaff is probably due to haste. The subject qualifies on other criteria within the list. --Kevin Murray 06:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Which ones? She doesn't appear to meet any of them. One Night In Hackney 06:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The subject does not meet any of the optional criteria. I refuse to presuppose what Kevin Murray's gaff is due to. -- Satori Son 06:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now Satori has stated his case, albeit defensivly. Before he wanted to hang on one criterion now he cites all criteria - talk about covering all of the bases! Please specify why you don't think that the author(s) have met the criteria. Let's talk some specifics, if you're not too busy --Kevin Murray 07:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Two words explain it best - reliable sources. There are no reliable sources to verify she meets any of the criteria. One Night In Hackney 07:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we have ~~three~~ five reliable sources that demonstrate that she is recognized internationally as a symbol of racism and intolerance -- thus notable. More than that, she is a snake-in-the-grass due to her ability to "come across as the girl-next-door" and alternatively the "Swedish Madonna of the far right." This is not about just a singer; it's about a potentially dangerous social phenomenon. Please stop micro lawyering and look at the big-picture --Kevin Murray 07:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Three reliable sources? The Minnesota Radio show has been discounted above, it does not assert notability. Second reference is exactly the same. It's an interview from a far right radio show (of unknown broadcast status), where her name is mentioned in one sentence, and does not assert notability. That only leaves the incredibly short clip from Discovery, which does not assert notability. One Night In Hackney 08:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hackney, you are starting to cite your own statements of opinion as sources of reference. You have stated above your concern about the sourcese, but you can't cite your own opinions as "discounting" the credibilty of the source -- this is circular logic. You seem to be losing objectivity here. --Kevin Murray 08:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No, I'm just not the one saying that simply because Saga is mentioned in passing on a couple of radio station by people who run record companies that distribute her music (which are therefore not independent, and are not reliable sources) she is notable. If you wish to carry on this charade, I suggest first reading WP:RS, WP:V, WP:MUSIC and especially using extremist sources. Extremist sources can only be used as primary sources, and articles may use primary sources, but only to make descriptive points about the topic. Any interpretive claims require secondary sources. Without independent third party sources, there's no way of proving she's notable. And yet again not one of the sources (be they credible or otherwise) made any assertion of notability that she meets any of the criteria for WP:MUSIC. One Night In Hackney 08:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As the various criteria at WP:RS, WP:V, WP:MUSIC are merely guidelines, we must look to the overarching spirit of Wikipedia, especially when someone's notability crosses among genres and borders. In this case Saga is more than a musician, she is a symbol within an international cult. By your own statement above her "distributors" are getting her press in the US, as far reaching as the ultra-liberal Public Radio and the reactionary National Alliance, with a significant interview on Discovery Channel in the middle, which is a big deal on this side of the Pond. How can you question the independence of Public Radio and Discovery Channel? What is the risk of inclusion? Again, this seems to be mirco lawyering to win a point --Kevin Murray 09:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:V is policy, it is not a guideline. Re we must look to the overarching spirit of Wikipedia, especially when someone's notability crosses among genres and borders, quite possibly so proving there is evidence that the person is actually notable which you have consistently failed to show thus far. I can't put this any simpler for you, stop saying she's notable and produce some evidence that she is! Any further comments from you without this evidence will be summarily ignored, I'm done feeding the troll. One Night In Hackney 09:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You cite Verifiability as the policy, you have ~~three~~ five verifiable source -- that is fact. --Kevin Murray 09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You say the sources are insufficient, that is subjective - your opinion! --Kevin Murray 09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Calling me a troll is getting personal. Not appropriate. --Kevin Murray 09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. Its an awfully written article with no references, and notable surely means more than "has more than 5 fans". 58.7.0.146 09:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

58.7.0.146 has blank user and discussion pages. SPA? Sockpuppet? Admin should check for multiple vote offense --Kevin Murray 21:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. So far, all of the reasons listed supporting deletion are satirical, and seem to be attacking the singer's political views, rather than her notoriety. Saga is an important singer of a music sub-culture and should be kept. A simple democratic vote may not be fair, as people who are too emotional or opinionated politically may allow their own personal opinions to sway their votes. -Wikischmedia 16:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I added several sources, including the Southern Poverty Law Center and an interview with Resistance Magazine. With every passing day, there is a better case being made to keep Saga on Wikipedia. The satirical, and hateful "has more than 5 fans" comments do not help the discussion. --Wikischmedia 17:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So far, all the reaons against deletion have failed to produce a single verifiable reliable source that Saga is notable, and repeatedly misrepresent the content of the articles they have linked to and ignore Wikipedia guidelines and policies at will. If she is an important singer, please produce evidence to support this. Not one of the sources suggests she is notable. The Southern Poverty Law Centre merely has her in a list of over a hundred acts, with no information apart from her name. That isn't a source, other than to prove she actually exists. Please produce sources that assert notability. If she is notable as you allege, you should be able to produce sources to support this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by One Night In Hackney (talk • contribs) 00:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Missing the Point Hackney continues to miss the point or try to throw the discussion off track with non sequitur discussion and ad hominem conclusions. Focusing on Saga as only a singer ignores the political symbolism for which she is most notable. The perponderance of sources makes Hackney's arguments about the weaknesses of several irrelevant. By the heated level of discussion here and vandalism at the article, it appears that the Saga issue is controvercial enough to qualify by that alone. If you look back to the Notability guidelines, there is very little specification of what makes media mention notable; the concern is mostly that the medium be independent and that the mention be non-trivial. When the US Southern Poverty Law Center ~~puts~~ published a list including a Swedish singer, along with an article expressing deep concern ~~on a list of concerns~~, that is notable from a highly credible liberal source, not to mention public radio. Hackney may not respect the neo-conservative press, but they are independent of Saga herself, and are discussing her clearly in more than a trivial way. Hackney seems to be taking this to a level of prosecution rather than nomination --Kevin Murray 00:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresenting the content yet again They are not "discussing her clearly in more than a trivial way" [2]. She is not discussed, she is a name on a lengthy list with no context. Not one "source" (and I use that term loosely) asserts notability. The Southern Poverty Law Centre didn't "put a Swedish singer on a list of concerns", the article clearly states it was a list provided to them. I strongly suggest an administrator thoroughly reviews this debate and disregards the constant blatant inaccuracies clearly made in bad faith by Kevin Murray. One Night In Hackney 00:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)}[reply]

