Talk:Prussian Blue (duo)/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Fraternal twins

I had always assumed they were identical twins. Am I just being stupid and plain wrong, or does anyone have a source as to whether they are identical or fraternal?

Rightlibbiaskiller

This is not a message board

I have removed all off-topic comments, namel those not dedicated to the betterment of this article, regardless of topic or opinion. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 07:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I made some mistakes on this Talk Page as you can read in the subject above. However, I had only been with Wikipedia for just over a month at that time and hadn't learned about Talk Pages enough. Acalamari 16:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Then why is it labelled 'discussion'? Seems like that's what was going on...

See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for the purposes of talk pages. Phiwum 16:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed photos

Hey ho. I see that the photos of Prussian Blue have been removed. I assume this was done for reasons of copyright (and despite plausible fair use claims). Can someone point me to the discussion that led to the removal please? Thanks. Phiwum 18:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

An overall discussion of using copyrighted images of living people can be found at Wikipedia talk:Elimination of Fair Use Rationale in Promotional Photos/Vote#My own view. The current interpretation is that Wikipedia will not employ the "fair use" exemption for pictures of living people because it is possible to obtain free use images. If you'd like to have pictures in the article my suggestion would to either take a photo yourself or to ask the subjects to release a photo under CC BY-SA. -Will Beback · † · 19:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

White Supremacist

Those Neo-nazi american girls are "White Supremacist" and the article should reflect that. However its is very difficult to do anything to articles when such obvious bias is about. The article needs to reflect that they are "White Supremacist" racist neo-nazis, the section at the start of the article about white nationalist needs to be removied. There is no white nation!, and stop trying to white wash, and uplift pro-kkk, nazi people, they are nothing more than what they are. --Margrave1206 18:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The article is not biased. However, if it was edited to show a negative or positive view of them, it would be biased. All because you have a problem with these people doesn't give you carte blanche to edit it how you like. I learned not to be biased on Wikipedia, and so should you. Acalamari 02:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I suppose I was a little tough with the message above; sorry. Anyway, articles can't be biased either way. Wikipedia isn't supposed to declare Prussian Blue as racists or diversity promoters, unless it has sources to prove it. Wikipedia is supposed to provide information about facts, not someone's opinion. Your's, mine, and everyone else's points of view are not supposed to be on the article. Acalamari 17:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Acalamari is right. Notice that in the Ideology section, a sentence states that the duo's views are described as racist and white supremacist by many organizations, and has no fewer than four sources in that sentence alone. No one here is trying to whitewash the group. But everything on WP must follow WP:NPOV and WP:V guidelines, which means documented, notable sources are required. Kasreyn 08:54, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Song Lyrics

I have removed song lyrics from the article, please do not readd them. These lyrics are copyrighted and putting them back puts the Wikipedia at risk for a copyright theft lawsuit.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 18:50, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Full lyrics, yes. A couple of short extracts - couplets maybe - would not be an issue and would greatly illustrate the subject matter. TygerTyger 13:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Quotes are fine. If people were allowed to claim copyright on quotes it would be very difficult to report accurately. 172.159.69.47 22:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Neufeldt or Harrington?

Just what is the real last name of Mark and his daughter, Dresden? Here, it says Dresden's last name is Harrington, but on the refrence link to Sigrfrida, it states her last name as "Neufeldt". I'm totally confused...GimmeABreak 1:00 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Dresden goes by the last name Gaede, same as her sisters and her mother, according to this post in a fansite guestbook by the fansite's owner.\

The Neufeldt name is an alias used by Mark Harrington (the child's father) on the racist forums. Mr. Harrington is/was a school teacher and did not want his real name listed since parents might not want a teacher teaching their children with ideals such as his. The Sigrfrida reference link is to a racist communication that lists birth announcements on said racist forums, so that is why the alias was used. Gaede is the stage name used by the Prussian Blue twins and the maiden name of their mother. Their real last name is Lingelser. The twins have a different father than the child Dresden. So, the child's real name is Dresden Hale Harrington.

Notability

I am not calling for deletion -- but can we find something that makes them notable and put it up top?

Besides being Friends Of Adolf, is there anything to this group? I mean, besides the sheer creepiness of it all.

