Talk:Elvis Presley

Elvis and fourteen year olds

This is news to me. Was Elvis known for his relationship with 14 year olds? Have any of Elvis' biographers mentioned this? This seems like a rather controversial point. We certainly should not rush to including it in the article. This section is intended to open a "slow" discussion on the point. Our task is to demonstrate that this issue has solid secondary sources. If it doesn't, then we need to find them before including such info in the article. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 19:59, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

It does not appear to have been well documented. All of the information i'm finding says that because Elvis' manager made sure to keep everything covered up, it never turned into a controversy (which would be why there's little info on it). Silverseren^C 21:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes - the source for this seems to be Kathleen Tracy's Elvis biography, [1] which seems anything but a credible source - furthermore, as was pointed out at WP:BLP/N, this may involve living individuals, so we'd have to be careful what detail we include, even if we can find better sources. I'd suggest that if Tracy's book and other sensationalist sources are all we have to back this up, it is best not included. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:40, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Kathleen Tracy is a popular biographer, accomplished and noted for focusing on entertainment subjects. She is a journalist and a writer, not a scholar, but she is not unreliable as a source. Underscoring Tracy's interpretation is Alanna Nash's version of Elvis, taken from several of her books. Nash rehashes some of the Byron Raphael stuff that they published in Playboy in 2005. This story has Elvis into heavy petting with young virgins (pages 182 and 231 of Baby, Let's Play House) and hanging around 14-year-old girls in swimsuits around the pool and playing in their pajamas at night. Girls such as Gloria Mowel, Frances Forbes and Heidi Heissen (page 209 of Baby, Let's Play House, also "The King's Troubling Obsession" by David Leafe in the Daily Mail.) Forbes said 13 was insufficient "...but when I was fourteen he noticed me. Fourteen was a magical age with Elvis." (The preceding quote appears in four books including Rose Clayton's Elvis Up Close: In the Words of Those Who Knew Him Best and The Elvis Encyclopedia.) And of course there's Priscilla Ann Beaulieu who Elvis met when she was 14. Albert Goldman wrote of the pajama parties in his 1981 book, Elvis. Goldman wrote, "Elvis had a great gift for disarming parents and persuading them that though their fourteen-year-old daughters spent a lot of time in his bedroom, nothing improper was going on." There's an article in September 1990 Penthouse called "Elvis's Secret Sex Films" in which one of Elvis's inner circle—distant cousin Earl Greenwood—wrote about the home movies Elvis made of his parties with young girls; five nights of films including orgies with fourteen-year-olds. Greenwood said these films were seized by Colonel Tom Parker and used to blackmail Elvis into giving Parker a huge percentage. Greenwood said the same in his 1990 book The boy who would be king, written with Kathleen Tracy. Tracy refers to this movie-making incident on page 107 of Elvis Presley: a biography. Columnist Liz Smith wrote about it in August 1990: "Poor Elvis Presley". Smith says of Greenwood's theory, "it makes some sense."

Greenwood's material about Elvis has been quoted by other biographers such as Rose Clayton, by the Gregorys in their When Elvis Died, and also by Tony Gentry in Elvis Presley (1994, Chelsea House).

