1161:"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.
949:. 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.
914:
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
874:
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.
712:
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 --
220:
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) --
735:, 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.
922:, 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 --
1184:
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
622:
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.
382:
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
219:
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:
1196:
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
990:
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
1285:
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
1172:
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
835:
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
597:
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
264:
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
416:
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
913:
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
636:
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.
1055:
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
873:
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 Knowledge (XXG) guidelines and policies at will. If she is an important singer, please
665:
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
233:
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
148:
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
711:
are merely guidelines, we must look to the overarching spirit of Knowledge (XXG), 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
537:
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
852:
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 Knowledge (XXG). The satirical, and hateful "has more than 5 fans" comments do not help the discussion.
682:. 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
214:
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
1224:. 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
189:
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.
1286:
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. --
1254:
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.
265:
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--
1143:. 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. --
971:
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. --
129:
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.
1121:
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. --
889:
1075:
877:
386:
438:"has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable."
598:
not about just a singer; it's about a potentially dangerous social phenomenon. Please stop micro lawyering and look at the big-picture --
1037:
All are clearly verifiable, reliable sources. I find the subject of this article despicable, but that is not a reason to exclude her.
341:
318:
1208:
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
17:
96:
91:
284:
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
100:
733:
we must look to the overarching spirit of Knowledge (XXG), especially when someone's notability crosses among genres and borders
686:
not one of the sources (be they credible or otherwise) made any assertion of notability that she meets any of the criteria for
885:
83:
125:
Non-notable artist. Mainstream coverage is less than 90 seconds on the Discovery Times Channel. There are claims on the
1087:
398:
1307:
574:
Two words explain it best - reliable sources. There are no reliable sources to verify she meets any of the criteria.
36:
1023:
282:
1277:
1110:
1057:
950:
881:
736:
691:
624:
575:
497:
418:
374:
289:
253:
174:
130:
1306:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
799:
Its an awfully written article with no references, and notable surely means more than "has more than 5 fans".
1185:
is a victory salute. For me, it is a really honourable thing to do. There is a lot of honour in doing that.
356:
Definitely, I agree with keeping her on wikipedia; she does have some influence in the White Power scene.
1290:
1280:
1259:
1240:
1216:
1147:
1125:
1113:
1091:
1060:
1041:
995:
975:
953:
926:
893:
857:
840:
821:
803:
777:
768:
759:
739:
716:
694:
641:
627:
602:
578:
542:
528:
500:
484:
449:
421:
402:
346:
337:
323:
314:
292:
269:
256:
238:
224:
194:
177:
153:
133:
65:
286:
There's Czech bands, Italian bands, you've got Valkyrian and you've got Saga -- female Swedish folk tunes
817:
has blank user and discussion pages. SPA? Sockpuppet? Admin should check for multiple vote offense --
1234:
1173:
mates, and so on until everyone in the white power scene knows where and when the latest gig will be.
814:
800:
522:
443:
1026:
as a White Power band (I don't think SPLC is in the business of denoting neo-nazi garage bands...)
1079:
947:
390:
359:
126:
87:
708:
687:
675:
480:
This gaff is probably due to haste. The subject qualifies on other criteria within the list. --
469:
252:
gives guidelines on notability for music acts, she doesn't appear to meet any of the criteria.
249:
166:
623:
That only leaves the incredibly short clip from Discovery, which does not assert notability.
1287:
1256:
1229:
1144:
1140:
1122:
972:
923:
854:
837:
818:
774:
765:
756:
713:
638:
599:
539:
517:
481:
332:
309:
266:
235:
221:
216:
191:
150:
58:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1083:
394:
1209:
918:
published a list including a Swedish singer, along with an article expressing deep concern
700:
679:
667:
171:
Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio or TV network
728:
704:
671:
79:
71:
836:
opinionated politically may allow their own personal opinions to sway their votes. -
1251:
1213:
1038:
992:
50:
117:
1141:"White off the scale", Guardian - Observer Music Monthly, Sunday January 22, 2006
281:
Saga hasn't been on Minnesota Public Radio. A link to the article in question
288:. It's a trivial mention at best, and can't be used to argue she's notable.
373:
In that case, please show evidence of the influence citing reliable sources.
173:, if you think that is unreasonable, then try and get the guideline changed.
764:
You say the sources are insufficient, that is subjective - your opinion! --
331:: Much revised, although I'm not entirely convinced of the notability.
1273:
An interview which you have never read and do not know the content of
946:
They are not "discussing her clearly in more than a trivial way"
1300:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
165:
Discovery Times Channel is not "a mainstream TV news feature".
773:
Calling me a troll is getting personal. Not appropriate. --
1276:
is not a source, and has been removed from the article.
1274:
149:
article; the U-tube links are for song samples etc.. --
113:
109:
105:
516:
of the optional criteria. I refuse to presuppose what
496:
Which ones? She doesn't appear to meet any of them.
1072:
Oops. I forgot to sign in when I wanted to keep it.
436:as insufficiently notable. No evidence that artist
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1056:making grandiose and factually incorrect claims.
