Revision as of 04:12, 7 January 2008 editJaye9 (talk | contribs)226 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:33, 7 January 2008 edit undoJaye9 (talk | contribs)226 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 481: | Line 481: | ||
'''User:141 Writes''' NB: This is undoubtedly a source from Elvis's lifetime. By the way,the Guardian Article also proves(as many sources do)that Vernon & Dee Presley had indeed been living together with Priscilla and Elvis for a considerable period of time at Graceland. You should stick close to the facts to be found in published sources,Lockdale insted of making false accusations against other contributors. Talk:Elvis Presley/Archives:15. July 2006-December 2006?.--] (]) 04:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | '''User:141 Writes''' NB: This is undoubtedly a source from Elvis's lifetime. By the way,the Guardian Article also proves(as many sources do)that Vernon & Dee Presley had indeed been living together with Priscilla and Elvis for a considerable period of time at Graceland. You should stick close to the facts to be found in published sources,Lockdale insted of making false accusations against other contributors. Talk:Elvis Presley/Archives:15. July 2006-December 2006?.--] (]) 04:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC) | ||
Vernon was often at Graceland,but since his marriage on July 3,1960,he lived in a house near Graceland with Dee and her three boys. Taken from: Joe Esposito and Elena Oumano,"Good Rockin'Tonight. p.56--] (]) 04:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:33, 7 January 2008
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elvis Presley/Archive 23 page. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Elvis Presley/Archive 23 was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This non-existent page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Elvis Presley
I've created a WikiProject that will hopefully help focus the efforts of all of us involved with Elvis-related articles. Obviously, those of us who work on these articles collectively know pretty much everything there is to know about Elvis. However, we must keep in mind that this is an encyclopedia and just because it's published in a biography does not mean it should be included here. We want to present our knowledge to the reader as clearly and focused as possible, leaving out the gossip, hearsay and such. That's what the biographies are for. So, for what is relevant in terms of an encyclopedia, we want the readers to know everything we know.
In order to get things going in the most productive manner possible, I have the following proposal (which is reflected in the project pages, but can be changed if consensus does not support it):
- A collaboration of the week, as many projects have. However, initially, rather than having a different article each week, we start with the Elvis article and do one section per week. With each section, we would follow a few short steps:
- Paste the section, as it currently exists, to the talk page.
- Discuss issues and possible changes.
- Draft the rewrite and discuss.
- Repeat steps 2 and 3 until consensus is reached.
- Replace current section with the rewrite.
- Should there be a need to extend the time frame to more than a week, that's fine. However, each section would get no less than one week. This allows all editors to have a say in each section—even those who only edit once per week.
If consensus supports this proposal, then we can start immediately. If everyone respects this, there should be no need for page protection. However, if edit wars resume and the page is once again protected, this process will still be able to go on as stated above. The only difference will be that only I or another involved admin will be able to replace the current version with the rewrite.
Please discuss. Lara❤Love 21:09, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Looks like a very workable idea. Rikstar 18:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- All articles have been assessed. Some still lack an importance rating, but they're at least all tagged. Now it's just a matter of article improvement. Shall we start today? Lara❤Love 18:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still looks like a very workable idea. So... Early life currently reads as follows:
Early life
First draft
Presley's father, Vernon (April 10, 1916–June 26, 1979), had several low-paying jobs, including sharecropper and truck driver. His mother, Gladys Love Smith (April 25, 1912–August 14, 1958) worked as a sewing machine operator. They met in Tupelo, Mississippi, and eloped to Pontotoc County where they married on June 17, 1933.
Presley was born in a two room house, built by his father, in East Tupelo. He was the second of identical twins—his brother was stillborn and given the name Jesse Garon. The family lived just above the poverty line and attended the Assembly of God church.Template:Fn Vernon has been described as "a malingerer, always averse to work and responsibility." In 1938, he was jailed for an eight dollar check forgery. During his absence, his wife, described as "voluble, lively, full of spunk", lost the family home. Priscilla Presley recalls her as "a surreptitious drinker and alcoholic."
Presley was bullied at school; classmates threw "things at him—rotten fruit and stuff—because he was different... quiet and he stuttered and he was a mama's boy."
At age ten, he made his first public performance in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, the young Presley had to stand on a chair to reach the microphone and sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." He won second prize.
In 1946, Presley got his first guitar. In November 1948, the family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, allegedly because Vernon—in addition to needing work—had to escape the law for transporting bootleg liquor. In 1949, they lived at Lauderdale Courts, a public housing development in one of Memphis' poorer sections. Presley practiced playing guitar in the laundry room and also played in a five-piece band with other tenants. Another resident, Johnny Burnette, recalled, "Wherever Elvis went he'd have his guitar slung across his back... e'd go in to one of the cafes or bars... Then some folks would say: 'Let's hear you sing, boy.'" Presley attended L. C. Humes High School, but fellow students apparently viewed the young singer's performing unfavorably: One recalled that he was "a sad, shy, not especially attractive boy" whose guitar playing was not likely to win any prizes. Many of the other children made fun of him as a 'trashy' kind of boy playing 'trashy' hillbilly music."
Presley occasionally worked evenings to boost the family income. He began to grow his sideburns and dress in the wild, flashy clothes of Lansky Brothers on Beale Street. He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and was mocked and bullied for it. Despite his unpopularity, he was a contestant in his school's 1952 "Annual Minstrel Show" and won by receiving the most applause and thus an encore (he sang "Cold Cold Icy Fingers" and "Till I Waltz Again With You").
After graduation, Presley was still rather shy, a "kid who had spent scarcely a night away from home". His third job was driving a truck for the Crown Electric Company. He began wearing his hair longer with a "ducktail"—the style of truck drivers at that time.
I propose shortening this to:
Presley's father, Vernon (April 10, 1916–June 26, 1979), had several low-paying jobs, including sharecropper and truck driver. His mother, Gladys Love Smith (April 25, 1912–August 14, 1958) worked as a sewing machine operator. They met in Tupelo, Mississippi, and eloped to Pontotoc County where they married on June 17, 1933.
Presley was born in a two room house, built by his father, in East Tupelo. He was the second of identical twins (his brother was stillborn and given the name Jesse Garon). He grew up as an only child. The family lived just above the poverty line and attended the Assembly of God church.Template:Fn In 1938, Vernon Presley was jailed for an eight dollar check forgery. During his absence, his wife lost the family home.
At age ten, Presley made his first public performance in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, he had to stand on a chair to reach the microphone and sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." He won second prize.
In 1946, Presley got his first guitar. In November 1948, the family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, allegedly because Vernon—in addition to needing work—had to escape the law for transporting bootleg liquor. In 1949, they lived at Lauderdale Courts, a public housing development in one of Memphis' poorer sections. Presley practiced playing guitar in the laundry room and also played in a five-piece band with other tenants. Presley occasionally worked evenings to boost the family income. He began to grow his sideburns and dress in the wild, flashy clothes of Lansky Brothers on Beale Street. He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and was mocked and bullied for it. Despite any unpopularity, Presley was a contestant in his school's 1952 "Annual Minstrel Show" and won by receiving the most applause and thus an encore (he sang "Cold Cold Icy Fingers" and "Till I Waltz Again With You").
After graduation, Presley was still rather shy, and had spent little time away from home . His third job was driving a truck for the Crown Electric Company. He began wearing his hair longer with a "ducktail"—the style of truck drivers at that time.
Discussion
This version gets rid of quotes (which I think are generally unencyclopedic) and cuts the section down to facts, with a bit of interest thrown in. Rikstar 18:51, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I like it for the most part, but I think the "mama's boy" quote is an important one. I also think the comments of "trashy boy making hillbilly music" should also be included. I think it adds context to see where he started compared to where he ended up. In the 1946 paragraph, I think it would read/flow better with a slight tweaking of the following part: "Presley practiced playing guitar in the laundry room and also played in a five-piece band with other tenants. He occasionally worked evenings to boost the family income, and began to grow his sideburns and dress in the wild, flashy clothes of Lansky Brothers on Beale Street. He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and was mocked and bullied for it." Lara❤Love 19:50, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Got no problems with that. I just tried to add the above to the wikiproject you created but realised you'd added your last comment. Apologies. Rikstar 20:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I fully agree that the "mama's boy"quote is important
Boy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.69.5.141 (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Second draft
- Now would read as:
Presley's father, Vernon (April 10, 1916–June 26, 1979), had several low-paying jobs, including sharecropper and truck driver. His mother, Gladys Love Smith (April 25, 1912–August 14, 1958) worked as a sewing machine operator. They met in Tupelo, Mississippi, and eloped to Pontotoc County where they married on June 17, 1933.
Presley was born in a two room house, built by his father, in East Tupelo. He was the second of identical twins (his brother was stillborn and given the name Jesse Garon). He grew up as an only child and "was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother." The family lived just above the poverty line and attended the Assembly of God church.Template:Fn In 1938, Vernon Presley was jailed for an eight dollar check forgery. During his absence, his wife lost the family home.
At age ten, Presley made his first public performance in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, he had to stand on a chair to reach the microphone and sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." He won second prize.
In 1946, Presley got his first guitar. In November 1948, the family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, allegedly because Vernon—in addition to needing work—had to escape the law for transporting bootleg liquor. In 1949, they lived at Lauderdale Courts, a public housing development in one of Memphis' poorer sections. Presley practiced playing guitar in the laundry room and also played in a five-piece band with other tenants. He occasionally worked evenings to boost the family income, and began to grow his sideburns and dress in the wild, flashy clothes of Lansky Brothers on Beale Street. He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and was mocked and bullied for it. Despite any unpopularity, Presley was a contestant in his school's 1952 "Annual Minstrel Show" and won by receiving the most applause and thus an encore (he sang "Cold Cold Icy Fingers" and "Till I Waltz Again With You").
After graduation, Presley was still rather shy, and had spent little time away from home . His third job was driving a truck for the Crown Electric Company. He began wearing his hair longer with a "ducktail"—the style of truck drivers at that time.
Rikstar 20:26, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
I endorse this version. It still lacks the trashy, hillbilly quote, but I missed at first that it was a quote from children, so I think it's fine to leave it out. I like this version. Lara❤Love 21:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. I missed out ref. for five-piece band. Now added above. Rikstar 21:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
I really don't know if I have the stomach for going through this again, but I once provided a link to a presentation which stated that something like 2 out of every 3 children are bullied in school. (The other third are probably the bullies.) I don't see what's so noteworthy about Elvis being bullied. Most films about Elvis leave out any bullying scenes. Also, why pick on the South? By current standards, the entire country was conservative in the early/mid 50s. Yes, someone wrote it. A "reliable source", no doubt. The South was one of the first areas of the country where "black sounding" music was accepted by white people (there is a lot more complexity to this, but in general it's true), so how how could it have been more conservative than the rest of the country? As far as the trashy hillbilly music part, you "should" see that in reaction to some of the early public performances, and you could use a Barbara Pittman quote that can be heard at the Experience Music Project in Seattle that is specifically about this, though not specifically about Elvis.
Oh, and how do we know that any time we spend one this version of the article will stay around after protection is lifted? Steve Pastor 23:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- The bullied comment is removed in the above version. That's a good point about the South accepting black music before the rest of the country. This is the sort of stuff I don't think about. As for how will we know it will stay around after protection is lifted, we don't. But, if revisions are not appropriate and not discussed and agreed on here on the talk page, they'll be reverted. Once the article again achieves GA, it will be permalinked in the article history. Same with FA, should we get there. Lara❤Love 04:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Good points. The rewrite does mention he was "mocked and bullied", but because of his unconventional appearance. This seems to be a valid comment based on the sources I've read. I think it's significant because it shows he didn't give in to such intimidation. This attitude may well have contributed to him maintaining unconventional ways - not just regarding his looks - but with music, song choice, etc.
- As for: "He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and was mocked and bullied for it.". This could be amended to:
- "He stood out, especially in the conservative 1950s, and was mocked and bullied for it." (It could read: "... conservative America of the 1950s...", but I think that would be superfluous). Rikstar 09:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Of the two, the former reads better, "conservative 1950s". However, it's occurred to me that the reference to him standing out in the deep south refers to his look, not his sound. So in that the south accepted black music before the rest of the country has no bearing on this statement. This refers to his sideburns and flashy clothes, not his music. Lara❤Love 19:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Er...Ummm...The sideburns and ducktail haircut came from truck drivers of that day and location. So, if you were used to being around truck drivers... Lansky Brothers were selling those flashy clothes to folks other than Elvis. Bullies will seize on ANY reason to torture a victim, and most people have been bullied in their lives. If we can't agree on what the quote was about, I say leave it out. Presley's early recorded song choices were based on what Sam Phillips thought would sell, and what Scotty, Bill, and Elvis knew how to play. Steve Pastor 20:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I do not agree with the latest changes. Some important facts are missing:
- Vernon has been described as "a malingerer, always averse to work and responsibility."
- his wife, described as "voluble, lively, full of spunk".
- Priscilla Presley recalls her as "a surreptitious drinker and alcoholic."
- At the beginning of a biography we need some brief information about Elvis’s parents and their character. It shows the proletarian background of the singer’s family. The information also explains why Elvis was so close to his mother. According to Peter Guralnick, his mother Gladys "worshiped him from the day he was born." Elvis himself said, "My mama never let me out of her sight. I couldn't go down to the creek with the other kids." Later, Gladys was so proud of her boy, that she "would get up early in the morning to run off the fans so Elvis could sleep." She was frightened of Elvis being hurt: "She knew her boy, and she knew he could take care of himself, but what if some crazy man came after him with a gun? she said...tears streaming down her face."
- Presley was bullied at school; classmates threw "things at him—rotten fruit and stuff—because he was different... quiet and he stuttered and he was a mama's boy."Cite error: A
<ref>
tag is missing the closing</ref>
(see the help page).
- This passage should not be removed, as it is well sourced and gives a nice impression of Elvis’s unpopularity at school at that time. At the start of his fame, guitarist Scotty Moore still attested that the singer was a "typical coddled son" and "very shy": "His mama would corner me and say, 'Take care of my boy. Make sure he eats. Make sure he -' You know, whatever. Typical mother stuff." But Elvis "didn't seem to mind; there was nothing phony about it, he truly loved his mother." Moore adds that Elvis "was more comfortable just sitting there with a guitar than trying to talk to you."