This material is out in the public domain and ought to be addressed. I don't think it should be avoided. Binksternet (talk) 04:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Binksternet, There have been more books written on Elvis Presley than any other entertainer,and for that reason you have to take extreme care on who you choose as a reliable source and sadly there's not that many. Mentioning Earl Greenwood as being a reliable source on Elvis Presley,is like saying Ian Halperin is a reliable source for Michael Jackson. To me these two authors are best describled as unscrupulous individuals with a vivid imagination. Please do yourself a favour and get yourself a copy of "Revelations Of The Memphis Mafia" by Alanna Nash,read it and then you will understand the topics you have brought forward in its proper contents,okay!--Jaye9 (talk) 11:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree that Wikipedia's guideline about reliable sources must flex in the face of many books written about Elvis. I am not trying to say that Greenwood is right, I am simply saying that he has been published, and commented upon, and that his version is part of the public dialog about Elvis. Binksternet (talk) 16:32, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Then find other sources that support this 'public dialog' in a meaningful way. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Liz Smith... Binksternet (talk) 19:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Columnist Liz Smith? Wrote as you pointed out,about Greenwood' theory about Parker had seized these supposed films and used them to Blackmail Elvis into giving Parker a huge percentage and Smith goes on to say "It makes some sense". Well that's the first time I've heard that one and she lost me right there. It reminds me of these conspiracy theorist and these wild things they come up with and they have nothing to back it up with. When you speak of Elvis and fourteen year old girls,it was pretty prevelant in certain parts of the South in those days. It has been said many times that Presley was drawn to 14,15 & 16 year old girls during the early days of his career. As these girls were virgins and made good potential wifes. Someone he could mould into the ideal women. Unlike the girls he met on the road. Quite simply he would not have married them. And it has also been said,during this period he proposed to quite a few of these young girls. I might add,back in 1948,Country singer Loretta Lyn married "Doo" Lyn in Kentucky three months shy of her 13th birthday and yes it was legal. What I am trying to explain is whether we agree with this pratice or not,it is not for us to judge,but more to understand that this is what people did in these parts of the south. It is there culture and Elvis was a part of that culture.--Jaye9 (talk) 04:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. In Georgia for instance, the age of consent wasn't raised from 14 to 16 until 1995: Age_of_consent_reform#Georgia.2C_USA. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

There can be no doubt that Elvis's relationships with girls were kind of infantile. This comes as no surprize. Peter Guralnick writes, "Elvis grew up a loved and precious child. He was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother." Throughout her life, "the son would call her by pet names, they would communicate by baby talk." Gilbert B. Rodman calls Elvis "the dutiful mama's boy" and mentions, with reference to Guralnick, "the humble modesty of a Dixie-bred mama's boy: In many ways I am sure that the picture is accurate, and it undoubtedly conforms to the image that Elvis Presley had of himself."

Furthermore, Guralnick describes Elvis as a very shy person, as a "kid who had spent scarcely a night away from home in his nineteen years" and who was teased by his fellow classmates: "My older brother went to school with him," recalled singer Barbara Pittman, "and he and some of the other boys used to hide behind buildings and throw 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." These early experiences had a deep influence on his clumsy advances to girls. According to Guralnick, he loved playing with the girls and teasing them, but "it didn't go too far. ... In between shows at the auditorium he would peek out from behind the curtain, then, when he spotted someone that he liked, swagger over to the concession stand, place his arm over her shoulder, and drape his other arm around someone else, acting almost like he was drunk, even though everyone knew he didn't drink." It is no wonder then that Elvis's early girlfriends June Juanico and Judy Spreckels say they had no sexual relationships with Presley.

Concerning the adult singer, Guralnick writes that when Elvis "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 most 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—the companionship seemed as important for him as the sex—and then in the early-morning hours they would make love [editorial note: How should the author know what was really going on in the bedroom? Many girls say they were only talking there]. "He had an innocence at that time", said one of them. "I'm sure it didn't last. But what he really wanted was to have a relationship, to have company."

In their Playboy article, "In Bed with Elvis" (November 2005), Byron Raphael and Alanna Nash have stated 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." According to Goldman, the reason for "never [having] normal sexual relations with these girls" was that "Elvis was a voyeur. What he sought as his erotic goal was a group of girls who would agree to strip down to their panties and wrestle with each other..."

According to Alan Fortas, who knew the singer well, "Elvis needed someone to baby more than he needed a sex partner. He craved the attention of someone who adored him without the threat of sexual pressure, much as a mother would." Furthermore, "Elvis befriended some of the young girls who used to cluster adoringly in his driveway, or outside the fence ... Some of the girls were as young as fourteen. Fortas said they were frequent houseguests who attended his concerts as part of 'Elvis's personal traveling show.' Out in the backyard, they romped with Elvis in the Doughboy pool and challenged him to watermelon-seed spitting contests. They also slipped into his bedroom ... for rambunctious pillow fights. Sometimes they would all sit cross-legged with him on the bed, flipping through his fan magazines or admiring his stuffed-animal collection. Often they would all lie down together and cuddle. But what went on was horseplay, not foreplay."