Have they done anything significant?Yakuman 01:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

"I am not calling for deletion" --- I Am... Metsfan666 02:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

"Have they done anything significant?" Nope...

They were prominently featured in a Louis Theroux documentary. They have been featured on Primetime and in many newspaper articles from cities near and far. On these bases alone, they satisfy the criteria at Wikipedia:Notability_(music), namely

(The Group) has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable.

Therefore, they are notable. (I think the article was put up for an AFD once or twice and you might check there for other arguments regarding notability.) Phiwum 12:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really asking the notability question, so much as I wish someone would reinforce why these girls matter to the real world. Simply pointing at them like circus freaks is simply cruel. Yakuman (数え役満) 21:10, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid that question isn't so relevant to Wikipedia and I doubt you'll find much insight here. Phiwum 21:18, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

If You want "Cruel"... listen to their music. Now "Thats" cruel. I don't know which is worse for humanity: Their disgusting racism, or their bland bubblegum hooks. There is no need to try and play nice with these girls. This is an encyclopedia, and if its noteable, and if its the truth, it goes in the article, whether anyone likes it or not. 68.193.53.233 02:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

They, personally, aren't notable, any more than some victim of a tragic disease. In 100 years time nobody will care. But at the moment they do, making this more of a "current event" tabloid article. 172.159.69.47 22:52, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The 100 years test is a poor test of notability, which is why it isn't used as a standard for inclusion. 4 years as a group is hardly a current event, as the controversy began with their first releases. the_undertow ^talk 23:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

References in the media

Not sure if it's significant to add, but the website somethingawful.com has made a routine habit of insulting the band, including posting fake interviews, featuring their website as an ALOD twice(which apparently got the band's guestbook closed due to flames and spam), and have even gone so far as to encourage people to murder the girls(as if a jury would convict...). I don't have the article links handy but their archives should turn them up. They actually started insulting the band even before media attention on them became widespread.206.162.204.6 04:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Neo-Nazis

Is there a reason why these two are not identified as neo-Nazis in the article? They are and the article should reflect that, regardless of NPOV.

Soviet Canuckistan 02:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

The girls have never self-identified as neo-Nazis, but they have called themselves white nationalists. Consequently, this is the term we use. Phiwum 03:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you disagree that "white nationalist" is a euphemism? Soviet Canuckistan 02:05, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Here in Wikipedia, White nationalism does not redirect to neo-Nazi. Indeed, the definitions are different, and I can imagine a person honestly claiming to be a nationalist, but not a Nazi. Of course, my opinion doesn't matter here. Policy (and long discussions found in the archive) led to the current consensus: as long as the girls call themselves white nationalists and not Nazis, so will the article. Phiwum 02:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm kind of new here, and the Wikipedia policy is a bit mind-boggling at first. Soviet Canuckistan 21:35, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. The tag "neo-Nazi" has been suggested many times and indeed I just reverted another application. This is not really my personal battle, however. I simply read the earlier arguments and was persuaded that they are correct. I am glad you and I came to an easy agreement rather than a protracted battle over these terms. Phiwum 01:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm...but they have associated themselves with the Neo-Nazis. Take a look at this picture: http://i18.tinypic.com/2wg6rd1.jpg Plus, they are shown throwing "Heil Hitler salutes in the "Louis and the Nazis" video. They are just attempting to ignore that right now to bring in new recriots to their movement.

Throwing the Heil Hitler salute, distasteful as that is, is not sufficient evidence that they are Nazis. There's no doubt that they've exhibited some behavior which suggests sympathy with the Nazi movement or ideology — the Smiley Hitler t-shirts come to mind. But in order to justify calling them Nazis in an encyclopedia article, we need a clear statement that they consider themselves Nazis. At least, this is the consensus reached in previous discussions. Phiwum 23:09, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't the fact that they perform in neo-nazi events, believe that Hitler was a great man (typing those words makes me wanna vomit) and do sieg heils during their concerts be enough to list them as Neo-nazis?--Gonzalo84 02:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Unless you have a source which cites them as claiming to be Neo-Nazis, it would violate WP:BLP to add the information. the_undertow ^talk 03:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Since when does the subject of an article get to decide what they're called? Call a spade a spade. Ciotog 12:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I'd just like to add "with properly cited sources" - in other words, if notable sources call them a neo-nazi music group, then it's appropriate to mention this in the article, whether or not they consider themselves to be. Ciotog 00:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