- The conservative “Deep South” makes sense as all of Elvis’s friends were described as Southern boys and the singer was later accused of racism. His poor, white origins in deeply racist Mississippi, his purchase of an old Memphis mansion, and his association with right-wing politicians such as Richard Nixon have often been cited as proof of his conservative feelings. Here is Michael T. Bertrand, Race, Rock, and Elvis (University of Illinois Press, 2000):
- There are several reasons why no subject associated with Presley causes greater controversy and conflict than that of race. He was, after all, a white performer whose financial success rested upon the songs and styles of black artists historically excluded from the popular music marketplace. Second, he hailed from the former slave-holding and segregated South. Third, he belonged to a white working class traditionally antagonistic to its African American counterpart. Fourth, upon achieving affluence, he purchased an antebellum-style mansion in Memphis that to many recalled the Old South as represented in Gone with the Wind. Fifth, he associated with racially conservative politicians such as George Wallace and Richard Nixon. Finally, he presumably uttered a racial slur on at least one public occasion during his career. (p.26)
- As the bearer of too many painful images and memories, Presley has become a symbol of all that was oppressive to the black experience in the Western Hemisphere. (p.27)
- Many have almost systematically insisted that Presley, "looking the part of a hillbilly racist," generated nothing but distrust within the black community. A black southerner in the late 1980s captured that sentiment: "To talk to Presley about blacks was like talking to Adolph Hitler about the Jews." One journalist wrote upon the singer's death that African Americans refused to participate in the numerous eulogies dedicated to him. (p.200)
Interestingly, only critical information has been removed. This is not acceptable. Onefortyone 19:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- What critical information is that, 141? Lara❤Love 19:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Some examples. Elvis's father was "a malingerer, always averse to work and responsibility," his mother was described as "a surreptitious drinker and alcoholic." Elvis's classmates threw "things at him—rotten fruit and stuff." See also the conservative “Deep South” passage etc. Onefortyone 19:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, the current version reads:
- In 1946, Presley got his first guitar.
The following passage should be added:
- In 1946, Presley's mother took Elvis to Tupelo Hardware to get him a birthday present. Although he wanted a rifle, he left the store with a $7.90 guitar.
- It is of some importance that young Elvis wanted a rifle. According to Mark Crispin Miller, “Elvis gradually became an explosive megalomaniac as his wealth and boredom increased over the years. ... He loved guns, and regularly shot out television sets and light fixtures, sometimes nearly killing various acquaintances.” See Mark Crispin Miller, Boxed in: The Culture of TV (Northwestern University Press, 1988), p.191. Onefortyone 19:50, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I'd rather see a quote specific to Elvis and his mother rather than the descriptive quotes regarding his parents. I also like the quote that young Elvis "was more comfortable just sitting there with a guitar than trying to talk to you". However, the point is to trim the article so that all the information is presented in fewer words, so I disagree with your need to add information on top of information. We don't need example after example, quote after quote, to get this information across. Make the statement and support it with multiple references. Not all the references have to be quoted. Lara❤Love 20:01, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- The information must be added. The wording may be changed. However, short quotes from mainstream biographies show that reliable sources have been used. This is fully in line with Misplaced Pages policies. Onefortyone 20:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Ditto what Lara wrote about the non necessity of the information 141 wants included. Steve Pastor 20:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that Elvis fans such as Steve Pastor are trying to exclude critical information from the article. Onefortyone 20:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- 141, I don't believe all of the above information is necessary. Some only adds to further explain certain aspects of his life. It's better to state something clearly supported by references than to give three examples, in my opinion, when writing an encyclopedic article. Also, you don't have to quote a reference to show it's reliable. It's place on the reference list accomplishes that. Lara❤Love 20:15, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry Lara, the facts that Elvis's father was "always averse to work and responsibility" and that his mother was an alcoholic etc. are important. Onefortyone 20:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- What context does that add? And your comments regarding Steve Pastor are not productive. Assume good faith. We're all here to improve the article. Just because some of us don't agree with you does not mean we're acting in bath faith. Lara❤Love 20:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- The information about Vernon explains why Elvis was a mama's boy. Gladys began to drink excessively because Elvis was away from her. She died very early because of her alcoholism. This is important and deeply influenced Elvis's life. Onefortyone 20:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's not how it read/reads. Just throwing the information in there does not put it into context. And not all readers are going to put that together. Write it into a paragraph in such a way as to explain that without using more wording than necessary. Lara❤Love 20:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- This means that the first paragraph should be extended. This may be possible. We can also return to one of the former versions of the paragraph, if you agree. For instance, in order to underscore that Elvis was heavily bullied at school, it could be added that Elvis was cornered in the bathroom of his school by a couple of boys with scissors, but was rescued by upperclassman Red West. See Connie Kirchberg and Marc Hendrickx, Elvis Presley, Richard Nixon, and the American Dream (1999), p.6-7. Onefortyone 20:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- That's not how it read/reads. Just throwing the information in there does not put it into context. And not all readers are going to put that together. Write it into a paragraph in such a way as to explain that without using more wording than necessary. Lara❤Love 20:49, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- The information about Vernon explains why Elvis was a mama's boy. Gladys began to drink excessively because Elvis was away from her. She died very early because of her alcoholism. This is important and deeply influenced Elvis's life. Onefortyone 20:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- What context does that add? And your comments regarding Steve Pastor are not productive. Assume good faith. We're all here to improve the article. Just because some of us don't agree with you does not mean we're acting in bath faith. Lara❤Love 20:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry Lara, the facts that Elvis's father was "always averse to work and responsibility" and that his mother was an alcoholic etc. are important. Onefortyone 20:22, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
(←) None of the former versions I read explained it. If you're up to it, draft it below. Otherwise, I'll try something when I get off work. Lara❤Love 21:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Here is an excerpt from one of these older versions:
- Elvis's parents were very protective. He "grew up a loved and precious child. He was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother."His mother Gladys "worshiped him," said a neighbor, "from the day he was born." Elvis himself said, "My mama never let me out of her sight. I couldn't go down to the creek with the other kids." In his teens, Elvis was still a very shy person, a "kid who had spent scarcely a night away from home in his nineteen years." He was teased by his fellow classmates who threw "things at him - rotten fruit and stuff - because he was different, because he was quiet and he stuttered and he was a mama's boy." Psychologists believe that the disappearance of his father "Vernon from Elvis' life when the King was three (Vernon was jailed for passing bad cheques) had a profound effect upon Elvis' emotional development" at an age when "a child naturally goes through a separation anxiety from its mother, which fathers can often help with. Elvis only had Gladys. They slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen." Guitarist Scotty Moore still attested that the singer was a "typical coddled son" and "very shy": "His mama would corner me and say, 'Take care of my boy. Make sure he eats. Make sure he -' You know, whatever. Typical mother stuff." But Elvis "didn't seem to mind; there was nothing phony about it, he truly loved his mother." Gladys was so proud of her boy, that she "would get up early in the morning to run off the fans so Elvis could sleep".Cite error: A
<ref>
tag is missing the closing</ref>
(see the help page).
- Elvis's parents were very protective. He "grew up a loved and precious child. He was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother."His mother Gladys "worshiped him," said a neighbor, "from the day he was born." Elvis himself said, "My mama never let me out of her sight. I couldn't go down to the creek with the other kids." In his teens, Elvis was still a very shy person, a "kid who had spent scarcely a night away from home in his nineteen years." He was teased by his fellow classmates who threw "things at him - rotten fruit and stuff - because he was different, because he was quiet and he stuttered and he was a mama's boy." Psychologists believe that the disappearance of his father "Vernon from Elvis' life when the King was three (Vernon was jailed for passing bad cheques) had a profound effect upon Elvis' emotional development" at an age when "a child naturally goes through a separation anxiety from its mother, which fathers can often help with. Elvis only had Gladys. They slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen." Guitarist Scotty Moore still attested that the singer was a "typical coddled son" and "very shy": "His mama would corner me and say, 'Take care of my boy. Make sure he eats. Make sure he -' You know, whatever. Typical mother stuff." But Elvis "didn't seem to mind; there was nothing phony about it, he truly loved his mother." Gladys was so proud of her boy, that she "would get up early in the morning to run off the fans so Elvis could sleep".Cite error: A
- See . See also , , , , etc. However, much of this material has been removed. Onefortyone (talk) 21:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Also, are you going to be willing to agree to the removal of any supporting information from this article? Particularly in sections where a main article exists for such expansion of information? Lara❤Love 21:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- I do not believe that it is necessary to remove all supporting information from the article. Many other biographical articles also include such information. In my opinion, important details that deeply affected Elvis's life should not be removed from the main article, especially if they are well sourced and part of most books on Elvis. Onefortyone (talk) 21:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- This isn't really getting us very far is it? The material he cites above belongs in a detailed biog. 141 appears to want to use wikipedia to write his own biog of Presley. Does he want to help write an article that is worthy of GA/FA status? I have asked this question several times before, and 141 has not responded. Rikstar (talk) 22:32, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, Rikstar, I indeed want to help write a well-balanced article that is worthy of GA/FA status. Therefore, critical material should not be removed. For comparison, here are some excerpts from the Misplaced Pages page on rock singer Frank Black. It is listed among the featured articles. See . There are several quotes in the “Youth and college” section of this article:
- Charles Thompson was born in Template:City-state on April 6, 1965. His father was a bar owner, and Thompson first lived in Template:City-state as a baby because his father wanted to "learn more about the restaurant and bar business". Thompson was introduced to music at a young age, as his parents listened to 1960s folk rock. His first guitar was his mother's, a Yamaha classical guitar bought with money from his father's bar tips, which he started to play at age "11 or 12".
- Thompson's family moved around, first with his father, and then his stepfather, a religious man who "pursued real estate on both coasts"; his parents had separated twice by the time he was in first grade. ... Thompson later described the music he listened to during his youth:
“ | I used to hang out with some misfits. We were the 'we listen to odd-ball music' kids. I wasn't hanging out at all-ages shows or trying to get into clubs to see bands, and I was buying records at used records stores and borrowing them from the library. You just saw Emerson, Lake & Palmer records. So I didn't know music but I started to hear about it in high school. But it was probably a good thing that I didn't know it, that I instead listened to a lot of '60s records and this religious music. | ” |
- Thompson shared a room with another roommate for a semester before moving in with future Pixies guitarist Joey Santiago. The two shared an interest in rock music, and Santiago introduced Thompson to 1970s punk and the music of David Bowie; they began to jam together.
- In his second year of college, Thompson embarked on a trip to San Juan, Puerto Rico as part of an exchange program. He spent six months in an apartment with a "weird, psycho, gay roommate", who later served as a direct inspiration for the Pixies' song "Crackity Jones"; many of the band's early songs refer to Thompson's experiences in Puerto Rico. Thompson failed to grasp the Spanish language, and left his studies after debating whether he would go to New Zealand to view Halley's Comet (he later said it "seemed like the cool romantic thing to do at the time"), or start a rock band. He wrote a letter urging Santiago, with the words "we gotta do it, now is the time Joe", to join him in a band upon his return to Boston.
Query: if there are so many quotes in this featured article on Frank Black, why should similar quotes be removed from the Elvis article, especially if they are well sourced and throw light on the many diverse aspects of Elvis's colorful life? Onefortyone (talk) 00:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view states,
- All Misplaced Pages articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), representing fairly and, as much as possible, without bias all significant views (that have been published by reliable sources). This is non-negotiable and expected on all articles, and of all article editors.
- The neutral point of view is a means of dealing with conflicting verifiable perspectives on a topic as evidenced by reliable sources. The policy requires that where multiple or conflicting perspectives exist within a topic each should be presented fairly. None of the views should be given undue weight or asserted as being judged as "the truth", in order that the various significant published viewpoints are made accessible to the reader, not just the most popular one. It should also not be asserted that the most popular view, or some sort of intermediate view among the different views, is the correct one to the extent that other views are mentioned only pejoratively. Readers should be allowed to form their own opinions.
This means that well-sourced information should not be removed because some users didn’t like the information. Onefortyone (talk) 01:07, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Here are some commentaries by third-party users concerning the Elvis page:
- Elvis was a controversial figure. His sexuality, drug taking, divorce, eating disorders etc etc all attract differing points of view. To some he was a god; to others a fat bloke who died on the toilet. For many aspects of his life there is no definitive answer. He is dead and people will continue to write with bias and an agenda. To attempt to compromise, this article needs to show both sides with suitable references and let the reader decide. Unfortunately brevity and balance appear to be mutually exclusive but until both sides are allowed their say this article will fall further into disrepute.--Egghead06 (talk) 09:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- I just think that when a user expresses an interest in additions, you can't tell him that it's closed to new content. It's discouraging. You mention a rewrite, and I assume that it means you are open to revisions: removals and additions. The guinea pig article is huge, but if there is good information out there, I can't let size take precedent over content. If the general consensus on the article talk is that it's too large, that's one thing, but consensus changes. the_undertow 00:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
These commentaries speak volumes. Onefortyone (talk) 01:31, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Frank Black is 40kb. Guinea pig is 60kb. Elvis is the size of them both combined, literally. It's topics branch off into 15 main articles. Not everything has to be included in this article. The basic information explained and supported here, expanded in the main articles. Give the reader the details, all the aspects, all the points of view. But you don't have to use 3 examples for every claim. We also don't need quotes from so many people. In many cases, it's one person's opinion, and not even always a notable person's opinion. Lara❤Love 07:45, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Frank Black is not such a big figure as Elvis. You should compare the size of the Elvis page with Misplaced Pages pages on other important figures in popular music. For instance, the good article on Paul McCartney is more than 123 kb, the featured article on Bob Dylan is more than 126 kb. Furthermore, the article still doesn’t include all details and points of view concerning Elvis’s life and career. For instance, there are no details about Elvis’s personal life at Graceland, his family life and the problems he had with his stepmother. Some critical points are still missing. There is nothing on his love of guns and his predilection for dangerous games to be found in the article. It has not been mentioned that several of his friends were badly treated by the singer and that Elvis was of the opinion that "the Smothers Brothers, Jane Fonda, and other persons in the entertainment industry of their ilk," had "poisoned young minds by disparaging the United States in their public statements and unsavory activities", etc. etc. Onefortyone (talk) 21:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with LaraLove, and would emphasize the need to confine extra details - critical or otherwise - to the branch articles. Also, details about Gladys' alcoholism don't need stating in Early years when they are/can be covered in the section dealing with his mother's death (didn't she drink excessively after his "early years"?). I am pleased 141 has now declared he is 'on board' with other editors; I hope he agrees with myself and LaraLove about the need to keep multiple examples out when one will do, and that this has nothing to do with the suppression of criticism by "Elvis fans". Rikstar (talk) 09:54, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Elvis's mother was an alcoholic from the beginning. This must be mentioned in the "Early years" section. Furthermore, I am not of the opinion that significant quotes should be omitted, as many of these quotes represent the knowledge of authorities on Elvis from different points of view. As Egghead06 said, "this article needs to show both sides with suitable references and let the reader decide." Onefortyone (talk) 21:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
- Precisely. To clarify (because I apparently am being misunderstood to some not involved with the article), I don't want any critical information removed. I'm am an Elvis fan, but of his music and look, not so much his life and how he lived it. I want all the information there, as I believe Rikstar and others do. I just want the non-critical supporting details that are not necessary removed or moved to the branch articles. Lara❤Love 14:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Onefortyone, would you mind posting your desired section in the draft section below so we can work from there? Lara❤Love 21:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Third draft
Presley's father, Vernon (April 10, 1916–June 26, 1979) was "a malingerer, always averse to work and responsibility." He had several low-paying jobs, including sharecropper and truck driver. His wife, Gladys Love Smith (April 25, 1912–August 14, 1958), an alcoholic who was "voluble, lively, full of spunk," worked as a sewing machine operator. They met in Tupelo, Mississippi, and eloped to Pontotoc County where they married on June 17, 1933.