More importantly, Elvis indeed had relationships with very young women. Priscilla was only 14 years old when the singer began dating her. He was 24, and at that time, he even had a younger girl living in his house, says Elvis’s first guitarist and manager, Scotty Moore. Therefore, authors such as Goldman have gone so far as to call Presley a "pedophile". According to this author, "Elvis plays the strutting, overbearing macho in public, but in private he loves nothing better than to roughhouse with teenage girls with whom he exchanges beauty secrets. His basic erotic image is a crotch covered with white panties and showing a bit of pubic hair -- an image no different essentially from male to female." Alanna Nash also confirms that the singer had a predilection for young adolescent girls. Her book, 'Baby, Let's Play House': Elvis Presley and the Women Who Loved Him (2010), reveals a need in Presley to play Pygmalion and father to very young girls, whom he delighted in making over. A late-blooming "Mama's boy," she argues, young Elvis was a flop with girls and super-religious. Because of a fear of sexually transmitted diseases he wouldn't actually go "inside" women, never undressed, and was more into watching elaborate tableaux, often involving feet.

"What Elvis projected through his epoch-making act," Goldman adds, "was not just the enormous sexual excitement of puberty but its androgynous quality. Much of Elvis' power over young girls came not just from the act that he embodied their erotic fantasies but that he likewise projected frankly feminine traits with which they could identify. ... When you dig down to the sexual roots of an Elvis Presley, you sense a profound sexual ambivalence." Onefortyone (talk) 20:46, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Onefortyone, where do you find all this disgusting trash? Elvis is dead, so it's proper now to leave this kind of scurrilous rubbish in the dumpster where it belongs. It's just not right to keep going on and on about pubic hair and lace panties. The article just starts sliding downhill once it starts moving in your direction. Give it a rest. Santamoly (talk) 11:25, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I believe we should mention it in the article, one way or another, because it is talked about in his biographies. Either it can be a subtle mention in the lede, or it can be something similar to this edit, which was reverted by an editor who wants more discussion + a more reliable source. Pass a Method talk 11:39, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I don't know where you were raised up, but where I live we don't speak ill of the dead. We all wipe our arses, but we can stop talking about it once we're dead. The stuff you dredge up is totally disgusting and doesn't belong anywhere but in the National Enquirer. The article is bad enough without adding in your creepy obsessions. Santamoly (talk) 17:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

You'd be surprised to learn that Wikipedia has more respect for the living than the dead. There's no special rules for a biography of a dead person but the living get WP:BLP protection. We at Wikipedia are more concerned with reliable sources, verifiability, and proper weight than with respect for the dead. Binksternet (talk) 05:31, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

My question is: Do these so-called "biographies" have sources listed in them? If not, I don't think they should be considered reliable. And even if they do, that doesn't mean that it's true, and it doesn't mean that this type of salacious material should be included in a Wiki article. --Musdan77 (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh dear... In the blue corner we have user Onefortyone who reappears after a well-earned rest after seeing an opportunity to push his well-worn agenda regarding Presley's sex life. I wonder if he'll resurrect previous claims that Presley was gay, had sex with his Mom and had oral sex with some dude in the 1950s. And in the red corner we have user Santamoly who thinks the current article is already unacceptably seedy, even though it contains little of such tosh and even though it's a Featured Article. Go figure. Past experience suggests neither will make meaningful contributions here, but may well drive everyone else nuts. I hope they prove me wrong. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 22:17, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

←First, Happy birthday, Elvis (yesterday). Whether these stories are true or not, I think everyone—particularly those who have bad thoughts about Elvis—should read this article, especially the next to last paragraph, which quotes him. Thank you. --Musdan77 (talk) 03:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Propose