417:album listed on there doesn't make her notable.
1310:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1016:(a) a prominent cable television show as well as
748:You cite Verifiability as the policy, you have
358:— The preceding unsigned comment was added by
8:
1232:and others who worked hard on this one! --
1008:as obviously notable based on coverage on:
478:"meets any one of the following criteria:"
944:Misrepresenting the content yet again
731:is policy, it is not a guideline. Re
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
383:Metallum (or Metal-Archives.com).
24:
1105:This editor has already stated
234:excellent research resource. --
1:
858:17:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
841:16:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
822:21:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
804:09:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
778:09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
769:09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
760:09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
740:09:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
717:09:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
695:08:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
642:08:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
628:08:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
603:07:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
579:07:26, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
543:07:04, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
529:06:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
501:06:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
485:06:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
450:03:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
422:02:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
403:02:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
324:10:21, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
293:21:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
270:20:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
257:06:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
239:19:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
225:18:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
195:00:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
178:23:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
154:19:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
134:04:46, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
512:: The subject does not meet
1291:07:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1281:04:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1260:03:22, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1241:03:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1228:opinion above. Nice job to
1217:21:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
1148:21:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
1126:07:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1114:04:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1092:00:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1061:04:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1042:17:37, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
1024:Southern Poverty Law Center
996:18:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
976:00:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
954:00:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
927:00:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
894:00:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
699:As the various criteria at
347:03:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
66:16:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
1327:
1019:(b) Minnesota Public Radio
1303:Please do not modify it.
362:21:56, 28 December 2006
32:Please do not modify it.
1153:Quotation from Article:
680:using extremist sources
460:The criterion cited by
753:five verifiable source
666:suggest first reading
1078:comment was added by
920:on a list of concerns
880:comment was added by
389:comment was added by
1278:One Night In Hackney
1111:One Night In Hackney
1058:One Night In Hackney
951:One Night In Hackney
882:One Night In Hackney
737:One Night In Hackney
692:One Night In Hackney
625:One Night In Hackney
576:One Night In Hackney
498:One Night In Hackney
419:One Night In Hackney
375:One Night In Hackney
290:One Night In Hackney
254:One Night In Hackney
175:One Night In Hackney
131:One Night In Hackney
1022:(c) designation by
755:-- that is fact. --
520:gaff is due to. --
1095:
911:Missing the Point
897:
476:clearly specify:
468:within a list at
466:one among several
406:
363:
345:
322:
1318:
1305:
1239:
1073:
875:
527:
448:
384:
357:
335:
312:
121:
103:
61:
53:
34:
1326:
1325:
1321:
1320:
1319:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1308:deletion review
1301:
1233:
1138:
1109:much earlier.
1074:—The preceding
876:—The preceding
678:and especially
521:
442:
385:—The preceding
94:
78:
75:
59:
51:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1324:
1322:
1313:
1312:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1283:
1263:
1262:
1244:
1243:
1219:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1190:
1189:
1188:
1187:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1155:
1154:
1137:
1132:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1116:
1097:
1096:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1047:
1046:
1045:
1044:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1020:
1017:
1003:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
983:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
964:
963:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
903:
902:
901:
900:
899:
898:
863:
862:
861:
860:
844:
843:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
824:
807:
806:
797:Strong delete.