Presley was born in East Tupelo as the second of identical twins (his brother was stillborn and given the name Jesse Garon). He grew up as an only child and "was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother." The family lived in a two room house just above the poverty line and attended the Assembly of God church.Template:Fn In 1938, Vernon Presley was jailed for an eight dollar check forgery. During his absence, his wife lost the family home. Psychologists believe that the disappearance of his father "had a profound effect upon Elvis' emotional development" at an age when "a child naturally goes through a separation anxiety from its mother, which fathers can often help with. Elvis only had Gladys. They slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen."
At age ten, Presley made his first public performance in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, he had to stand on a chair to reach the microphone and sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." He won second prize.
In 1946, Presley's mother took Elvis to Tupelo Hardware to get him a birthday present. Although he wanted a rifle, he left the store with a $7.90 guitar. (In later years, Elvis still "loved guns, and regularly shot out television sets and light fixtures, sometimes nearly killing various acquaintances.") In November 1948, the family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, allegedly because Vernon—in addition to needing work—had to escape the law for transporting bootleg liquor. At school, Presley was bullied; classmates threw "things at him—rotten fruit and stuff—because he was different... quiet and he stuttered and he was a mama's boy." At L. C. Humes High School, fellow students viewed the young singer as "a sad, shy, not especially attractive boy" whose guitar playing was not likely to win any prizes. Many of the other children made fun of him as "a 'trashy' kind of boy playing 'trashy' hillbilly music."
In 1949, the family lived at Lauderdale Courts, a public housing development in one of Memphis' poorer sections. Presley practiced playing guitar in the laundry room and also played in a five-piece band with other tenants. He occasionally worked evenings to boost the family income, and began to grow his sideburns and dress in the wild, flashy clothes of Lansky Brothers on Beale Street. He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and was mocked for it. Despite any unpopularity, Presley was a contestant in his school's 1952 "Annual Minstrel Show" and won by receiving the most applause and thus an encore (he sang "Cold Cold Icy Fingers" and "Till I Waltz Again With You").
After graduation, Presley was still rather shy, and had spent little time away from home . According to Scotty Moore, he "was more comfortable just sitting there with a guitar than trying to talk to you." His third job was driving a truck for the Crown Electric Company. He began wearing his hair longer with a "ducktail"—the style of truck drivers at that time.
This is my desired section. Onefortyone (talk) 00:42, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
It's longer than the current version. I think it's actually the current version rearranged with an extra sentence or two. Lara❤Love 01:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- So, after 141's considerable efforts to convince us that Gladys was a drunk because she missed Elvis, now we have the assertion that she was a drunk before that anyway. Which is true? Why not avoid needless conflict like this and just leave it out of this section?
- Why do we need psychologists' beliefs about Presley's closeness to his mother? The draft states they were close. Gladys lost one son at childbirth. Why isn't this a stated reason for them being close? Because it's just more speculation.
- The kid wanted a rifle. Why jump in to stuff about blowing out TV sets? Why at all? What a tenuous link, and so early in the article. This third draft is much worse than the second. And it's unnecessarily long. Why can't we keep it simple? The only useful addition is the Scotty Moore observation. Rikstar (talk) 21:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Elvis's mother was an alcoholic before she missed Elvis. She died very young because of alcohol-induced liver disease. LaraLove recommended to put the information into context so that "all readers are going to put that together." That's what I did. Psychologists believe that Elvis's closeness to his mother had a profound effect upon the singer's emotional development. This is very important and puts facts into context. The same is with Elvis's love of guns. Onefortyone (talk) 23:54, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Do we really need to know that Elvis and his mother "slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen", whether it is true or not? I hope this sort of thing won't be in any version of this article. Steve Pastor (talk) 22:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why not? If it illustrates the poverty of his early life and is properly sourced, what is the problem? It would have been fairly common for family members in the southern states to share sleeping arrangements at that time, and any sexual innuendo is surely in the mind of the beholder. You also have to remember that sexual maturity and awareness occurred at older ages back then. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 23:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
I grew up in public housing and was poor in the same general time as Elvis, not 30 miles from the Mason Dixon line. I did not sleep with my mother. Nevertheless, if it was so common, then why include it? The banal nature of some of this stuff, such as the tales of bullying, call for exclusion from the article. Regardless, of whether it was "common in the south", as you state, mainstream media generally respects the private aspects of something like who slept with whom. Of course, you have to buy into the idea that even public figures deserve some kind of privacy. I understand that in this day and age, these standards are either breaking down, or have already broken down. Given the need to exclude information to make the article an acceptable size, I think it should be left out. Steve Pastor (talk) 23:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- The information that Elvis slept in his mother's bed up until he was a young teen both underscores the poverty of Elvis's early life and the closeness to his mother. Elvis was heavily bullied at school. He was even cornered in the bathroom of his school by a couple of boys with scissors, but was rescued by upperclassman Red West. See Connie Kirchberg and Marc Hendrickx, Elvis Presley, Richard Nixon, and the American Dream (1999), p.6-7. These are important facts having a profound effect on Elvis's life. Onefortyone (talk) 00:01, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
FYI "Bullying is a common experience for many children and adolescents. Surveys indicate that as many as half of all children are bullied at some time during their school years, and at least 10% are bullied on a regular basis." Steve Pastor (talk) 01:11, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
This is from the Archeive of this page, regarding the bullying information. "At one point we agreed to take it out, and it is back. See page 5 of the presentation at this url .In this study only 31% of students reported that they HADN'T been bullied. I identify with anyone who has been the victim of bullies, but can anyone make a good argument as to why this is so important that it shouldn't be deleted? Steve Pastor 00:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)" My question was never answered, so I ask it again. And hope for something more than more quotes from books. Steve Pastor (talk) 01:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- As far as I can remember, there was no agreement to take the bullying information out. It is very important that Elvis was heavily bullied at school, as it had a great influence on his later predilection for Karate and playing dangerous games with his guys. Onefortyone (talk) 03:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- So, is the thinking that they slept together because they were poor and could only afford one bed? And that Elvis was close to his mother because they had slept together? And by the way, was it Elvis or his mother that is quoted saying that they did in fact sleep together? Steve Pastor (talk) 01:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- It was Elvis's father Vernon who said that Elvis and his mother slept together. Most published biographies include these facts. In addition, here is reputed Elvis expert Elaine Dundy on Gladys Smith's house:
- The Smiths' house - you would have to call it a shack - would have been made of Mississippi pine... Inside, it would have a "breezeway," a hall running through the center from the front door to the back door. The front room would contain only one proper iron bedstead covered with a patchwork quilt. The bed would be placed diagonally against two walls, this being the position in which it would take up the least amount of space, while at the same time allowing room on either side of the bed to get in and out of it. All the children, except the youngest, who always slept in the same bed with its parents, slept on what were called "made beds" on the floor. Pallets were stuffed with clean soft crabgrass and sewn into what they called a thicket. And they all slept in the same room."
- See Elaine Dundy, Elvis and Gladys, p.31. The same author writes about Gladys's close relationship with her son:
- it was agony for her to leave her child even for a moment with anyone else, to let anyone else touch Elvis. Maternal love was not for Gladys a prettily sentimental attachment. Rather it was a passionate concentration which deepened into a painful intensity when her son was not there, directly in her sight. She imagined all sorts of horrors. She imagined he was being tortured and she was not there to stop it. It was physical torment for her to be separated from him. Maternal devotion is constantly misrepresented as either grasping, clinging, stifling or pathetic. It is none of these things. Every mother of a very young child has the primordial conviction, deeper than reason, that as long as her child is within her eyesight she will be able to protect him from all harm. Generally the mother outgrows this as the child grows up but Gladys all her life remained anxious over each one of Elvis' separations from her.
- See p.71. Dundy adds on page 77 that neighbors also had "stories of Elvis' precocious solicitude towards his mother." Elvis always watched her and comforted her: " 'There, there, my little baby.' This strange reversal of roles between the parent and the child often takes place when one parent is absent." (p.80) Interestingly, "Vernon and Gladys were always 'his babies,' which was how the adult Elvis referred to them." (p.81) All this shows how unusually close Elvis was to his mother and how much this close relationship affected his life. Onefortyone (talk) 03:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- It was Elvis's father Vernon who said that Elvis and his mother slept together. Most published biographies include these facts. In addition, here is reputed Elvis expert Elaine Dundy on Gladys Smith's house:
Thanks for providing the attribution, although I note that there is no direct quote from Vernon. Note that the words the author used were "would have" rather than "did have" or "was" when describing the house. This is an indication that the author was describing typical conditions rather than the specific conditions. A good writer choses words carefully. There is no question that Elvis was close to his mother, but the choice of words in draft 3 will lead to misinterpretation by most readers without too much added text. The word salacious comes to mind also. And, again, we aren't writing an Elvis biography here.
- Regading previous removal regarding bullying...Probably, the rest of us agreed to remove it, and you didn't. Rikstar has again included the bully bit in draft 4. So, if in spite of the fact that bullying is commonplace (and I hope you all have looked at the links I provided) and I was bullied, too, I would say heavily, and I didn't grow up to shoot tvs, etc.... Steve Pastor (talk) 20:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
4th draft
Presley's father, Vernon (April 10, 1916–June 26, 1979) had several low-paying jobs, including sharecropper and truck driver. Gladys Love Smith (April 25, 1912–August 14, 1958), who became an alcoholic, was "voluble, lively, full of spunk," and worked as a sewing machine operator. They met in Tupelo, Mississippi, and eloped to Pontotoc County where they married on June 17, 1933.
Presley was born in East Tupelo, the second of identical twins (his brother was stillborn and given the name Jesse Garon). As an only child he "was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother." The family lived in a two room house just above the poverty line and attended the Assembly of God church.Template:Fn In 1938, Vernon Presley was jailed for an eight dollar check forgery. It has been claimed that the absence of his father "had a profound effect upon Elvis' emotional development".
At age ten, Presley made his first public performance in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, he had to stand on a chair to reach the microphone and sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." He won second prize.
In 1946, Presley's mother took Elvis to Tupelo Hardware to get him a birthday present. Although he wanted a rifle, he left the store with a $7.90 guitar. In November 1948, the family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, allegedly because Vernon—in addition to needing work—had to escape the law for transporting bootleg liquor. At school, Presley was bullied "because he was different... he stuttered and he was a mama's boy." At L. C. Humes High School, fellow students viewed the young singer as "a sad, shy, not especially attractive boy"; some made fun of him for playing "trashy" hillbilly music.
In 1949, the family lived at a public housing development in one of Memphis' poorer sections. Presley practiced playing guitar in the laundry room and also played in a five-piece band with other tenants. He occasionally worked evenings to boost the family income, and began to grow his sideburns and dress in the wild, flashy clothes of Lansky Brothers on Beale Street. He stood out, especially in the conservative Deep South of the 1950s, and he was mocked for it. Despite any unpopularity, Presley was a contestant in his school's 1952 "Annual Minstrel Show" and won by receiving the most applause and thus an encore (he sang "Cold Cold Icy Fingers" and "Till I Waltz Again With You").
After graduation, Presley was still rather shy. According to Scotty Moore, he "was more comfortable just sitting there with a guitar than trying to talk to you." His third job was driving a truck for the Crown Electric Company. He began wearing his hair longer with a "ducktail"—the style of truck drivers at that time.
A revision, to reduce it's length and redundant wording, for what its worth. I hope editors will note it is not simply a revert and that content remains because it has been discussed above. It isn't my preferred version, but like any decent editor, I am trying to accommodate others. Rikstar (talk) 11:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Discussion
The first sentence reads,
- Presley's father, Vernon (April 10, 1916–June 26, 1979) had several low-paying jobs, including sharecropper and truck driver.
I think it is important to mention that Vernon was "a malingerer, always averse to work and responsibility." This passage should not be removed, as there is no further information about the character of Elvis's father in the article and it underscores why Elvis's mother had such a strong influence upon her son.
- At age ten, Presley made his first public performance in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, he had to stand on a chair to reach the microphone and sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." He won second prize.
This passage may be shorter:
- At age ten, Presley won second prize in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show. Dressed as a cowboy, he sang Red Foley's "Old Shep." Onefortyone (talk) 19:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Or:
- At age ten, Presley won second prize in a singing contest at the Mississippi-Alabama Fair and Dairy Show for his rendition of Red Foley's "Old Shep". Lara_Love 20:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree to shortening the Old Shep bit and prefer the above version. I think we could get rid of the direct quote about Vernon and make it:
- Vernon has been described as a malingerer, averse to work and responsibility . Rikstar (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
As far as the above discussion regarding his early life, there seems to me to be enough relevant, sourced information to create a main article on the matter. Thoughts? Lara_Love 20:15, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- You're probably right, but every section could potentially have its own main article. Would that be acceptable? Rikstar (talk) 14:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- I would think so. He's notable, and those years are sourced. It will be illustrated. This article needs to be shortened for readability. It should touch on all the major points and leave the reader with an understanding and knowledge of all the important aspects of his life and career. It should leave them wanting to read more, and for that, we expand in main articles on each topic. I see no reason his early years can't support a stand-alone article. There's certainly enough information. I assume these biographies go into more details regarding his parents, no? I don't know about them. I'm interested to find out more. This is a good way to make that available to everyone who hasn't read the bios. Lara_Love 19:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- I am not so sure if it is really necessary that every section should have its own main article. As a colorful personality, Elvis needs one comprehensive article including many facts concerning his life and career. Query: how many users are going to read all the additional material presented in extra articles? Onefortyone (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- How many users are going to read an article the length of a book? Lara❤Love 14:59, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I am not so sure if it is really necessary that every section should have its own main article. As a colorful personality, Elvis needs one comprehensive article including many facts concerning his life and career. Query: how many users are going to read all the additional material presented in extra articles? Onefortyone (talk) 22:41, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I have now included the 4th draft of the first section with minor changes in the article. It is shorter than the previous version. I hope this is satisfactory to all. Onefortyone (talk) 05:55, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
References
Only passing by. I learned something from this content and had fun reading it, but the citation formatting is muddled (pls see below). Gwen Gale (talk) 17:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've removed the example. We can look on the article page. Lara_Love 19:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Original Research ?