I propose adding this sentence. Do you support or oppose? Pass a Method talk 15:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support I think it is a moderate compromise to the above dispute Pass a Method talk 15:47, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Absolutely not As was already explained to Silver Seren in edit summary, one sentence in a newspaper article on Michael Jackson is not the high-quality sourcing this FA requires. Furthermore, not all "disputes" requires "compromise"; some "disputes" amount to little more than hot air and the best thing to do is allow them to slowly dissipate. DocKino (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support. Here are some additional sources: in her book, The Colonel: The Extraordinary Story of Colonel Tom Parker and Elvis Presley (2003), Alanna Nash cites Memphis Mafia member Lamar Fike who remembers that Priscilla showed up at the house that first night wearing a blue-and-white sailor suit and white socks. "I said, 'God Almighty, Elvis, she's cute as she can be, but she's fourteen years old. We'll end up in prison for life.' I watched that from the very beginning with abject fear." Nash adds "that a chaperoned Priscilla would live on nearby Hermitage Road with Vernon and his new wife, Dee. That arrangement lasted only a matter of weeks, Priscilla slipping back and forth between the houses. With Grandma Minnie Mae Presley serving as lenient watchdog, the teenager soon took up residence at Graceland... During Presley's army years, Parker had steadfastly refused to allow Elvis's most serious girlfriend, Anita Wood, to travel to Germany to see him. ("We had to keep everything so quiet ... the Colonel said it would hurt his career.") But though the Colonel took an unusual liking to Priscilla, he was furious at such a Lolita-like setup. Elvis was now twenty-eight years old, with twelve years' difference in their ages. Not so long before, in a redneck hormone storm, the piano-pounding Jerry Lee Lewis had ruined his career by marrying his underage cousin. This situation wasn't nearly as dangerous, but if discovered, it would still be a scandal, and Presley's movie contracts had morals clauses in them - a fact, along with paternity suits, that was never far from Parker's mind." (p.205-206)

According to Albert Goldman, "Elvis never had normal sexual relations with these girls. The reason? Elvis was a voyeur. What he sought as his erotic goal was a group of girls who would agree to strip down to their panties and wrestle with each other while Elvis stared out his eyes with a rocklike hard-on pressing up against his underwear. He accounted for this obsession by recalling an incident from his childhood: a moment when he had seen two little girls tumbling together on the ground with their dresses rising to show their crotches. In fact, with the fine-focus characteristic of his kind, what Elvis described as his ultimate fulfillment was not the sight of the girls or even the crotch but the vision of black pubic hairs protruding around the edges of white panties. Out of all the sexual excitements in the world, this one teasing image represented the ultimate in arousal to Elvis." (Goldman, Elvis, p.338)

Interestingly, there are also several photos showing Elvis’s predilection for very young girls, for example

• 14-year-old Dixie Locke. See [2].
• 15-year-old Siegried Schutz. See [3]

These girls were much younger than 18 when Elvis dated them. This certainly supports Goldman’s opinion that the girls Elvis liked were "as young as possible, certainly no older than eighteen" – or you might say: much younger than eighteen, or fourteen such as Priscilla, or even younger than fourteen as the girl Scotty Moore mentioned in his book. Onefortyone (talk) 00:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

What 'you might say' is of no consequence, and given the WP:BLP considerations (these women may well be still alive), none of this speculation is relevant - and may itself be a violation of WP:BLP, which applies to talk pages too. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support I'm the one that added that sentence in the first place. I feel that it is not a controversial sentence to include and all the sources I found stated that the manager did this cover-up. If readers want to take away some sort of implication out of that, that's up to them, but we should at least state this age cover-up fact in half a sentence. It's not like it's much of the article at all. Silverseren^C 01:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

"All the sources I found..." Could you please identify some of these other sources (including page numbers, please)--as long as they are of higher quality than a single sentence in an article on Michael Jackson? The problem here is not the proposed sentence, which strikes me as worthwhile; the question is if it is supported by high-quality sources, as this Featured Article requires. DocKino (talk) 02:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Agree, would be useful. Yes, "popular" bios are RS, in practice that barely gets you in the door. I'm going to take a scholarly bio over Kitty Kelley every time, and if the salacious information entering the public domain postdates the bio, why, show me something that applies rigor that supports it. Or leave it out.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