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
788:
787:
786:
785:
784:
783:
782:
781:
780:
771:
762:
743:
742:
720:
719:
697:
651:
650:
649:
648:
647:
646:
645:
644:
631:
630:
616:
615:
614:
613:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
607:
606:
605:
582:
581:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
532:
531:
518:Kevin Murray's
504:
503:
488:
487:
453:
452:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
408:
407:
377:
365:
364:
351:
350:
349:
300:
299:
298:
297:
296:
295:
273:
272:
259:
228:
227:
208:
207:
206:
205:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
199:
198:
197:
181:
180:
157:
156:
123:
122:
74:
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1323:
1311:
1309:
1304:
1298:
1292:
1289:
1284:
1282:
1279:
1275:
1272:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1261:
1258:
1253:
1250:
1246:
1245:
1242:
1238:
1237:
1231:
1227:
1223:
1220:
1218:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1204:
1203:
1198:
1194:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1186:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1174:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1162:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1156:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1149:
1146:
1142:
1136:
1133:
1127:
1124:
1120:
1117:
1115:
1112:
1108:
1104:
1101:
1100:
1099:
1098:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1071:
1068:
1067:
1062:
1059:
1054:
1051:
1050:
1049:
1048:
1043:
1040:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1033:
1025:
1021:
1018:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1009:
1007:
997:
994:
989:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
977:
974:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
955:
952:
948:
945:
942:
941:
940:
939:
938:
937:
936:
935:
928:
925:
921:
917:
912:
909:
908:
907:
906:
905:
904:
895:
891:
887:
883:
879:
872:
869:
868:
867:
866:
865:
864:
859:
856:
851:
848:
847:
846:
845:
842:
839:
834:
831:
830:
823:
820:
816:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
805:
802:
798:
795:
794:
779:
776:
772:
770:
767:
763:
761:
758:
754:
751:
747:
746:
745:
744:
741:
738:
734:
730:
727:
724:
723:
722:
721:
718:
715:
710:
706:
702:
698:
696:
693:
689:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
664:
661:
660:
659:
658:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
643:
640:
635:
634:
633:
632:
629:
626:
621:
618:
617:
604:
601:
596:
593:
589:
586:
585:
584:
583:
580:
577:
573:
570:
569:
568:
567:
566:
565:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
544:
541:
536:
535:
534:
533:
530:
526:
525:
519:
515:
511:
508:
507:
506:
505:
502:
499:
495:
492:
491:
490:
489:
486:
483:
479:
475:
471:
467:
463:
459:
458:
457:
456:
455:
454:
451:
447:
446:
440:
439:
435:
431:
430:
423:
420:
415:
412:
411:
410:
409:
404:
400:
396:
392:
388:
381:
378:
376:
372:
369:
368:
367:
366:
361:
355:
352:
348:
343:
339:
334:
330:
327:
326:
325:
320:
316:
311:
308:
306:
302:
301:
294:
291:
287:
283:
280:
277:
276:
275:
274:
271:
268:
263:
260:
258:
255:
251:
248:
245:
244:
243:
242:
241:
240:
237:
232:
226:
223:
218:
215:phenomonon.--
213:
210:
209:
196:
193:
188:
185:
184:
183:
182:
179:
176:
172:
168:
164:
161:
160:
159:
158:
155:
152:
147:
144:
143:
142:
141:
140:
139:
138:
137:
136:
135:
132:
128:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
80:Saga (singer)
77:
76:
73:
72:Saga (singer)
70:
68:
67:
63:
62:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1302:
1299:
1288:Kevin Murray
1270:
1257:Wikischmedia
1252:Kevin Murray
1248:
1235:
1230:Wikischmedia
1225:
1221:
1205:
1195:
1183:
1171:
1160:
1145:Kevin Murray
1139:
1134:
1123:Kevin Murray
1118:
1106:
1102:
1069:
1052:
1005:
1004:
973:Kevin Murray
943:
924:Kevin Murray
919:
915:
910:
870:
855:Wikischmedia
849:
838:Wikischmedia
833:Strong Keep.
832:
819:Kevin Murray
796:
775:Kevin Murray
766:Kevin Murray
757:Kevin Murray
752:
749:
732:
725:
714:Kevin Murray
683:
662:
639:Kevin Murray
619:
600:Kevin Murray
594:
591:
587:
571:
540:Kevin Murray
523:
513:
509:
493:
482:Kevin Murray
477:
474:instructions
473:
465:
461:
444:
437:
433:
432:
413:
379:
370:
353:
333:CRGreathouse
328:
310:CRGreathouse
304:
303:
285:
278:
267:Kevin Murray
261:
246:
236:Kevin Murray
230:
229:
222:Kevin Murray
217:Kevin Murray
211:
192:Kevin Murray
186:
170:
162:
151:Kevin Murray
145:
124:
57:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
1236:Satori Son
1135:New Source
815:58.7.0.146
801:58.7.0.146
524:Satori Son
472:where the
462:Satori Son
445:Satori Son
991:more so.
684:yet again
329:Weak keep
127:talk page
1226:"Delete"
1088:contribs
1076:unsigned
890:contribs
878:unsigned
709:WP:MUSIC
688:WP:MUSIC
676:WP:MUSIC
590:we have
470:WP:MUSIC
464:is only
399:contribs
387:unsigned
307:per nom.
250:WP:MUSIC
187:Rebuttal
167:WP:MUSIC
1271:Comment
1249:Comment
1214:Tarinth
1206:Comment
1119:Comment
1103:Comment
1053:Comment
1039:Tarinth
993:Tarinth
871:Comment
850:Comment
726:Comment
663:Comment
620:Comment
572:Comment
510:Comment
494:Comment
414:Comment
380:Comment
371:Comment
279:Comment
262:Comment
247:Comment
169:states
163:Comment
146:Comment
97:protect
92:history
52:Majorly
1210:WP:BIO
1080:Groar!
1006:* Keep
434:Delete
391:Groar!
360:Groar!
305:Delete
101:delete
750:three
701:WP:RS
668:WP:RS
592:three
118:views
110:watch
106:links
16:<
1222:Keep
1197:way.
1107:Keep
1084:talk
1070:Keep
916:puts
886:talk
729:WP:V
705:WP:V
672:WP:V
595:five
395:talk
354:Keep
231:NOTE
212:Keep
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
60:Talk
46:keep
588:Yes
514:any
441:--
1255:--
1247:*
1212:.
1090:)
1086:•
892:)
888:•
853:--
707:,
703:,
690:.
674:,
670:,
637:--
538:--
401:)
397:•
340:|
317:|
190:--
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
64:)
48:.
1094:.
1082:(
956:}
896:.
884:(
405:.
393:(
344:)
342:c
338:t
336:(
321:)
319:c
315:t
313:(
120:)
82:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.