On a quick skim-through here, I've noticed a number of original research violations. Specifically this paragraph which I have removed , is a synthesis of sources serving to advance a position (check out this WP:NOR, and this WP:SYN). From experience its quite easy to fall into this sort of trap when writing articles or essay's, so we'd best be on the lookout. Time permiting I will take a closer look at the article for more orignal research, any help would be appreciated.GiantSpitoon (talk) 23:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- The material you have removed is well sourced, as it is backed up by several mainstream biographies on Elvis (among them authorities such as Alanna Nash and Peter Guralnick) and eyewitness accounts of women the singer dated. You may include quotes from other sources contradicting the statements given in the said section, if there are any such sources, but do not remove well-sourced material that is not in line with your personal opinion. Here is Peter Guralnick, Last Train to Memphis: The Rise of Elvis Presley (1994), p. 415, on Elvis's alleged affairs with girls:
- He was still seeing Yvonne Lime occasionally, but he was dating Anne Neyland, a former Miss Texas whom he had met on the MGM lot, and Venetia Stevenson, too, when a rumor that he was about to marry Yvonne in Acapulco broke at the end of May. "When I get married," he told the press, after the Colonel 's official denials, "it'll be no secret. I'll get married in my hometown of Memphis, and the whole town'll be there." He wasn't really serious about anyone for the time being, though. He was enjoying the single life, and when he got bored he just had to tell the guys to hunt up some girls in the lobby of the hotel. He would have them brought up to the suite, offered one observer, "and Elvis would go in the other room, he'd go in the bedroom or somewhere, and then when they came back with the girls, the girls would sit there for maybe ten or fifteen minutes, and finally one of the cousins would go in the bedroom and come out himself and another ten minutes would go by - and then in would come Elvis. And there would be like a silence, and then the cousins would say, 'Oh, Mary Jane, this is Elvis,' and the girls would be totally gone." For the more experienced girls it wasn't like with other Hollywood stars or even with other more sophisticated boys they knew. They offered to do things for him, but he wasn't really interested. What he liked to do was to lie in bed and watch television and eat and talk all night...
- There can be no doubt that Elvis wasn't overtly sexually active. Onefortyone (talk) 18:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Well-sourced is irrespective of the point, what you are doing is drawing these sources together to advance a position which you appeared to have reached yourself, and that is original research; in other words your creating a new narrative from a pile of sources you have hand-picked - a big no no. Also, the above quotation you have given is open to interpretation and does not explicitly state what you conclude from it (for example, that may just be ONE ocassion here Presley decided not to do whatever...). Your conclusion that Presley was not generally overtly sexually active from this and other sources bundled together is just that, YOUR CONCLUSION, and is thus original research. Oh, and I do not appreciate being accused of removing material based on the fact that I personally don't like it, please assume good faith in the future as I am with you.GiantSpitoon (talk) 22:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- No, you are wrong. It is not my conclusion, as most sources say that Elvis was not overtly sexually active. Even his ex-wife Priscilla confirms that this was the case. By the way, it is very interesting that you, as a new user, are well informed about Misplaced Pages pages such as WP:NOR and WP:AGF and that you are so keenly interested in removing well-sourced content from the Elvis article. This strongly suggests that you may be a sockpuppet of another user who was edit warring on Elvis Presley in the past. Therefore, I cannot assume good faith. Onefortyone (talk) 20:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Unless you have a published source which draws your same conclusion based on the sources you have presented, what you have included is synthesis of published sources which advance an unpubished view point, and is therefore original research under WP:SYN. Whether it's well sourced or not doesn't matter! From a quick glance your most sources is a mere handful, and you cannot draw a conclusion yourself based on that handful (or even a more substantial amount) that Presley was not very sexually active. Also, please stop questioning my motives, just because I've read many of wikipedia's policies (like every new user should!) and am proactive in removing original research, that doesn't all of a sudden mean I'm a sockpuppet of anyone! I AM NOT here to pick fights, or remove 'well-sourced' information without reason, but I will remove original research where I can; that's my main interest here. And, to show my good faith, I volunteer to step back from editing out the paragraph and await further comment from the community.GiantSpitoon (talk) 23:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with GiantSpitoon that this article is of very low quality due to the absurd level of "original research" being attempted here. There appears to be a continuing obsession with salacious trivia, and this article could use a vigorous amount of content pruning. The subject, Elvis, deserves Good Article status, but the presentation is bogged down with excessive amounts of pointless and unencyclopedic rubbish pushing questionable Points of View. Since I'm not the only one who feels this way, I'm sure that we could soon get to work trimming a lot of this improperly-presented content. Hoserjoe (talk) 22:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
During the time that I have participated in this article, 141 has outlasted all other editors, in spite of having been previously taken to arbitration for the same behavior that has been exhibited since being allowed back into the article. Numberous editors have removed 141's contributions repeatedly. 141, however, persists. Steve Pastor (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- It is interesting how one or two Elvis fans endeavor to uphold the myth of Elvis's intensive sex life that is primarily being promoted on some fan sites in order to stress the megastar's masculinity. However, too many independent sources say otherwise, and this is what counts on Misplaced Pages. According to reputed Elvis biographer Alanna Nash, "the so-called dangerous rock-and-roll idol was anything but a despotic ruler in the bedroom" and he "would never put himself inside one of these girls..." The author also writes that Elvis was overly attached to his mother and could not relate normally to mature women. During his military service, he had "discovered prostitutes and picked up the intense fear of sexually transmitted diseases which led to claims that he had a morbid fear of sexual penetration." June Juanico "recalls a time when she stood up to Elvis in front of his band of hangers-on, who even then were beginning to accompany him everywhere. He grabbed her arm, took her into the bathroom and declared: 'Look, you are so right, I am really sorry.' He kept her there for five minutes, then swaggered out, his image intact." See Tracy McVeigh, "Elvis Special: Love me tender." The Observer, Sunday August 11, 2002. Actress June Wilkinson remembered that Elvis gave her "a tour of his suite, sat me on the bed in his bedroom and sang to me for two hours. That was it." See Paul Parla and Charles P. Mitchell, Screen Sirens Scream!: Interviews with 20 Actresses from Science Fiction, Horror, Film Noir and Mystery Movies, 1930s to 1960s (2000). Cassandra Peterson alias 'Elvira' says she knew Presley for only one night and all they did was talk. See Ruthe Stein, "Girls! Girls! Girls! From small-town women to movie stars, Elvis loved often but never true," San Francisco Chronicle, August 3, 1997. In her memoir, Breathing Out (St. Martin's Press, 2005), Peggy Lipton relates that Elvis was like a "teenage boy". "He didn't feel like a man next to me - more like a boy who'd never matured." When he tried to make love with Lipton, "he just wasn't up to sex. Not that he wasn't built, but with me, at least, he was virtually impotent." In an interview, Cybill Shepherd reveals that Presley kissed her all over her naked body - but refused to have oral sex with her. His slow tender kisses ended at her bellybutton. Elvis explained to her, "Me and the guys talk and, well, white boys don't eat pussy." According to his own words, Elvis "didn't make love to Anita Wood the whole four years went with her" "Just to a point. Then I stopped. It was difficult for her too, but that's just how I feel." In her book, Elvis and me, Priscilla Presley writes that she "felt sure the night would end with Elvis finally making love to me. I was drunk with ecstasy. I wanted him. I became bolder, reaching out to him, totally open and honest in my need. Then, as before when we'd reach this point, he stopped and whispered, 'Don't get carried away, Baby. Let me decide when it should happen. It's a very sacred thing to me. It always has been. You know that I want it to be something to look forward to." In another chapter, Priscilla says, "Any sexual temptations were against everything he was striving for, and he did not wish to betray me, the girl waiting for him at home who was preparing to be his wife." "Fearful of not pleasing him-of destroying my image as his little girl - I resigned myself to the long wait." According to sexual psychologists, "Elvis never made love to her again after the birth of his daughter, and would never have sex with a woman who had had a baby." See Carol Martin-Sperry, Couples and Sex: An Introduction to Relationship Dynamics and Psychosexual Concepts (2004). Reputed Elvis biographer Peter Guralnick concludes that for "the more experienced girls it wasn't like with other Hollywood stars or even with other more sophisticated boys they knew." Although they offered to do things for Presley, "he wasn't really interested. What he liked to do was to lie in bed and watch television and eat and talk all night..." If there are any other sources that contradict these many accounts which say that Elvis wasn't overtly sexually active, would you please cite them. According to Misplaced Pages policy, the "cite sources" guideline is the best way to ensure that you do not violate the NOR policy. "In short, the only way to demonstrate that you are not presenting original research is to cite reliable sources that provide information directly related to the topic..." That's what I have done. Onefortyone (talk) 02:40, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm just repeating myself again, but oh well ... This great big wad of text doesn't change the fact that the way they are presented is original research! Once again, I am citing WP:SYN here, you have drawn these hand-picked sources together to further the unpublished conclusion based on these that Presley was not 'overtly sexually active' - this creates a new narrative, and is therefore original research. Here, you cannot argue that because someone claimed this, and another person stated that, therefore one may conclude that fish can talk - for example; we're not writing an essay here! And, like I've said before (hint! hint!) its made worse in this case because many of the sources you present are open to interpretation (for example, because someone said Presley was like a 'teenage boy' does that necessarily mean he's not very sexually active?), or questionable (did those 'sexual psychologists' camp out near Presley's bed with a pad and pen? I wonder...). GiantSpitoon (talk) 04:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Dennis Hopper once said in an interview that Elvis was with four girls at the same time. When Dennis asked Elvis if he had sex with all four at the same time he replied "yes". A female friend has said on an E!TV special that Elvis had as many as 7 girls at a time in what she described as a Elvis having different woman in different rooms waiting for him. They joined him after he was finished. Juliet Prowse has stated on camera that Elvis was not only a wonderful kisser but a wonderful lover. Anne Helm, his co-star in Follow That Dream has stated on record that her and Elvis had sex very frequently while filming that movie. Elvis' co-star Joan Blackman also stated that her and Elvis had sex frequently on the movie set. So why isn't this incorportated into that section? Is it because it totally wipes out Onefortyone's wish that Elvis was gay? I say that this section should be removed because it is not factual and is distorted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfbinc (talk • contribs) 06:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Would you please provide evidence that reliable sources exist that confirm your claims. If you can quote the exact passages, it would be possible to include parts of the material in the Misplaced Pages article on Elvis. I did some further research in order to prove what you have written. However, I have not yet confirmed most of your claims.
- In his book, Drive-in Dream Girls: A Galaxy of B-Movie Starlets of the Sixties (2003), Tom Lisanti writes about Juliet Prowse, "Regarding her first reaction when learning that she was being paired with Presley, Prowse commented in Drama-Logue, 'My first thought was, "Oh my God. I'm going to work with a juvenile delinquent." That was my first impression of him. Well, he couldn't have been more the opposite. A terrific guy!' ... The chemistry between Presley and Prowse continued off-screen as the duo became an item despite Prowse's on-going affair with Frank Sinatra. To keep the momentum going on screen, producer Hal B. Wallis asked Fox to borrow Prowse again for Elvis's next movie Blue Hawaii (1961) since they worked so well together previously." Prowse "wanted movie star treatment" and Elvis as a companion because she "didn't know anyone else in company ... and he's always surrounded by a dozen buddies." However, she decided not to do the film: "I was only one of three girls in Elvis's life, and one 16-year-old had a more interesting part than mine." The way she handled the matter "made her come across as more of a pampered prima donna than a career-conscious actress. ... She killed her chances of ever working with Presley again... In 1962, despite her very public romance with Elvis Presley, Prowse accepted Frank Sinatra's marriage proposal. She was once again in the headlines..." (p.308-309). Does this sound as if Prowse and Presley were lovers? It seems as if Prowse dated the singer primarily for publicity reasons, as many other starlets did. In an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, June Juanico "blames his manager, Colonel Tom Parker, for encouraging Presley to go out with beautiful women for the publicity."
- Tom Weaver's book, I Was a Monster Movie Maker: Conversations with 22 SF and Horror Filmmakers (2001), includes a chapter on Anne Helm. The author writes that in the 1950s, Anne Helm was New York's top teenwear model who later appeared in some movies. In 1962, she "co-starred (and dallied off-screen)" with Elvis. It is not mentioned that they had a sexual affair.
- Joan Blackman starred opposite Elvis in Blue Hawaii (1961), where they had an on-screen wedding. My sources do not mention that they "had sex frequently on the movie set," as you claim. What really happened on similar occasions is described by Julie Parrish, Presley's co-star in Paradise Hawaiian Style. The starlet relates, "One time on set I had a real pain in my side - a side-effect, I think - and Elvis scooped me up, carried me into his trailer and shut the door. Outside the crew was waiting and wondering, but Elvis was oblivious to the innuendo. He placed his hand over my side and tried to do some healing on me." See Tracy McVeigh, "Elvis Special: Love me tender." The Observer, Sunday August 11, 2002.
- Bill Dakota writes,
- Although many girls were invited to Elvis's mansion (it was printed in all the magazines), the evenings were spent watching television, drinking cokes and eating popcorn. No sex. Just television. There was an exception, I heard of. In Bel-Air one evening, Elvis is alleged to have had four girls taking turns giving him a blow-job. This was outside the mansion, at night, in the yard.
- Actress, Yvonne Lime said, "For the most part, my time in Memphis was a quiet one. There were long hours of just sitting around, talking with Elvis and his parents. Or we'd watch television or gather around the piano and sing old Southern folk songs and spirituals. On Sunday I went to church with Elvis and his parents and afterwards a group of his old friends would drop by the house where we ate hot-dogs and danced and just sat around playing records and singing for hours and hours. And that was pretty much how we spent the six days I was there in Memphis."