That's not entirely true. If we adhere to WP:BLP, it would not be viable. We don't get to label people anything that is contrary to their own assertions. Male movie stars who sleep with other men, may in reality be gay, but it's libelous unless they agree. Given your comment above, you may want to see this essay. the_undertow ^talk 01:32, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Is this a biography of a living person, or an article about a band? I'm not saying either of the girls are neo-nazis, but this band is. The essay you linked to is about editors, not article subjects. It's entirely appropriate to call a spade a spade in the spade's article, if there are reliable sources that indicate this. Ciotog 12:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

(undent) The essay is just a reminder of why we don't call a spade a spade. How can two non-nazi's be in a neo-nazi band that they founded? And because we are specifically references the twins, BLP most certainly appears. the_undertow ^talk 19:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The essay has little relevance to this discussion - it's basically a rehash of "assume good faith" and is one editor's opinion. How can two non neo-nazis be in a neo nazi band? Plenty of people work for companies who have different philosophies than they do. It would seem that these girls are heavily influenced by their mother, and don't necessarily believe in everything they're doing. Similarly most dictators wouldn't consider themselves dictators, but if that's what they're called by the press then it's mentioned in their article. Ciotog 04:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

These girls don't work for the band - they are the band. the_undertow ^talk 07:23, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

They're a couple of young girls who's minds are being messed with. Their music is "neo-nazi", the band is "neo-nazi", and they're possibly heading that way as well, but I'd say there's hope they might not. Then we can say they were in a neo-nazi band when they were young, on their biographical article if one exists then. Ciotog 01:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

With all respect, that comment is completely original research and violates BLP. You may be right, but it is libelous and there is not a single source that would back up that assertion. the_undertow ^talk 01:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you misread BLP, and actually there are plenty of sources that would back up the assertion that the girls are too young to have come up with all their ideas themselves, and are in fact being controlled largely by their mother. BLP is a guideline to "be careful", but that doesn't mean you ignore well established facts that are uncomfortable for some. To quote BLP: "The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable third party sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves." In other words the subject of the article is a secondary source. Since they are referred to as a "neo-nazi" band by major media, then it's worth noting. Ciotog 12:38, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

We could end this by you being bold. Find the sources that say the girls are brainwashed (this may be tough), controlled by their mother and are neo-nazis. Then simply add the text and inline citations. It's not my article so edit mercilessly. And I'm quite aware of BLP and 'too young to have come up with all their ideas' will get you absolutely nowhere - it's original research. Younger people have done far greater. the_undertow ^talk 03:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

So let me get this straight. Unless they PERSONALLY identify as neo-Nazi they cannot be identified as such, right? How convenient. This is as ridiculous as it is fallacious. This is what happens when the general public are allowed to determine the code of inclusion for an encyclopaedia. And this is why worthwhile academic institutions do not allow a scholar to cite from this drivel. How is it remotely subjective, or intelligent or logical for that matter, to OMIT ideas when their omission favours the subject of the entry? And why? Because the PERSONAL opinion, or deceptive language rather, of the subject somehow matters more? Therein lies the catch-22 with subjectivity because any omission is as weighted as any inclusion and it seems to me that there are rightwing ideologues here arguing this point in favour of the duo. I have no doubt there exists academic literature which would not hesitate to label this act as the racist vehicle it is but I wager The undertow would fail to find the contrary from ANY reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.18.34.5 (talk) 05:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you get it. If they personally identify as neo nazis then we can include in the article that they personally identify themselves as neo nazis. If you can find a reliable source that describes them as neo nazis then we can include in the article that that source identifies them as neo nazis. These are the fundamentals of WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:OR. And another thing, there is no reason to find reliable sources for the exclusion of information. The burden of citing has always been on inclusion. For An Angel (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Channel 4 documentary :Nazi Pop Twins

Notes made while watching live broadcast. Girl = either Lamb or Lynx, I can't tell them apart.

Girls wear Hitler smiley face t-shirts. In a local radio interview they deny the holocaust (reasoning: Nazis needed fuel to fight the war, they wouldn't waste fuel just to make things bad) and claim that immigration needs to be stopped before things get worse because "immigrants don't use toilet paper".