The more that you contribute the more you prove my point. You seem emotionally charged by this subject, lending further creedance to the assertion of the subject's implied notability. --Kevin Murray 00:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If she was ONLY listed on the SPLC's list of White Power bands, with no other sources, I'd agree that she wouldn't be notable. But the fact that SPLC thinks she's a worth warning people about, and that Discovery Channel interviewed her suggests to me that she's notable and will probably only become more so. Tarinth 18:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep as obviously notable based on coverage on:

(a) a prominent cable television show as well as
(b) Minnesota Public Radio
(c) designation by Southern Poverty Law Center as a White Power band (I don't think SPLC is in the business of denoting neo-nazi garage bands...)

All are clearly verifiable, reliable sources. I find the subject of this article despicable, but that is not a reason to exclude her. Tarinth 17:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yet again, (b) and (c) are not coverage. Minnesota Public Radio did not cover her. Her name was mentioned in one sentence during an interview with the owner of a Minnesota based record company. The Southern Poverty Law Centre did not designate her as anything, please read the articles before making grandiose and factually incorrect claims. One Night In Hackney 04:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Oops. I forgot to sign in when I wanted to keep it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Groar! (talk • contribs) 00:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Comment This editor has already stated Keep much earlier. One Night In Hackney 04:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wrote to Groar to suggest that he come back to sign his prior "Keep", the second Keep was apparently his reposnse and should not be counted as a second Keep. --Kevin Murray 07:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Source[edit]

"White off the scale", Guardian - Observer Music Monthly, Sunday January 22, 2006. Research for this topic is time consuming because the name "Saga" is such a common word. This article I found this morning is from an undisputable non-trivial and independent source. --Kevin Murray 21:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Quotation from Article:

"Some white power websites list a 'Nazi Top Ten' - Viking is a regular chart-topper. Frequently appearing in the same hit parade is another racialist chanteuse called Saga - or the 'Swedish Madonna of the far right' as she's been nicknamed thanks to her stunning looks. Her philosophy, she told me simply, was: 'I just don't want people that are not like me around me.' We met in Stockholm, where she was feted in the streets by skinheads. She has deliberately concocted a 'mainstream' look - not for her the 'skin-girl' haircut and bovver boots - despite her celebrity status in the white power underground. She's immaculately coiffed and made up - and alludes to something terrible happening to her in her past, that she won't talk about explicitly, which turned her towards the politics of hate.

Saga flew secretly to the UK to play a white power concert in yet another run-down former mining town in the north of England. Most gigs are arranged surreptitiously through a series of mobile phone calls, like football hooligan rucks. Those in the know phone their mates, and then they phone their mates, and so on until everyone in the white power scene knows where and when the latest gig will be.

Saga's biggest thrill is giving the Nazi salute to her fans. I watch while a moshpit of smitten British skinheads salute her back - including a child aged about eight. 'Raising your right arm is like - we all do that, you know, to greet each other,' she says later. 'They greet me and I greet them. It is a victory salute. For me, it is a really honourable thing to do. There is a lot of honour in doing that.

At gigs such as the one played by Saga in Britain, all profits from merchandising and ticket sales go to the BNP. 'You do something to make a difference,' she says. 'I sing because that's what I do. If I was any good at politics I would probably do that, but I am not so I am doing my bit the musical way.

Comment I don't think anyone can seriously challenge The Guardian as a reliable source. I think this puts her well over the minimum bar for WP:BIO. Tarinth 21:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I received a note on my talk page asking me to please review the newly sourced article, and I do agree now that reliable sources have been found to verify the article's contents and establish a bare minimum of notability. I have stricken my "Delete" opinion above. Nice job to Wikischmedia and others who worked hard on this one! -- Satori Son 03:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

* Comment Kevin Murray is the one to thank. I found a couple of sources, but I couldn't have dreamed the article would expand to over a page in length. If you look at the article's history, a mere month ago it was only 2 lines, with no sources. Amazing. --Wikischmedia 03:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment An interview which you have never read and do not know the content of [3] is not a source, and has been removed from the article. One Night In Hackney 04:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Saga appears on the cover of Resistance Magazine, which is visible on the webpage; the article is linked to that visual. Another editor referred to the interview, but that has now been removed and only the reference to the cover page remains. Hackney should not have removed the entire discussion and reference. However, Hackney also removed the reference to the Jewish Defense League which mentions Saga at it's webpage. I think that an editor in opposition to an article should not be removing references without discussion. --Kevin Murray 07:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.