- See . This means that the story concerning the "four girls" was an exception. There can be no doubt that most sources agree that Elvis wasn't overtly sexually active. Onefortyone (talk) 23:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I actually thought we were getting somewhere regarding 141's recent involvement in this article. But, the above comments and accusations - assuming bad faith, "Elvis fans" promoting their biased agendas, sockpuppetry claims - are depressingly familiar. I am on record as saying that 141 has the resources, intelligence and communication skills to help make this an excellent featured article, but these are yet again being squandered by 141's negative editing tactics. The original research argument seems a sound one in this case, and it may well apply to other edits in this article. This problem can be solved with some simply editing - it won't be the end of the world as we know it - yet 141 is tenacious to the point of being disruptive in protecting his own edits and promoting his personal agendas. As Steve Pastor says, it is 141 who has been in trouble for his editing behavior before, not those others who are currently trying to edit this article with him. I have veered between severe (and justified) admonishment of 141 and being forgiving, simply because 141 continues to edit the Presley article. It beggars belief that he is allowed to make the same tired accusations time and again, and that his pattern of disruptive editing and warring has not lead to another ban of some form. I now wish, in spite of my previous attempts at goodwill towards 141, that he was banned permanently. Has it not occurred to anyone else that here we are for the umpteenth time, all running around in circles getting het up as 141 calls the tunes?Rikstar (talk) 06:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, Rikstar, a supposed sockpuppet of user Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo appeared on the scene removing, as usual, a well-sourced paragraph from the Elvis article and accusing me, without justification, of original research. Do you really think that this is OK? I hope not. The same thing happened several times in the past. There is much evidence that the said passage was deleted by a newly created sockpuppet. Compare, for instance, this edit with this one. See also and and this edit by Mingy Jongo, one of the many other sockpuppets of Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo, which includes the same accusations of original research. It is certainly no coincidence that GiantSpitoon, as a new user, is very familiar with Misplaced Pages pages such as WP:NOR or WP:AGF and even with the abbreviations used by Misplaced Pages administrators. Furthermore, apart from his interest in Elvis Presley, the very first edits by GiantSpitoon were contributions to Michael Jackson. See , . Significantly, Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo (who, together with his other sockpuppets, also showed much interest in Elvis related topics) was voting against the good article reassessment of Michael Jackson because he found "this article to be quite biased and in general badly written." See , . By the way, before the recent accusations, we were talking about the 4th draft of the first section of the article and not about the "Sex symbol" section. See . Shouldn't we return to the previous discussion? Onefortyone (talk) 23:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like to clarify a few things. Firstly, I'm disappointed onefortyone that you feel I've accused you of anything. All I've done is point toward a paragraph that in accordance with policy (WP:SYN) is original research, and judging from the posts of other users, I'm not alone in this stance. I'll repeat this again because apparently it didn't sink in the first time: I'm not out to attack anyone and I won't remove the contributions of others without a valid reason. We had minor dispute where we reverted which others edits, but instead of continuing I did the right thing by stopping the edit-war and taking it to the talk page for discussion, so why do you persist in attacking me? GiantSpitoon (talk) 03:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, GiantSpitoon, you claim in all innocence, "I'm disappointed onefortyone that you feel I've accused you of anything." Notwithstanding, your accusations are clearly directed at me: "what you are doing is drawing these sources together to advance a position which you appeared to have reached yourself, and that is original research..."; "what you have included is synthesis of published sources which advance an unpublished view point, and is therefore original research..." etc. Significantly, your first edit on Elvis Presley was the removal of an entire paragraph. See . And you removed it without comment on the talk page. The comment only appeared a day later, after I had reinstated the paragraph. See . However, it should be noted that most parts of the present state of the paragraph have been included by Rikstar. The said passage is an abridged version of a much longer paragraph written by me. Rikstar wrote, "Some of the above issues have been addressed by a new 'Sex Symbol' section. I felt this was an obvious addition, especially having read a lot of evidence which does support the idea that he wanted female company, but not always for sexual gratification." See . See also this edit. As for the few other Elvis fans supporting your removal (some of whom are supposed to be socksuppets), they have not yet provided reliable sources that contradict the well-sourced content of the "Sex symbol" paragraph. Onefortyone (talk) 18:43, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'd like to clarify a few things. Firstly, I'm disappointed onefortyone that you feel I've accused you of anything. All I've done is point toward a paragraph that in accordance with policy (WP:SYN) is original research, and judging from the posts of other users, I'm not alone in this stance. I'll repeat this again because apparently it didn't sink in the first time: I'm not out to attack anyone and I won't remove the contributions of others without a valid reason. We had minor dispute where we reverted which others edits, but instead of continuing I did the right thing by stopping the edit-war and taking it to the talk page for discussion, so why do you persist in attacking me? GiantSpitoon (talk) 03:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, Rikstar, a supposed sockpuppet of user Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo appeared on the scene removing, as usual, a well-sourced paragraph from the Elvis article and accusing me, without justification, of original research. Do you really think that this is OK? I hope not. The same thing happened several times in the past. There is much evidence that the said passage was deleted by a newly created sockpuppet. Compare, for instance, this edit with this one. See also and and this edit by Mingy Jongo, one of the many other sockpuppets of Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo, which includes the same accusations of original research. It is certainly no coincidence that GiantSpitoon, as a new user, is very familiar with Misplaced Pages pages such as WP:NOR or WP:AGF and even with the abbreviations used by Misplaced Pages administrators. Furthermore, apart from his interest in Elvis Presley, the very first edits by GiantSpitoon were contributions to Michael Jackson. See , . Significantly, Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo (who, together with his other sockpuppets, also showed much interest in Elvis related topics) was voting against the good article reassessment of Michael Jackson because he found "this article to be quite biased and in general badly written." See , . By the way, before the recent accusations, we were talking about the 4th draft of the first section of the article and not about the "Sex symbol" section. See . Shouldn't we return to the previous discussion? Onefortyone (talk) 23:49, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
If I thought it would make a difference to 141, I would go through the archeives and repeat the arguments that have been made by other editors as to why this material does not belong in this article. Since 141 has been unable or unwilling to understand, or accept any other viewpoints on this subject, that exercise would be pointless. Oh, how about this one, the article is too long and has to be trimmed. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
B Class rating
I've no objection to this, but the three comments under "The following comments have been left for this page" are all from assessments of the the FA candidate of over a year ago. The third comment is certainly no longer relevant, as there isn't a trivia section. My own comment - "However I am put off by the thought of the time it will take, and the inevitable interference that will come from those who have already made this article as bad as it is." - strikes me as still being of some relevance. Editing/discussion have gone quiet lately: I wonder why? I currently have no wish to continue trying to improve this article. It includes many bits that I and a consensus of others have tried to remove, but they remain because of the single-minded and inappropriate tenacity of one user. That user, Onefortyone, has asked me to return to discussing the Early years section, as if his other comments/contributions can be simply ignored. Dragging my name in to support his fight with GiantSpitoon earns no respect from me. This article is supposed to evolve into a better one over time; my views on what should or should not be included have also changed, in marked contrast to 141's general agenda. Soon, he'll be the only one editing the article. Fait accompli? Rikstar (talk) 06:35, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- In response to the recent comments made by user:141 dated 13th December 2007. Taken from Peter Guralnick,Last Train to Memphis. p 415. These are just a few more sentences that follow after what 141 quoted in that same paragraph. It reads: - the companionship seemed as important for him as the sex- and then in the early-morning hours they would make love. "He had an innocence at the time," said one of them. "I'm sure it didn't last.
- Why did you leave this out? Does this not pertain to the text? Jaye9 19 December 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.142.39.219 (talk) 13:41, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Interesting. Perhaps there's a need to check all of 141s sources for selective reference. Perhaps there is also a need to evaluate the appropriateness of 141 continuing to edit this article. Lara❤Love 15:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- The Guralnick quote goes on: "But what he really wanted was to have a relationship, to have company. He was very clean-cut about it. There were a lot of things that he didn't like. And another thing that you could not do around him was mention drugs, he was dead set against it." etc. etc. That Elvis primarily wanted to have company, also male company, and not sex with girls, is also backed up by what is written directly before the passage on the girls in Guralnick's book. It is mentioned that Elvis apparently "loved the entourage" and that they went out to Russ Tamblyn's "beach house one or two more times" . Elvis even asked if he could rent that house "for the next couple of months." Last year, I included a longer quote from Guralnick on my user page explaining why it isn't necessary to cite the whole passage. See . If you would like to see a longer quote from Guralnick in the Elvis article, I have no problems with this. However, it is a fact that modern researchers question whether Elvis had actually sex with most of these girls. Even the Memphis Mafia members were not sure what was going on behind closed doors. Therefore, eyewitness accounts by women who say that they didn't make love are so important. Some users may remember that last year I even included the following passage at the beginning of the section (see , ):
- Several authors have written that "Elvis busied his evenings with various girlfriends" or that his "list of one-night stands would fill volumes." According to eyewitness Byron Raphael, who worked for Presley's manager Parker, the star even had a secret one-night stand with Marilyn Monroe in a hotel room.
- I did this for reasons of balance. This passage was later abridged by Rikstar in order to shorten the section, as we have, on the other hand, the many eyewitness accounts by former girlfriends (and other women the star dated) that they didn't have sex with Elvis. A longer version of the paragraph once read:
- However, it is unclear whether the "sex symbol" actually had sex with most of the women he dated. His early girlfriends Judy Spreckels and June Juanico say that they had no sexual relationships with Presley. Raphael and Alanna Nash have stated that the star "would never put himself inside one of these girls..." During his military service, he had "discovered prostitutes and picked up the intense fear of sexually transmitted diseases which led to claims that he had a morbid fear of sexual penetration." Because of his shyness, Albert Goldman says, "no woman ever saw Elvis undressed." June Juanico "recalls a time when she stood up to Elvis in front of his band of hangers-on, who even then were beginning to accompany him everywhere. He grabbed her arm, took her into the bathroom and declared: 'Look, you are so right, I am really sorry.' He kept her there for five minutes, then swaggered out, his image intact." Julie Parrish, Presley's co-star in Paradise Hawaiian Style, relates, "One time on set I had a real pain in my side - a side-effect, I think - and Elvis scooped me up, carried me into his trailer and shut the door. Outside the crew was waiting and wondering, but Elvis was oblivious to the innuendo. He placed his hand over my side and tried to do some healing on me." ... Playboy star and actress June Wilkinson remembered that she "met Elvis on the set of King Creole. He invited me to dinner at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel. ... Then Elvis gave me a tour of his suite, sat me on the bed in his bedroom and sang to me for two hours. That was it. The next day ... we had dinner again. He was very sweet, and he was friendly. He had more than sex on his mind. He got me to the airport on time, and our paths never crossed again." etc. etc.
- Furthermore, we may also add that, according to Albert Goldman, Elvis was "a pervert" and "a voyeur," who often refrained from intercourse with the women who came to his bedroom. The author also sees a "decline into infantilism." Even when Elvis did "have intercourse with an unfamiliar woman, he would never allow himself to ejaculate inside her." According to Alanna Nash, Elvis had gone impotent in his final years, due at least in part to extremely massive intake of narcotics, both uppers and downers. Nash also emphasizes that Elvis was overly attached to his mother and could not relate normally to mature women; that's why he sought out very young girls because he felt threatened by women his own age. In similar terms, Memphis Mafia members such as Joe Esposito not only report a "boyish charm" in him, but also "voyeuristic tendencies," a "full-blown Madonna complex" and drug-induced impotence in his decline. See Joe Esposito and Elena Oumano, Good Rockin' Tonight: Twenty Years on the Road and on the Town With Elvis (1994). By the way, it is also a fact that Elvis spent most of his time with the guys from the Memphis Mafia, not with girls. And he preferred to hide when he wasn't performing. Esposito recalled leaving Presley's Vegas suite to play poker in the wee hours of the morning: "We had a lot of people up there all the time. We had 15, 30, 50 people a night up in the suite. But it was hard for him, because when he was in town people were always looking for him. But the thing about it, see, we used to go down at 4, 5 in the morning just to play cards a little bit in the casino when it wasn't as crowded. But then all of a sudden it got crowded, bothered him, we had to back upstairs." For reasons of balance, all this well-sourced information may also be included in the article, if you would prefer that. On the other hand, is it really necessary to include all this stuff? I don't think so. As I already recommended on my user page, it may be a good idea to mention that Guralnick writes that for "the more experienced girls it wasn't like with other Hollywood stars or even with other more sophisticated boys they knew." Although they offered to do things for Presley, "he wasn't really interested." He preferred to lie in bed, watch television and talk (and to play cards with his guys). This or a similar statement is a good summary of Elvis's attitudes toward girls, and in the Misplaced Pages article we don't need to go into all details mentioned by Guralnick. Onefortyone (talk) 20:16, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- The Guralnick quote goes on: "But what he really wanted was to have a relationship, to have company. He was very clean-cut about it. There were a lot of things that he didn't like. And another thing that you could not do around him was mention drugs, he was dead set against it." etc. etc. That Elvis primarily wanted to have company, also male company, and not sex with girls, is also backed up by what is written directly before the passage on the girls in Guralnick's book. It is mentioned that Elvis apparently "loved the entourage" and that they went out to Russ Tamblyn's "beach house one or two more times" . Elvis even asked if he could rent that house "for the next couple of months." Last year, I included a longer quote from Guralnick on my user page explaining why it isn't necessary to cite the whole passage. See . If you would like to see a longer quote from Guralnick in the Elvis article, I have no problems with this. However, it is a fact that modern researchers question whether Elvis had actually sex with most of these girls. Even the Memphis Mafia members were not sure what was going on behind closed doors. Therefore, eyewitness accounts by women who say that they didn't make love are so important. Some users may remember that last year I even included the following passage at the beginning of the section (see , ):
- It pains me to see what one user, 141, has done to this article. I watched many others work very hard on getting it to FA status. Maria202 (talk) 15:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- The only problem is that some Elvis fans endeavor to remove sourced material they do not like from the article . Onefortyone (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- It pains me to see what one user, 141, has done to this article. I watched many others work very hard on getting it to FA status. Maria202 (talk) 15:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
ArbCom talk
OK. So we are all belly aching about 141. There seems to be no alternative to involving the Arbcom. I was about ready to do this when Lara stepped in, and I backed off. At least one other editor was with me on this at that time.
- Who is ready to go to the Arbcom?
The form that has to be filled out is a bit daunting, probably by design, but the only way this is going to work is if we bite the bullet. Many of us have spent WAY too much unproductive time on this.