They speak to David Lane on the phone - calls them his "sweethearts, fantasy daughters".

Girls grandmother (Dianne) says "God damn Nazi shit ruined my life. It fucks you up. I don't have a single friend ... can't live with him anymore. Bill is so hateful. I've seen my kids torn apart by it. But not April, she loves it.". Bill (grandfather) says he "comes out here to shoot cans.. Mexi'cans", turns out he isn't joking, he's shot 6 Mexicans in 4 years "stealing stuff". Girls say they're "not going to be doing this for the rest of our lives.".

Bill explains as a girl April was attacked and almost raped by a black man. It "put a lot of hate in her". At photo shoot set up by April Stormtroop 16 (Nazi band) say about girls "nothing they do is wrong or negative, we support them 100%".

Dianne says "It wouldn't occur to them to do it. The mother keeps this shit going." When they go to highschool, get a car, they'll escape, get their own place, and it'll be over. She's worried about her safety, she "wouldn't put it past" her husband to kill her.

The girls are playing in bar, April starts talking pro-racism ("we are white separatists"), so the bar owner (white woman) throws them out. April says she blames the media "the media have castrated the white race".

Family move from California to Montana for fresh start. 6 months later: April is happy "girls school is 98% white", small town. Local news station story - people are protesting outside their house. They receive some death threats, the FBI are involved, April says "someone has pinned a great big medal on me. It means I must be doing something effective.. something right".

In basement band products - white pride wrist bands, mouse mats with photos of girls and sister (her name is "Dresden"). April runs a radio show from basement (Stormfront Radio stormfront.org). April (on radio) talks about some "girl had beers with Mexican migrants.. they almost killed her". One of the girls says "I wouldn't consider myself a white nationalist. Below that. Not as extreme anymore". "On Martin Luther King day.. I felt guilty for things people accuse me of racism, worshipping Hitler. Things I don't agree with".

They move again. Disagreement at new home. Girl says "I don't want it to seem like my Mom is forcing me and my sister to do stuff because that's not the way it is". "We don't believe in racism". April says what she means by racism isn't what general society means, so *by her own definition* she isn't racist, even if she is by everyone elses. April denies she wants to be a martyr.

Girl says "We don't care about Hitler - we wore those t-shirts because we thought they were a joke... have you seen us wear them anywhere else? We threw them away". April denies this, she still has the t-shirts, shows them to camera later.

Back to Dianne. Bill had confronted her. "You didn't tell him about how you feel about Nazi's did you?". They fall out, she blames all the Nazi stuff, filling him with hate. Bill leaves saying "Hope you never wanted to see your grandkids again".

Finally : This summer April and the twins are planning a European tour. Bill and Dianne are still living together.

Yeah... I watched the documentary aswell. Really did seem to me that the girls themselves were trying to distance themselves from the White nationalism/racism... A few corrections to the above synopsis though. David Lane called them his "Daughters, fantasy sweethearts", not "Sweethearts, fantasy daughters". He also seemed to be saying that he felt some sort of sexual attraction to them (or that was what was implied in the documentary). Also, the attack on April (the Mother) by a black man when she was younger was only alleged. Malbolge 23:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

No real Nazi band

I believe that this deserves more emphasis, but I'm not sure how it should be done:

"Lamb and Lynx also star in a documentary entitled Nazi Pop Twins. This aired on Thursday 19th July 2007, on Channel 4 at 10:30pm in Britain.

(...) The documentary shows tension between the twins and their mother, April, their manager and the driving force behind the band. The girls are shown trying to distance themselves from the White Pride scene, and Prussian Blue's non-political songs receive a warm reception at a bar in Fresno, until their background is revealed."