It would probably be better to say that Parker discouraged the relationship, with various reasons being given across sources, such as here and here. And I see above that Baby, Let's Play House is discussed, but no one seems to give any real reasons why it shouldn't be used, especially if it has actual interviews with the women in question. Silverseren^C 02:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Any credibility you had, you're losing fast. The first cite you offer, How Stuff Works (???), does not have a single word that could be interpreted as supporting the claim that Parker discouraged the relationship. The second cite, an unsigned item on the Yahoo Movies website (this is what you consider a high-quality source?), says only that Parker advised Presley generally "to avoid any long-term relationships". Those leave us very, very far from supporting the inclusion of your proposed sentence. As for Nash's book, exactly what passage are you citing in defense of your proposed inclusion? DocKino (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The How Stuff Works articles states that "Elvis went along with the Colonel's belief that an all-consuming relationship would hurt his image and be bad for his career." In that, Parker discouraged a direct relationship with her because it would make Elvis be "taken". As for the book, I haven't read it, but according to this review of it, it likely has information regarding this subject, specifically interviews that could be helpful. Silverseren^C 03:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

You're seriously citing How Stuff Works for this? "The material that appears on the Discovery Sites is for informational and entertainment purposes only. Despite our efforts to provide useful and accurate information, errors may appear from time to time. Before you act on information you've found on the Discovery Sites, you should confirm any facts that are important to your decision. Discovery and its information providers make no warranty as to the reliability, accuracy, timeliness, usefulness or completeness of the information on the Discovery Sites". [4] AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:33, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The author of that How Stuff Works article, Susan Doll, is a PhD-holding "Chicago-based film and pop culture historian. Over the past twenty years she has written numerous books, including the acclaimed recent titles Florida on Film (2007) and Elvis for Dummies (2009). She also teaches film studies at the college level, works as a writer/researcher for Facets Multimedia and writes a weekly film blog at the Turner Classic Movies website." I think she is knowledgeable about Elvis. Silverseren^C 04:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

"Elvis for Dummies"! I'm not sure of the appropriate response here. Whatever - this discussion seems to have moved from allegations of under-age sex (in places where it may not actually have been under-age by the laws of the time) to vague assertions about Elvis being advised to keep his relationships out of the limelight to boost his career. We seem to have no reliable source for the former, and the latter is firmly into 'So what?' territory. Nothing to see here, move along... AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Clearly there are a number of editors that disagree with you, myself included. The issue with Parker should be noted in a single line and the rest of the accusations in regards to Priscilla should be investigated with looking for more sources. At the very least, it should be noted in the article that, while perhaps (or even likely) untrue, a number of biographies of Elvis and other news stories have accused him of inappropriate conduct with underage girls. Silverseren^C 05:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, stop. You have failed dismally to establish the supposed "issue with Parker". The "issue" changes with every submission here, and you have yet to find one single high-quality source that firmly supports this "issue"...whichever version of the "issue" you're pushing this hour. As for "inappropriate conduct with underage girls", please cite your high-quality source for that: book and page. DocKino (talk) 05:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I think Binksternet already covered a number of books and their pages right here. Silverseren^C 06:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Did you read what I have written above, DocKino and AndyTheGrump? In her book, The Colonel: The Extraordinary Story of Colonel Tom Parker and Elvis Presley (2003), Elvis biographer Alanna Nash cites Memphis Mafia member Lamar Fike concerning Priscilla: "I said, 'God Almighty, Elvis, she's cute as she can be, but she's fourteen years old. We'll end up in prison for life.' I watched that from the very beginning with abject fear." Nash adds that, "though the Colonel took an unusual liking to Priscilla, he was furious at such a Lolita-like setup. Elvis was now twenty-eight years old, with twelve years' difference in their ages. Not so long before, in a redneck hormone storm, the piano-pounding Jerry Lee Lewis had ruined his career by marrying his underage cousin. This situation wasn't nearly as dangerous, but if discovered, it would still be a scandal, and Presley's movie contracts had morals clauses in them - a fact, along with paternity suits, that was never far from Parker's mind." (p.205-206) These quotes from a reliable source certainly support Silverseren's view. Onefortyone (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Ha! Which of Silver seren's views?

Because nothing you've just quoted in any way supports the claim that "Colonel Tom Parker made sure that Priscilla's age did not get out to the media during that time period."

And nothing you've just quoted in any way supports the claim that Presley committed ""inappropriate conduct with underage girls."