Please leave a simple message on this page. Please do not equivocate. I'm looking for a YES or NO. I'm guessing that this will be best received if we do it above board and out in the open. Steve Pastor (talk) 16:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just a short note. We already had three arbcom cases concerning the Elvis article because my former opponent, Elvis fan Ted Wilkes alias multiple hardbanned User:DW took me to arbitration two or three years ago simply because my contributions were not in line with his personal view and he wanted to harass me. However, my opponents were later banned from the article. The arbcom says that "Onefortyone's editing has substantially improved from that in the earlier arbitration cases. A sampling of edits shows reference to reliable sources without overstating of their content. To a greater extent he allows the reader to draw their own conclusions." See . This is a clear statement. Onefortyone (talk) 20:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Yep, and the same link contains other clear, but critical, statements about 141's editing tactics. Some things have not improved. Rikstar (talk) 04:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- What things do you think have not improved? As far as I can see, I am always citing my sources. Furthermore, you have confirmed above that I have "the resources, intelligence and communication skills to help make this an excellent featured article." Onefortyone (talk) 20:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, and 141 also has "the resources, intelligence and communication skills" to stifle healthy debate and kill this article and its talk stone dead (For god's sake, I pay 141 a compliment, a gesture of goodwill, and he even uses that as a stick to beat his opponents with...) There have been numerous examples of 141 refusing to accept edits he personally disagrees with, pushing specific agendas, ignoring consensus... oh, I'm sorry, I am repeating myself, something else that always seems to happen when dealing with 141's tedious arguments. This article is going nowhere; few if any want to get involved with 141, and relative newcomers, openminded to the possibility of working usefully with 141, are now realizing how futile it is. And 141 will probably believe that this is everyone else's fault, and that he is entirely blameless because... he "is always citing his sources"!! I emphasize: there is a real possibility that 141 will, by undermining all opponents, stealthily get his skewed content inserted bit by bit. This is already happening; editors have given up removing stuff he wants in, resulting in e.g. a brief Ed Sullivan section that perplexingly mentions "ice cream", "pasha" and "harem girl". What does that inform readers about the Sullivan appearance?? It reads like a bunch of crap ('scuse my mouth). Like many other dubious bits, if it is changed or removed yet again with the blessing of a consensus in the name of improvement, you can bet 141 will change it back. I've not come across any user who edits in such a disruptive and subversive manner. It's time 141 left the building. Rikstar (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, Rikstar, did you realize that I have accepted many of your edits, as they are indeed improvements? What I am criticizing is that you and a few Elvis fans are frequently removing sourced content from the Elvis article. Time and again I have argued on the talk page why I find this material relevant. I have also tried to rewrite some passages in order to shorten the article. Notwithstanding, the abridged material also gets removed. Significantly, you are the person who says that what Elvis experts such as Greil Marcus have written in an essay directly related to the topic is "skewed content" and "reads like a bunch of crap" (see above), simply because you and Steve Pastor do not like the information that Ed Sullivan had "censored" or even "buried" the singer, as Elvis was only shown from the waist up and "stepped out in the outlandish costume of a pasha, if not a harem girl" during the Sullivan Show. It should be noted that I do not remove sourced paragraphs written by others. Only Elvis fans have the audacity to do so. Steve Pastor frequently wants to get rid of some information he doesn't like. For instance, he asked, "Do we really need to know that Elvis and his mother 'slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen?' " See . Rodhullandemu answered, "Why not? If it illustrates the poverty of his early life and is properly sourced, what is the problem? It would have been fairly common for family members in the southern states to share sleeping arrangements at that time..." See . Relating to the content dispute, Egghead06 said, "To attempt to compromise, this article needs to show both sides with suitable references and let the reader decide." See . This means that I am not the only one who thinks that specific information concerning Elvis's life should not be removed. And now Steve Pastor wants to take the content dispute a fourth time to arbcom? The arbcom members have certainly more important things to do and you should not waste their valuable time. As for the frequent removals, Professor Wall may be right with his opinions concerning the activities of the world-wide Elvis industry. Onefortyone (talk) 04:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, 141 is being disingenuous again. Time and again on this talk page others have argued why some of 141's edits should be removed - and he just goes ahead and ignores the consensus. 141 accuses me and others of wanting to remove material because we simply don't like it (because it's critical). How many more times have I to state that there are perfectly acceptable reasons for removing or rewriting material, however well-sourced it is? How many more times have I to state that I think the Marcus quote referring to ice cream, etc, is just a bad read that will beg more questions than it answers when the unintiated read it?? How many? Only 141 has the audacity to ignore a consensus of opinion and keep reinstating unsuitable material. I rewrote the Sullivan section after informing others of my intentions to make it read better, and 141 just changed it back, time and again. "I do not removed sourced paragraphs" proclaims 141, as if removing such material has always been done by others for the wrong reasons. Just another contemptible accusation that I find offensive, and 141 wants us all to hold hands and just forget about his history of disruption and get on with editing the Early years section? Sorry, 141 has left a very bad taste in my mouth. Just look how far this article hasn't progressed - because no one wants to work with one user. If arbcom members have more important things to do than address this issue, I'd like to know what they are. User Northmeister was one of only a few substantial contributors to this article, and he stopped because of 141's tiresome antics and accusations. What a pathetic and lamentable state of affairs. Rikstar (talk) 19:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Does this mean that you don't want to get on with editing the "Early years" section? Be that as it may, I do want to get on with the section and have now included the 4th draft with some minor changes in the article. As for the Sullivan passages, the chronology of inclusion may be of some interest. On May 18, 2007, I cited the main parts of an essay by reputed Elvis expert Greil Marcus on Elvis's Ed Sullivan appearances on the talk page in order to discuss its content. See . You said, "This is interesting stuff and I've got more like it on my book shelves," and you wondered what might be significant for inclusion in the article. See . Later, a well-sourced paragraph I had included in the article was repeatedly removed by Northmeister, Steve Pastor and Rikstar. I did not understand why. However, as I was willing to compromise, I tried my best to write shorter versions, and at last, only these few quotes from Marcus remained in the version I prefer: " 'Compared to moments on the Dorsey shows and on the Berle show, it was ice cream.' ... The fact that Presley was only shown from the waist up and 'stepped out in the outlandish costume of a pasha, if not a harem girl' during this last broadcast has led to claims that Sullivan had 'censored' or even 'buried' the singer ..." See . To my mind, these are important remarks by an expert on rock 'n' roll music, as it is clearly shown that Elvis's Sullivan appearances differ from the more lively ones on the Dorsey shows and that Elvis was censored. As for the lamentable state of affairs, did you mention that GiantSpitoon, a supposed sockpuppet of my old opponent, user Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo has removed, as usual, a well-sourced paragraph from the Sex symbol section and started the unnecessary discussion above? Recently, even the entire section has been removed by Hoserjoe. See . But it has been reinstated by LaraLove. See . So much for the disruptive behavior of supposed sockpuppets. See also . By the way, you, Rikstar, included this abridged version of the said section in the Elvis article, and I didn't reinstate the longer version written by me. So much for the claims that I am not willing to compromise. Onefortyone (talk) 06:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just because you can trumpet the odd occasion when you have not done something that might annoy other editors does not negate how disruptive I and others have found your general contributions. The pasha-ice cream-harem girl stuff is a clumsy, confusing read. You said it, your contribution was judged unfit by a consensus of others so you just shortened it, leaving the confusing and obscure Marcus terms. You persistently refused to accept the wishes of a majority who liked neither your long or your shorter version of Marcus' personal comments. We have as usual discussed this issue ad nauseum, and all we have is a sub-standard edit to show for it. Rikstar (talk) 12:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Could it be that you and Steve Pastor simply do not like the terms used by reputed rock 'n' roll and Elvis expert, Greil Marcus, even if they are cited in a very abridged form, because they all too clearly show that Elvis was indeed censored and buried by Sullivan, at a time when Presley's music was not generally accepted? Onefortyone (talk) 03:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just because you can trumpet the odd occasion when you have not done something that might annoy other editors does not negate how disruptive I and others have found your general contributions. The pasha-ice cream-harem girl stuff is a clumsy, confusing read. You said it, your contribution was judged unfit by a consensus of others so you just shortened it, leaving the confusing and obscure Marcus terms. You persistently refused to accept the wishes of a majority who liked neither your long or your shorter version of Marcus' personal comments. We have as usual discussed this issue ad nauseum, and all we have is a sub-standard edit to show for it. Rikstar (talk) 12:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Does this mean that you don't want to get on with editing the "Early years" section? Be that as it may, I do want to get on with the section and have now included the 4th draft with some minor changes in the article. As for the Sullivan passages, the chronology of inclusion may be of some interest. On May 18, 2007, I cited the main parts of an essay by reputed Elvis expert Greil Marcus on Elvis's Ed Sullivan appearances on the talk page in order to discuss its content. See . You said, "This is interesting stuff and I've got more like it on my book shelves," and you wondered what might be significant for inclusion in the article. See . Later, a well-sourced paragraph I had included in the article was repeatedly removed by Northmeister, Steve Pastor and Rikstar. I did not understand why. However, as I was willing to compromise, I tried my best to write shorter versions, and at last, only these few quotes from Marcus remained in the version I prefer: " 'Compared to moments on the Dorsey shows and on the Berle show, it was ice cream.' ... The fact that Presley was only shown from the waist up and 'stepped out in the outlandish costume of a pasha, if not a harem girl' during this last broadcast has led to claims that Sullivan had 'censored' or even 'buried' the singer ..." See . To my mind, these are important remarks by an expert on rock 'n' roll music, as it is clearly shown that Elvis's Sullivan appearances differ from the more lively ones on the Dorsey shows and that Elvis was censored. As for the lamentable state of affairs, did you mention that GiantSpitoon, a supposed sockpuppet of my old opponent, user Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo has removed, as usual, a well-sourced paragraph from the Sex symbol section and started the unnecessary discussion above? Recently, even the entire section has been removed by Hoserjoe. See . But it has been reinstated by LaraLove. See . So much for the disruptive behavior of supposed sockpuppets. See also . By the way, you, Rikstar, included this abridged version of the said section in the Elvis article, and I didn't reinstate the longer version written by me. So much for the claims that I am not willing to compromise. Onefortyone (talk) 06:02, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, 141 is being disingenuous again. Time and again on this talk page others have argued why some of 141's edits should be removed - and he just goes ahead and ignores the consensus. 141 accuses me and others of wanting to remove material because we simply don't like it (because it's critical). How many more times have I to state that there are perfectly acceptable reasons for removing or rewriting material, however well-sourced it is? How many more times have I to state that I think the Marcus quote referring to ice cream, etc, is just a bad read that will beg more questions than it answers when the unintiated read it?? How many? Only 141 has the audacity to ignore a consensus of opinion and keep reinstating unsuitable material. I rewrote the Sullivan section after informing others of my intentions to make it read better, and 141 just changed it back, time and again. "I do not removed sourced paragraphs" proclaims 141, as if removing such material has always been done by others for the wrong reasons. Just another contemptible accusation that I find offensive, and 141 wants us all to hold hands and just forget about his history of disruption and get on with editing the Early years section? Sorry, 141 has left a very bad taste in my mouth. Just look how far this article hasn't progressed - because no one wants to work with one user. If arbcom members have more important things to do than address this issue, I'd like to know what they are. User Northmeister was one of only a few substantial contributors to this article, and he stopped because of 141's tiresome antics and accusations. What a pathetic and lamentable state of affairs. Rikstar (talk) 19:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, Rikstar, did you realize that I have accepted many of your edits, as they are indeed improvements? What I am criticizing is that you and a few Elvis fans are frequently removing sourced content from the Elvis article. Time and again I have argued on the talk page why I find this material relevant. I have also tried to rewrite some passages in order to shorten the article. Notwithstanding, the abridged material also gets removed. Significantly, you are the person who says that what Elvis experts such as Greil Marcus have written in an essay directly related to the topic is "skewed content" and "reads like a bunch of crap" (see above), simply because you and Steve Pastor do not like the information that Ed Sullivan had "censored" or even "buried" the singer, as Elvis was only shown from the waist up and "stepped out in the outlandish costume of a pasha, if not a harem girl" during the Sullivan Show. It should be noted that I do not remove sourced paragraphs written by others. Only Elvis fans have the audacity to do so. Steve Pastor frequently wants to get rid of some information he doesn't like. For instance, he asked, "Do we really need to know that Elvis and his mother 'slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen?' " See . Rodhullandemu answered, "Why not? If it illustrates the poverty of his early life and is properly sourced, what is the problem? It would have been fairly common for family members in the southern states to share sleeping arrangements at that time..." See . Relating to the content dispute, Egghead06 said, "To attempt to compromise, this article needs to show both sides with suitable references and let the reader decide." See . This means that I am not the only one who thinks that specific information concerning Elvis's life should not be removed. And now Steve Pastor wants to take the content dispute a fourth time to arbcom? The arbcom members have certainly more important things to do and you should not waste their valuable time. As for the frequent removals, Professor Wall may be right with his opinions concerning the activities of the world-wide Elvis industry. Onefortyone (talk) 04:57, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, and 141 also has "the resources, intelligence and communication skills" to stifle healthy debate and kill this article and its talk stone dead (For god's sake, I pay 141 a compliment, a gesture of goodwill, and he even uses that as a stick to beat his opponents with...) There have been numerous examples of 141 refusing to accept edits he personally disagrees with, pushing specific agendas, ignoring consensus... oh, I'm sorry, I am repeating myself, something else that always seems to happen when dealing with 141's tedious arguments. This article is going nowhere; few if any want to get involved with 141, and relative newcomers, openminded to the possibility of working usefully with 141, are now realizing how futile it is. And 141 will probably believe that this is everyone else's fault, and that he is entirely blameless because... he "is always citing his sources"!! I emphasize: there is a real possibility that 141 will, by undermining all opponents, stealthily get his skewed content inserted bit by bit. This is already happening; editors have given up removing stuff he wants in, resulting in e.g. a brief Ed Sullivan section that perplexingly mentions "ice cream", "pasha" and "harem girl". What does that inform readers about the Sullivan appearance?? It reads like a bunch of crap ('scuse my mouth). Like many other dubious bits, if it is changed or removed yet again with the blessing of a consensus in the name of improvement, you can bet 141 will change it back. I've not come across any user who edits in such a disruptive and subversive manner. It's time 141 left the building. Rikstar (talk) 23:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Not in my case anyway. You're back to your old "you're just a biased Elvis fan" argument again. Been there before, dealt with it before... Rikstar (talk) 20:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- This article has been degraded enough. Too much time and hard work has gone to waste. This article has great potential to be an FA. Currently, it can't even keep GA. It's time to fix the issues that ail this article. Lara❤Love 17:14, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- There is another problem. Am I right that a featured article should not be protected? However, if the article is unprotected, many vandals will, as usual, reappear. See, for instance, , , , , , etc. How can this be handled? This is not unimportant. Onefortyone (talk) 20:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- WP:NOPRO only applies to the main page FA, which is so heavily watched that any vandalism it takes while featured is quickly reverted. Lara❤Love 03:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- There is another problem. Am I right that a featured article should not be protected? However, if the article is unprotected, many vandals will, as usual, reappear. See, for instance, , , , , , etc. How can this be handled? This is not unimportant. Onefortyone (talk) 20:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm with you Steve Pastor, Maria, LaraLove and anyone else of similar opinion. Rikstar (talk) 22:12, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
New perspective
I recently wrote a comment on the 18th November 2007 re: Peter Gurlanick. I have now signed in. However I am still on my learners plates,so please bear with me. In saying that,you all seem very nice and understanding group of people. So here we go! 141, in part of you text earlier in the piece, you mention For reasons of balance, all this is welled sourced information may also be included in the article,if you would prefer that. On the other hand, is it really necessary to include all this stuff? I don't think so.