The girls seem to have been (ab-)used by their psychotic mother, they don't share her Nazi/white pride views - but, as of yet, they are still too young to escape her influence. They're kids, for God's sake. I recommend that documentary to everyone interested in the band, it's on youtube at the moment. They seem to be nice girls, actually, and once they're grown up, they will probably have nothing to do with the scene any more. Kuba Libre 14:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Hitler's "good ideas"

The article says that: "During their ABC interview, the twins said they believe Adolf Hitler was a great man with good ideas, such as eugenic standards and incentives to improve the genetic quality of the German people, and marriage loans to help qualified German families begin upon a firm financial basis." I watched the interview on ABC's website many times and although the twins do say that Hitler had some good ideas, they do not give any examples of these good ideas. So where does the reference to "eugenic standards ... and marriage loans" come from? Is there another version of the interview in which they mention these examples? The link to the article by Tracy Connor in the New York Daily News, which is given as a source, is not working. I raised this point about the examples of "good ideas" about 2 years ago, but no-one responded. If no-one can tell me the source of these examples, I am going to remove them. Marsoult 06:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I suggest we replace the term 'white nationalist' with the term 'white racist'

We don't call terrorists 'religious martyrs' or 'freedom fighters' just because that is what they or their supporters call themselves. Should we call white racists 'white nationalists' just because that is what they call themselves?

At any rate, their self-designation as white nationalists doesn't make much sense. Their own fellow white people decided to have a colour-tolerant country, and rebelling against this sentiment could be said to border treason.

So, I say we call them white racists and leave it at that. As far as I know, they aren't saying white people is superior to other races, they are just advocating a total massacre of non-white races. It seems to me that white racists is what they are, and what they should be called. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1tephania (talk • contribs) 00:45, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

The definition "white nationalist" is more accurate. If the "racists" are Nazis they are called Nazis and if they are white nationalists they are called white nationalists.

MoritzB 09:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[To ltephania:] White nationalists do not advocate genocide. They claim they want separation of races, not destruction of other races. Also, arguing that a country ought to be different in some way is not "bordering treason".

But in the end, the argument is clear: the claim that nationalism is really just racism is an expression of opinion that should be kept to a minimum on WP. Phiwum 15:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

White nationalism is a movement. White racism is a term that doesn't exists. A person is racist or they are not, there is no white and black racists. So it has to be white nationalism. Cls14 (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, if a person is white and they are also racist that would make them a white racist. Like a male sexist. But still, I agree that it should stay "white nationalist" simply because it's more neutral and accurate. Ospinad (talk) 15:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Why are they even listed here?

I first heard of Lynx and Lamb when I watched an episode of "Louis Theroux's Weird Weekends" in which he spent time among racists, skinheads and Nazis in California. The most obvious fact about the girls is that they hav no musical talent whatever. I'm a former music teacher with a conservatory degree, so I have some idea what I'm talking about. The only reason I can imagine anyone listening to these two is that they're attracted to the racist, white supremacist "message" in the words of their songs.

When Louis Theroux interviewed Lynx and Lamb and their mother, the girls were only 11 and had no idea what they were singing about. After a tone-deaf rendition of a song the lyrics of which reduced the history and current politics of southern Africa to "black people are killing whites," Theroux asked the girls a couple of questions about the words they'd been singing. Neither of them could as much as remember what "ANC" stood for, much less what it was. He didn't bother to ask about apartheid, or any of the excesses of the former white regime of South Africa. He probably sensed it would have been a waste of time.

161.88.255.139 17:43, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

They are listed here because they are notable. The fact that they have been featured in Theroux's documentary and book as well as other media is sufficient proof that they are notable. Now, maybe you think they don't deserve this attention and you may be right. But the fact that they have received so much attention is by itself sufficient evidence of notability, whether or not the girls are talented or understand the racist content of their singing. Phiwum 18:08, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

White Noise

Hello,

I'd like to add some information on the musical WHITE NOISE about the group, but i can't edit the page. Can someone help? TheatreKid01 (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC

Post what you want to add, here on the Talk page, and someone else can add it to the article. Ospinad (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Prussian Blue was the inspiration for Ryan J. Davis and Joe Drymala's musical, White Noise. The show received rave reviews and was featured on Good Morning America and ABC Primetime Live. The show has been optioned for a major New York run.

TheatreKid01 (talk) 22:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks good enough to me, I'll add it to the references in the media section. BTW, do you think the play should get it's own article? Ospinad (talk) 19:35, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, it could. It received a ton of media attention and is due for a major new york run and a feature film in the future. How do we make that happen?TheatreKid01 (talk) 02:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

White nationalist/racist

I know this isn't about specifically this article but I'm begining to think we need a way to protect individual senctences or word from editing. I've seen white nationalist changed to racist and back more times than i've bothered to count. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avsn (talk • contribs) 19:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)