What we are left with is the stunning revelation that some of Presley's friends and associates thought it unwise that he pursue a romantic interest in a 14-year-old. Wow. The fact is, we already mention Priscilla's age at the time they met--that is entirely sufficient in the context of this encyclopedia article. But we s-o-o-o look forward to your book... DocKino (talk) 05:19, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Dockino, people are going to take your posts less seriously if you keep dsimissing reliable sources as unreliable, and dismissing notable topics as not notable. Pass a Method talk 17:37, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow, thank you so much for this heartfelt advice. Now, it's time for you to learn how to read...

I have not dismissed any reliable source as unreliable. If you bother to read the thread above, you will realize that you simply made that up. The closest I have come--and it's not very close--is to state that one sentence in a newspaper article on Michael Jackson is not the high-quality sourcing we need to support a significant claim about Presley and Parker. This position has been strengthened by the fact that in all of the many following comments and references to higher-quality sources, no one has turned up any evidence that Parker "made sure that Priscilla's age did not get out to the media during that time period" (as your proposal would have it).

I have not dismissed any notable topic as not notable. Again, if you would only bother to read, you would see that you fabricated that assertion as well. If high-quality sources supported the claim that Parker managed to suppress publication of Priscilla's age, that would be notable--but, to date, no one has found any such support for the claim. If high-quality sources supported the claim that Presley committed inappropriate conduct with underage girls, that would be notable--but, to date, no one has found any such support for the claim. DocKino (talk) 21:55, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Some further sources:

• "Under the guise of complying with Mr. Beaulieu's conditions, Elvis tightened a protective net around Priscilla that effectively made her a prisoner. ... The only one not thrilled with Priscilla was Parker. While it might be less difficult to pass her off as a friend of the family here for a visit, convincing the country that Elvis was a platonic host of a live-in 15-year-old girl would be almost impossible. The only saving grace was the number of people who lived at Graceland and the fact that Elvis kept her under close wraps and didn't flaunt her in public. While she adjusted to her new home, Priscilla seemed content to spend time at Graceland, but as she acclimated to her surroundings, the natural restlessness of a teenager surfaced. Elvis sternly cautioned her against going out alone at any time, citing his concern for her safety." See Kathleen Tracy, Elvis Presley: A Biography (2006), p.116.
• " The lack of a press profile for Priscilla is a testament to the Colonel's talent for controlling the information about Elvis that was released to the media. Elvis had met Priscilla while he was in the army, and then she moved to Memphis to finish high school during the early 1960s, when she was barely 16 years old and Elvis was in his mid-20s. Though the plan had been for her to live with Elvis's father and stepmother, the truth was that she lived at Graceland in Memphis, where she attended a private high school. If the press had uncovered this information, the scandal would have destroyed the mainstream image that the Colonel, Wallis, and Elvis had so carefully constructed. " See Susan Doll, PhD, Elvis for Dummies (2009), Chapter 7.
• "Finally Parker had an idea; it wasn't great, but the Colonel was getting desperate. Perhaps Elvis should get married. This idea came indirectly from Frank Sinatra, who in July 1966 had married Mia Farrow. It was a small, informal ceremony, arranged at short notice and held at the home of Jack Entratter, owner of the Sands Hotel in Las Vegas. There were few guests, just some friends and no family. It's unclear what Parker thought marriage would achieve for Elvis as far as his career was concerned. Maybe he thought he could float a newer, even more mature Elvis, or maybe he simply thought that marriage would somehow stabilize and make him more malleable. For five years Elvis had been living in a bizarre relationship with Priscilla Beaulieu that, according to Priscilla's account in her book, Elvis and Me, consisted of pills, Polaroids, and playacting but no fully consummated sex. Priscilla's role as live-in Lolita was certainly not publicized, and it's likely that had the fact about her living under Elvis's roof been made widely known, it would have been the scandal of the decade... " See Dirk Vellenga and Mick Farren, Elvis and the Colonel (1989), p.166.