141, I think to be fair to the subject (Elvis Presley), the author involved in the text, the other editors and the readers themselves, yes, I think it is very important for the article to be balanced. --Jaye9 (talk) 13:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
User: Mfbinc mentions a few ladies stating they had a relationship with Elvis, to conteract the claims made by 141. 141 requests for sources to back these claims. He then mentions a book by Tom Weaver, I Was A Monster Movie Maker: Conversations with 22 SF and Horror Filmakers (2001),stating the book didn't mention Elvis and Anne Helm having an affair. Anne Helm, to my knowledge has not done many interviews about Elvis. She did however give an interview regarding her relationship with Elvis to authors Brown & Broeske, Down At The End OF Lonely Street P. 242-44,449. Due to the fact that there are three pages on her,I'll only include the "Humpy Bumpy" bits,okay. Anne Helme states it is to ignore his physical allure--the hair that was dark blond again,the deep olive tan. But stressed Helm,his appeal was more than physical. "He was so very,very sweet. I think a lot of women reached out to him because they felt he was lonely. I actually wrote some poetry about him when we were making the movie. It was that kind of romance." It was also very physical. "He really liked sex. A lot of nights I didn't go back to my own bungalow. I felt a little ashamed about it the next morning,because I knew that the people on the set realized what was going on." But Helm added,"I have to tell you,I had fun. And it was special. Two paragraphs along- "They sometimes played cards into the early-morning hours,when Presley would ask her to slip into a flouncy,yellow baby-doll nightie he had bought her. "I wasn't crazy about them,but he just loved them,Helm said,laughing. After they made love,he would give her pills-----Jaye9 (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you Jaye9, your comments and citations are very welcome. Please make sure the quotes from others you give are very clear i.e. in quotation marks, to keep them separate from your own comments. Please also state in detail the source of your quotes. Your contributions could prove very useful in improving this article. Rikstar (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Rikstar,your comments and advise were both usefull and encouraging to me,thank you.--Jaye9 (talk) 01:00, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. Though it is very funny that a new user's first three contributions to Misplaced Pages are related to a specific discussion topic on Talk:Elvis Presley concerning Elvis's relationships with women, I would also recommend including the material in the Elvis article in an abridged form, provided that it is accurately cited. The source seems to be reliable and it supports the view that Elvis sometimes had sex with a girl. However, the passage is not yet accurately cited. That Elvis was very sweet, that several women felt he was lonely, that they seem to have had a lot of fun playing cards early in the morning etc. is in line with other sources. That Elvis was crazy about baby-doll nighties certainly underscores the singer's "decline into infantilism" (Goldman). Onefortyone (talk) 03:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Onefortyone, when you say funny, do you mean funny ha ha or funny parculiar? What can I say, only that my genuine reasons for being here, is to try and help were I can and to make this article as fair and as accurate as humanly possible. On that note, I wish you and yours a very merry christmas and that we can endeavour to have a cival and productive discussion re: this article, in the new year.--Jaye9 (talk) 09:14, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Just a thought but has anyone noticed how much of this controversy relates to Elvis' sexuality? I appreciate that it is some modern phenomenon as to the fascination concerning what people do with their genitals but, if so, why not hive it off to another article 'Elvis Sexuality'? There seems to be little doubt as to his place/date of birth, his music, his films, even his death - just what used to float his boat. This would not only free up this article but give a new life to those interested in his libido rather than that which made the man notable.--Egghead06 (talk) 16:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- If you've been around this article for a while, the situation can be summed up as 141. We are hoping to change that, but it will take time. Meanwhile, 141 has a number of ways to deflect the efforts of other editors. You could try making changes yourself to see what happens. Most people give up after a relatively short time, and find something more productive to do. Steve Pastor (talk) 17:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Making changes to 'see what happens' is exactly my idea of fun so will be leaving that to those who know something of his sexual proclivity (or care)!--Egghead06 (talk) 18:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- I also do not understand why so much of the current controversy relates to Elvis's sexuality. This is the more surprising as the shortest sections of the entire article deal with Elvis as a sex symbol and with his wife and daughter. I did not start this discussion. It was GiantSpitoon who repeatedly removed half of the "Sex symbol" section. Before these removals, we were talking about the 4th draft of the first section of the article and not about the "Sex symbol" section. See . Onefortyone (talk) 22:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- So much of the "current controversy" occurs because one particular user (guess) keeps trying to own this article, and the Talk Page. I'm in favor of taking it to arbitration, or even having him banned for his behavior in and about this article and Talk. It's a shame that this user has made such a mess of this page with his obsessive blather that the page is sinking into a swamp of user despair. Hoserjoe (talk) 00:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- Despair is right. I cannot believe 141 is trying to distance himself from the sex content in this article and the talk pages, when he has been uniquely instrumental in making accusations regarding Presley's sexuality over a long period, covering everything from Elvis having a blow job, through sex with Nick Adams to claims of gay lyrics in many of Presley's hits and that Elvis had sex with his own mother. No one else has persisted with such a ludicrous and disturbing agenda, and I doubt few who know 141 have any faith that 141 will not return to such matters. It does not matter how little these claims are referred to in the current article; it's how many hours have been wasted having to respond to 141 to keep his tiresome unilateral claims out. This is the despair; the realization that 141 will clog up these pages whenever he chooses, with whatever material he chooses, however inappropriate it may be deemed by a consensus of others. As for 141's claim that "it is very funny that a new user's first three contributions to Misplaced Pages are related to a specific discussion topic on Talk:Elvis Presley concerning Elvis's relationships with women", why is 141's paranoia at such a level that he has to assume so much bad faith on the part of a new contributor??? This is not nearly as offensive as it is unsettling and disturbing, and it's very offensive anyway. READ MY LIPS: 141 is killing this article. Rikstar (talk), 19:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, Rikstar, you are here talking about a discussion that is more than four months old. As there was no consensus of opinion to add a short, well-sourced note concerning Elvis's possible bisexuality, I didn't include the material in the article, although, from time to time, there are inquiries about the topic. See . So much for the false claim that I have "persisted with such a ludicrous and disturbing agenda" (your words). As for my "paranoia" that I have "to assume so much bad faith on the part of a new contributor", you may remember that I am frequently harassed by new sockpuppets of old opponents. See . However, you may have noticed that I did accept the contributions by Jaye9, as this user seems to have cited a reliable source. By the way, may I remind you of your handling of a request by another user who wished to include more facts about Elvis's father and stepmother in the article? In response, you rejected this legitimate request out of hand, arguing, without giving any reasons, that Elvis's songwriters deserve more of a mention than his stepmother. Interestingly, Steve Pastor also chimed in with, "there is much that has to be left out," although Elvis's problems with his stepmother are not unimportant, as they deeply affected the singer's personal life at Graceland. See . Onefortyone (talk) 06:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- So, you didn't include stuff on his sexuality; that's because other users spent a disproportionate number of hours challenging your agenda. I personally found it tedious and time-consuming to the point of almost ending my involvement. It is rich of you to try and criticize my handling of issues on this talk page. I and others have been running round in circles wondering how to handle your involvement; we've tried responding in detail to the great wads of text you post, we've ignored your comments when they have been repetitive or not worthy of comment e.g. making the "it's well-sourced so shouldn't be removed" argument. I've realized how frustrating it is to NOT respond to you because it appears to lend undue credence to your comments. Olive branches have been extended to you (even a barnstar, from Northmeister) just to keep this damned thing going 'cos you're around. And yet perhaps on occasion, a user pushed beyond reasonable endurance will make a brief, curt dismissal of someting on these talk pages, and you want to slap a user's wrist for it? Please note "Elvis's songwriters deserve more of a mention than his stepmother" is a reason for not including details of his stepmother. You may not agree with it, but don't accuse me of not giving any reason in that particular case. Why you appear to criticize Steve Pastor, for simply agreeing with me and stating that the article can't contain details on everyone, is beyond me.
- Sorry, Rikstar, you have not yet explained why Elvis's songwriters should deserve more priority than his stepmother in a biographical article on the star. Onefortyone (talk) 04:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Go ahead and finish the Early years section on these pages, wait for comments/approval from all those clamoring to join you in improving this article and, if I have the stomach for it, I may look at it. But do not interpret my reluctance to work with you as being a petulant rebuttal of your polite request; it is a reluctance to work with someone whose editing and talk comments have driven me beyond endurance. And I am not the only one. Rikstar (talk) 12:59, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- So, you didn't include stuff on his sexuality; that's because other users spent a disproportionate number of hours challenging your agenda. I personally found it tedious and time-consuming to the point of almost ending my involvement. It is rich of you to try and criticize my handling of issues on this talk page. I and others have been running round in circles wondering how to handle your involvement; we've tried responding in detail to the great wads of text you post, we've ignored your comments when they have been repetitive or not worthy of comment e.g. making the "it's well-sourced so shouldn't be removed" argument. I've realized how frustrating it is to NOT respond to you because it appears to lend undue credence to your comments. Olive branches have been extended to you (even a barnstar, from Northmeister) just to keep this damned thing going 'cos you're around. And yet perhaps on occasion, a user pushed beyond reasonable endurance will make a brief, curt dismissal of someting on these talk pages, and you want to slap a user's wrist for it? Please note "Elvis's songwriters deserve more of a mention than his stepmother" is a reason for not including details of his stepmother. You may not agree with it, but don't accuse me of not giving any reason in that particular case. Why you appear to criticize Steve Pastor, for simply agreeing with me and stating that the article can't contain details on everyone, is beyond me.
- Sorry, Rikstar, you are here talking about a discussion that is more than four months old. As there was no consensus of opinion to add a short, well-sourced note concerning Elvis's possible bisexuality, I didn't include the material in the article, although, from time to time, there are inquiries about the topic. See . So much for the false claim that I have "persisted with such a ludicrous and disturbing agenda" (your words). As for my "paranoia" that I have "to assume so much bad faith on the part of a new contributor", you may remember that I am frequently harassed by new sockpuppets of old opponents. See . However, you may have noticed that I did accept the contributions by Jaye9, as this user seems to have cited a reliable source. By the way, may I remind you of your handling of a request by another user who wished to include more facts about Elvis's father and stepmother in the article? In response, you rejected this legitimate request out of hand, arguing, without giving any reasons, that Elvis's songwriters deserve more of a mention than his stepmother. Interestingly, Steve Pastor also chimed in with, "there is much that has to be left out," although Elvis's problems with his stepmother are not unimportant, as they deeply affected the singer's personal life at Graceland. See . Onefortyone (talk) 06:16, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- Despair is right. I cannot believe 141 is trying to distance himself from the sex content in this article and the talk pages, when he has been uniquely instrumental in making accusations regarding Presley's sexuality over a long period, covering everything from Elvis having a blow job, through sex with Nick Adams to claims of gay lyrics in many of Presley's hits and that Elvis had sex with his own mother. No one else has persisted with such a ludicrous and disturbing agenda, and I doubt few who know 141 have any faith that 141 will not return to such matters. It does not matter how little these claims are referred to in the current article; it's how many hours have been wasted having to respond to 141 to keep his tiresome unilateral claims out. This is the despair; the realization that 141 will clog up these pages whenever he chooses, with whatever material he chooses, however inappropriate it may be deemed by a consensus of others. As for 141's claim that "it is very funny that a new user's first three contributions to Misplaced Pages are related to a specific discussion topic on Talk:Elvis Presley concerning Elvis's relationships with women", why is 141's paranoia at such a level that he has to assume so much bad faith on the part of a new contributor??? This is not nearly as offensive as it is unsettling and disturbing, and it's very offensive anyway. READ MY LIPS: 141 is killing this article. Rikstar (talk), 19:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- So much of the "current controversy" occurs because one particular user (guess) keeps trying to own this article, and the Talk Page. I'm in favor of taking it to arbitration, or even having him banned for his behavior in and about this article and Talk. It's a shame that this user has made such a mess of this page with his obsessive blather that the page is sinking into a swamp of user despair. Hoserjoe (talk) 00:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
- I also do not understand why so much of the current controversy relates to Elvis's sexuality. This is the more surprising as the shortest sections of the entire article deal with Elvis as a sex symbol and with his wife and daughter. I did not start this discussion. It was GiantSpitoon who repeatedly removed half of the "Sex symbol" section. Before these removals, we were talking about the 4th draft of the first section of the article and not about the "Sex symbol" section. See . Onefortyone (talk) 22:49, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Making changes to 'see what happens' is exactly my idea of fun so will be leaving that to those who know something of his sexual proclivity (or care)!--Egghead06 (talk) 18:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- If you've been around this article for a while, the situation can be summed up as 141. We are hoping to change that, but it will take time. Meanwhile, 141 has a number of ways to deflect the efforts of other editors. You could try making changes yourself to see what happens. Most people give up after a relatively short time, and find something more productive to do. Steve Pastor (talk) 17:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Rikstar, I have been observing this article for six months now, and I would read your contributions, comments and your frustrations on trying to make this a good article, and sometimes you would talk about possibly leaving and I would say to myself please don't. You have shown to be articulate and balanced in your views, this is part of the reasons why I'm here. I have taken your advise about your suggestion for users to read 141's editing history for the past three years. Please excuse my tone, but I have just recently had endure this tripe for two hours. Is it against Misplaced Pages's policy for an editor to use selective referencing?, if that's the case, it's FULL OF IT. Do you have a copy of Peter Gurlanick's two volummes Last Train To Memphis & Careless Love? He is as I'm sure you would agree the definative biographer of Elvis Presley, even Onefortyone couldn't dispute that fact. If you do have these copies, have a look at the names listed, who he interviewed, but in 141's case, who he didn't. There is no mention of Dee Stanley, or gossip columnist William Dakota or Earl Greenwood for that matter. I wonder why?
To Steve Pastor add me to your list, please.--Jaye9 (talk) 15:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- You should stick close to the facts, Jaye9. Peter Guralnick indeed cites the books by Earl Greenwood and Dee Presley (Stanley) in his Elvis biography, Last Train to Memphis. See and . Onefortyone (talk) 03:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- I have just read some old talk pages to help Steve P. and his arbcom. I found it shocking and depressing to see how much 141 has tied up the time and patience of well meaning users for over 18 months with his material and comments. I had to stop reading. If you have any evidence of selective referencing, please post specific examples here. I only have volume two. I really am having to fight hard to maintain interest in this project, and I am very grateful for the support you and others have shown in having me on board. Rikstar (talk) 17:30, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
- What is missing in your last edits is a substantial discussion concerning the content of the Elvis article and based on reliable sources. All I can see are accusations and attacks against me. One thing is clear: what stands me out from the other users (mostly Elvis fans together with some new sockpuppets of former opponents), who now join forces against me simply because my edits are not in line with their personal opinion, is that I am the only editor who frequently cites his sources, among them mainstream Elvis biographies, essays by reputed Elvis experts, books by people who knew Elvis and peer-reviewed studies published by university presses. This is fully in line with Misplaced Pages policy. Most other editors interested in the Elvis article do not cite books on Elvis or university studies on the rock 'n' roll era. For instance, Steve Pastor's only sources seem to be some DVDs. All what my opponents can do is to delete sourced material. It's a real pity. Onefortyone (talk) 03:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps the issue is not about the sources being used, but the selective nature in which information is being pulled from the sources and presented in the article. Lara❤Love 05:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- You could also say, perhaps the issue is not so much about the sources being used, but the selective nature in which well-sourced information is being removed from the article, simply because it is not in line with the opinion of some fans. For instance, a third-party user has called Hoserjoe's removals "whitewashing edits which remove much sourced content" and his edits were therefore repeatedly reverted. See , , . Onefortyone (talk) 05:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Right. We know there is an issue with Hoserjoe and his alt account(s), but that's not the focus of discussion. We're talking about the possibility of information being selectively pulled from sources in order to skew the information to one's own desired point of view. There is also an issue of deciding just what and how much is relevant for inclusion in this article. Lara❤Love 06:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- You could also say, perhaps the issue is not so much about the sources being used, but the selective nature in which well-sourced information is being removed from the article, simply because it is not in line with the opinion of some fans. For instance, a third-party user has called Hoserjoe's removals "whitewashing edits which remove much sourced content" and his edits were therefore repeatedly reverted. See , , . Onefortyone (talk) 05:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps the issue is not about the sources being used, but the selective nature in which information is being pulled from the sources and presented in the article. Lara❤Love 05:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
- What is missing in your last edits is a substantial discussion concerning the content of the Elvis article and based on reliable sources. All I can see are accusations and attacks against me. One thing is clear: what stands me out from the other users (mostly Elvis fans together with some new sockpuppets of former opponents), who now join forces against me simply because my edits are not in line with their personal opinion, is that I am the only editor who frequently cites his sources, among them mainstream Elvis biographies, essays by reputed Elvis experts, books by people who knew Elvis and peer-reviewed studies published by university presses. This is fully in line with Misplaced Pages policy. Most other editors interested in the Elvis article do not cite books on Elvis or university studies on the rock 'n' roll era. For instance, Steve Pastor's only sources seem to be some DVDs. All what my opponents can do is to delete sourced material. It's a real pity. Onefortyone (talk) 03:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Last Train To Memphis by Peter Gurlanick. Bibliography - Presley,Dee,Billy Stanley,Rick Stanley, and David Stanley. Elvis We Love You Tender. Greenwood,Earl. The Boy Who Would Be King Index Earl Greenwood - no mention; Dee Presley - no mention Acknowledgements Earl Greenwood - no mention; Dee Presley - no mention
Careless Love by Peter Gurlanick. Bibliography- Presley,Dee,Billy Smith,Rick Stanley,and David Stanley. Elvis We Love You Tender. Greenwood,Earl. The Boy Who Would Be King Index Presley,Dee Stanley(stepmother),14,16-17,31,42,46,56-57,58,Graceland,35-36,64,77-78,80,89,93,117. Earl Greenwood - no mention Acknowledgements Earl Greenwood - no mention; Dee Stanley - no mention--Jaye9 (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
141, when I discussed Peter Gurlanick to Rikstar, I said he did not interview the likes of Gossip Columnist Bill Dakota, Earl Greenwood, or Dee Stanley, that is all that I stated, and that is a FACT. Dee Stanley was certainly in Elvis Presley life, she was married to his father. In all the pages cited in Careless Love, which by the way was first published in 1999, he never once discusses Dee Stanley's outrageous allegations, which she bought to light back well before "Careless Love" was ever published. Why is it that you seem to be so fixated on these types of topics, or even think they are worth mentioning. Obviously Peter Gurlanick did't seem to think so, otherwise he would have put it in.
Oh by the way 141, I am an Elvis Fan and a John Lennon fan, as well as many other artist, but don't worry I'm taking medication for it.--Jaye9 (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
User: Onefortyone 5 September 2007 (Talk),titled "Elvis and Marilyn Monroe",writes: The members of the Memphis Mafia certainly did not know every secret about Elvis. His early girlfriend Judy Spreckles says that the singer told her secrets "that I never told and will never tell." Robert L. Levinson's book,The Elvis and Marilyn Affair (1999) deals with a batch of love letters allegedley exchanged between Elvis and Marilyn Monroe during the filming of Love Me Tender and with a secret affair on the Fox lot in 1956 between Elvis and Marilyn. Though the story is fictitious,the author may have had some information about what was going on behind closed doors.--Jaye9 (talk) 04:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
What do we have here? Let's try to decipher this text,shall we. Point one: "The members of the Memphis Mafia certainly did not know every secret about Elvis". My response: True, that's a fair enough statement. Point two: "His girlfriend Judy Spreckles says that the singer told her secrets that I never told and will never tell." My response: What do those secrets intail?,do you know 141?,I certainly don't. Point three: "Robert L. Levinson's fiction book on The Elvis and Marilyn Affair (1999)". My response: Simply,pure fiction. Point four: "The Author may have had some information about what was going on behind closed doors". My response: We'll never know. 141,is this your idea of research? your personal opinion,thrown in with a bit of imagination. Yet, you recently criticize user: Steve Pastor, for using DVD'S (film footage)as his method of research. It is my contention,that not only books,but DVD'S and recordings are an important part of that research. I am certainly questioning this one example of what you call research. Yet this rumor,taken from your original source in the main article,"Byron Raphel wtih Alana Nash,"In Bed with Elvis" Playboy Novemver 2005 Vol 52,Iss. 11,p64-68,76,140. This is your only source by the way, makes we wonder how this could happen. 141,is this truly your idea of a compromise?--Jaye9 (talk) 05:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
User:141 Writes NB: This is undoubtedly a source from Elvis's lifetime. By the way,the Guardian Article also proves(as many sources do)that Vernon & Dee Presley had indeed been living together with Priscilla and Elvis for a considerable period of time at Graceland. You should stick close to the facts to be found in published sources,Lockdale insted of making false accusations against other contributors. Talk:Elvis Presley/Archives:15. July 2006-December 2006?.--Jaye9 (talk) 04:12, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Vernon was often at Graceland,but since his marriage on July 3,1960,he lived in a house near Graceland with Dee and her three boys. Taken from: Joe Esposito and Elena Oumano,"Good Rockin'Tonight. p.56--Jaye9 (talk) 04:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Elvis Presley's Family Tree. ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved August 15 2007.
- Presley's ancestry is discussed at the following sites:
- Rossacher, Hannes (August 16 2007). Austrian and French TV documentary: "Elvis-O-Rama". ARTE. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- (August 11 2007). "Die wahre Wiege des Rock ’n’ Roll." Ludwigshafen: Die Rheinpfalz.
- "Biography: Presley, Elvis". German Heritage.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- (23 March 2004). "Elvis roots 'lead to Scotland'". BBC News Online. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Family Tree". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Roots". fife.50megs.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis' Jewish Heritage". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis Was a Metis: Cherokee-Scots-Irish (Celt)". WolfLodge.org. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- ^ Guralnick 1994, p.29
- Goldman, p.16
- ^ Guralnick 1994, p.12
- ^ Elvis Presley Home. Elvis-Presley-Biography.com. Retrieved July 15 2007.
- Presley, p.172
- Guralnick 1994, p.36
Referring to an account by singer Barbara Pittman in Humphries, Patrick (April 1, 2003). "Elvis The #1 Hits: The Secret History of the Classics" Andrews McMeel Publishing, p.117. ISBN 0740738038. - Elvis Australia (Jan 7, 2004). "Elvis Presley 1935-54." elvis.com.au. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- (October 14 2001). "Elvis Presley's First Guitar". Tupelo Hardware. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Escott, p.420
- ^ Guralnick 1994, p.50
- ^ Carr and Farren, p.10
- Guralnick, Last Train to Memphis, chapter 1.
- Lichter, p.10
- Lichter, p.9
- Guralnick 1994, p.149
- (1996). "Elvis Presley". history-of-rock.com. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Elvis Presley's Family Tree. ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved August 15 2007.
- Presley's ancestry is discussed at the following sites:
- Rossacher, Hannes (August 16 2007). Austrian and French TV documentary: "Elvis-O-Rama". ARTE. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- (August 11 2007). "Die wahre Wiege des Rock ’n’ Roll." Ludwigshafen: Die Rheinpfalz.
- "Biography: Presley, Elvis". German Heritage.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- (23 March 2004). "Elvis roots 'lead to Scotland'". BBC News Online. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Family Tree". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Roots". fife.50megs.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis' Jewish Heritage". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis Was a Metis: Cherokee-Scots-Irish (Celt)". WolfLodge.org. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- Elvis Australia (Jan 7, 2004). "Elvis Presley 1935-54." elvis.com.au. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- (October 14 2001). "Elvis Presley's First Guitar". Tupelo Hardware. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Escott, p.420
- Lichter, p.10
- Lichter, p.9
- Guralnick 1994, p.149
- (1996). "Elvis Presley". history-of-rock.com. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Lichter, p.10
- Lichter, p.9
- Elvis Presley's Family Tree. ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved August 15 2007.
- Presley's ancestry is discussed at the following sites:
- Rossacher, Hannes (August 16 2007). Austrian and French TV documentary: "Elvis-O-Rama". ARTE. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- (August 11 2007). "Die wahre Wiege des Rock ’n’ Roll." Ludwigshafen: Die Rheinpfalz.
- "Biography: Presley, Elvis". German Heritage.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- (23 March 2004). "Elvis roots 'lead to Scotland'". BBC News Online. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Family Tree". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Roots". fife.50megs.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis' Jewish Heritage". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis Was a Metis: Cherokee-Scots-Irish (Celt)". WolfLodge.org. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- ^ Guralnick 1994, p.13 Cite error: The named reference "Guralnick-13" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
- Elvis Australia (Jan 7, 2004). "Elvis Presley 1935-54." elvis.com.au. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- (October 14 2001). "Elvis Presley's First Guitar". Tupelo Hardware. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Escott, p.420
- Lichter, p.10
- Lichter, p.9
- Guralnick 1994, p.149
- (1996). "Elvis Presley". history-of-rock.com. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Goldman, p.16
- Presley, p.172
- Peter Guralnick, Last Train to Memphis: The Rise of Elvis Presley, p.13.
- Guralnick, p.13.
- Guralnick, p.149
- Guralnick, p.36, referring to an account by singer Barbara Pittman.
- Patrick Humphries, Elvis The #1 Hits: The Secret History of the Classics, p.117.
- Moore adds that Elvis "was more comfortable just sitting there with a guitar than trying to talk to you." Quoted in Guralnick, p. 149.
- ^ Frank, Ganz, 2005. p. 4
- Cite error: The named reference
pg3
was invoked but never defined (see the help page). - Sisario, 2006. p. 10
- Frank, Ganz, 2005. p. 9
- ^ 4AD. "Pixies Profile". Retrieved 2006-08-13.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link) - Sisario, 2006. p. 12
- "No Time Wasters!" Q, No. 48, September 1990
- Frank, Ganz, 2005. p. 12
- Frank, Ganz, 2005. p. 11
- Goldman, p.16
- Elvis Presley's Family Tree. ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved August 15 2007.
- Presley's ancestry is discussed at the following sites:
- Rossacher, Hannes (August 16 2007). Austrian and French TV documentary: "Elvis-O-Rama". ARTE. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- (August 11 2007). "Die wahre Wiege des Rock ’n’ Roll." Ludwigshafen: Die Rheinpfalz.
- "Biography: Presley, Elvis". German Heritage.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- (23 March 2004). "Elvis roots 'lead to Scotland'". BBC News Online. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Family Tree". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Roots". fife.50megs.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis' Jewish Heritage". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis Was a Metis: Cherokee-Scots-Irish (Celt)". WolfLodge.org. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- Humphries, p.117.
- Elvis Australia (Jan 7, 2004). "Elvis Presley 1935-54." elvis.com.au. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- (October 14 2001). "Elvis Presley's First Guitar". Tupelo Hardware. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Miller, Mark Crispin, Boxed in: The Culture of TV (Northwestern University Press, 1988), p.191.
- Escott, p.420
- Guralnick 1994, p.36
Referring to an account by singer Barbara Pittman in Humphries, Patrick (April 1, 2003). "Elvis The #1 Hits: The Secret History of the Classics" Andrews McMeel Publishing, p.117. ISBN 0740738038. - Guralnick 1994, chapter 1.
- Lichter, p.10
- Lichter, p.9
- Guralnick 1994, p.149
- Quoted in Guralnick 1994, p. 149.
- (1996). "Elvis Presley". history-of-rock.com. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Elvis Presley's Family Tree. ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved August 15 2007.
- Presley's ancestry is discussed at the following sites:
- Rossacher, Hannes (August 16 2007). Austrian and French TV documentary: "Elvis-O-Rama". ARTE. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- (August 11 2007). "Die wahre Wiege des Rock ’n’ Roll." Ludwigshafen: Die Rheinpfalz.
- "Biography: Presley, Elvis". German Heritage.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- (23 March 2004). "Elvis roots 'lead to Scotland'". BBC News Online. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Family Tree". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved on 2007-10-12.
- "Elvis Presley's Roots". fife.50megs.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis' Jewish Heritage". ElvisPresleyNews.com. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- "Elvis Was a Metis: Cherokee-Scots-Irish (Celt)". WolfLodge.org. Retrieved October 12 2007.
- Humphries, p.117.
- Elvis Australia (Jan 7, 2004). "Elvis Presley 1935-54." elvis.com.au. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- (October 14 2001). "Elvis Presley's First Guitar". Tupelo Hardware. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Escott, p.420
- Guralnick 1994, p.36
Referring to an account by singer Barbara Pittman in Humphries, Patrick (April 1, 2003). "Elvis The #1 Hits: The Secret History of the Classics" Andrews McMeel Publishing, p.117. ISBN 0740738038. - Guralnick 1994, chapter 1.
- Lichter, p.10
- Lichter, p.9
- Quoted in Guralnick 1994, p. 149.
- (1996). "Elvis Presley". history-of-rock.com. Retrieved 2007-10-14.
- Connie Kirchberg and Marc Hendrickx, Elvis Presley, Richard Nixon, and the American Dream (1999), p.62.
- Jim Curtin, Elvis: Unknown Stories behind the Legend, p.119.
- This was sensationally reported by many tabloid newspapers in October 2006. See, for example, New York Post, October 1, 2006; Daily Mail, October 4, 2006.
- See, for instance, Byron Raphael with Alanna Nash, "In Bed with Elvis," Playboy, November 2005, Vol. 52, Iss. 11. Ruthe Stein, "Girls! Girls! Girls! From small-town women to movie stars, Elvis loved often but never true," San Francisco Chronicle, August 3, 1997.
- Byron Raphael with Alanna Nash, "In Bed with Elvis," Playboy, November 2005, Vol. 52, Iss. 11, p.64-68, 76, 140. The article claims that "the so-called dangerous rock-and-roll idol was anything but a despotic ruler in the bedroom ... He was far more interested in heavy petting and panting and groaning" and "he would never put himself inside one of these girls ... within minutes he’d be asleep."
- Tracy McVeigh, "Elvis Special: Love me tender." The Observer, Sunday August 11, 2002.
- Tracy McVeigh, "Elvis Special: Love me tender." The Observer, Sunday August 11, 2002.
- Paul Parla and Charles P. Mitchell, Screen Sirens Scream!: Interviews with 20 Actresses from Science Fiction, Horror, Film Noir and Mystery Movies, 1930s to 1960s (2000), p.235.