All reliable sources prove you wrong, DocKino. Onefortyone (talk) 13:54, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Prove me wrong about what, exactly? DocKino (talk) 01:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Your denial of the fact that Parker made sure that the information that Elvis lived with a fifteen-year-old girl at Graceland did not get out to the media. Onefortyone (talk) 01:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

You don't even know the simple facts of the case. And you are lying about me. Why are you so evil? Your behavior is so very sad and wrong. Please apologize. You are harmful to Wikipedia and to those of us trying to help it. You make us cry. Very bad. Very sad. DocKino (talk) 10:05, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I would say you make me and some other Wikipedians involved in this sad discussion cry, DocKino. You said above: " If high-quality sources supported the claim that Parker managed to suppress publication of Priscilla's age, that would be notable--but, to date, no one has found any such support for the claim." All sources cited have proved you wrong about this detail, as these sources indeed support the claim that Parker managed to suppress publication of Priscilla's role as live-in Lolita at Graceland. This is no wonder, as this information would have caused a scandal. Onefortyone (talk) 13:48, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Priscilla moved to Graceland in March 1963. She was not "barely 16" as one of your sources claim, she was a few months away from being 18. From May 1963 till her marriage in 1967 she was old enough to do as she pleased and live with whom and where she liked. What exactly did Parker have to hide? An 18 year old adult living with a slightly older man? That's hardly news, even back then, especially in the world of showbiz. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

According to my sources, Priscilla secretly lived at Graceland from December 1960:

• Jon Pareles, The Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock 'n' Roll (1983), p.439:

"On Christmas 1960, Priscilla Beaulieu, the teenaged daughter of an Army officer whom Presley had met in Germany, visited Graceland."

• Kathleen Tracy, Elvis Presley: A Biography (2006), p.115-116:

"During the weeks of Priscilla's holiday visit, life at Graceland took a turn for the normal. Elvis lavished time and attention on Priscilla ... He even found it in his heart to be more polite and less vicious toward Dee. ... Priscilla endured the scrutiny of everyone with admirable grace. ... She had the innocent and idealistic outlook of a well-cared-for teenager. ... She was one of the few things Vernon and Elvis saw eye to eye on. Vernon made a constant fuss over Priscilla - ...- and between the two of them, her head was spinning. For her part, Priscilla seemed just as delighted to be back in America as she was to be at Graceland with Elvis. ... the house radiated a life that had been missing for years. ... As the end of Priscilla's holiday vacation neared, the thought of her leaving drove Elvis to despair. The solution was simple – she simply had to stay. She could go to school in Memphis and live at Graceland full time. Vernon was in full support. After weeks of peaceful cohabitation, Vernon was apprehensive of the mood Elvis would revert to if Priscilla left. Like everyone else, he believed Priscilla's mere presence would solve everything and make Graceland a home, happily ever after. With Vernon on the upstairs extension, Elvis talked to Joe Beaulieu for close to an hour, while Priscilla sat listening quietly but anxiously. ... After a sometimes-impassioned conversation, it had been miraculously arranged. Priscilla would move to Graceland as a guest of Vernon and Dee's, who would take personal responsibility for chaperoning her. ... Elvis enrolled Priscilla in an all-girls school, Immaculate Conception, wanting her well educated and sheltered from the attention of teenage boys. Under the guise of complying with Mr. Beaulieu's conditions, Elvis tightened a protective net around Priscilla that effectively made her a prisoner. ... The only one not thrilled with Priscilla was Parker. While it might be less difficult to pass her off as a friend of the family here for a visit, convincing the country that Elvis was a platonic host of a live-in 15-year-old girl would be almost impossible. The only saving grace was the number of people who lived at Graceland and the fact that Elvis kept her under close wraps and didn't flaunt her in public. While she adjusted to her new home, Priscilla seemed content to spend time at Graceland, but as she acclimated to her surroundings, the natural restlessness of a teenager surfaced. Elvis sternly cautioned her against going out alone at any time, citing his concern for her safety."

• Larry Geller and Joel Spector, If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story (1989), p.58:

"Probably the most scandalous rumor circulating then was that Elvis kept a young girl [Priscilla] back at Graceland. ... As Vernon and Elvis promised Mr. and Mrs. Beaulieu, she did complete her schooling and, as far as the public knew, lived with Vernon, Dee and Dee's three little boys, Rick, David and Billy Stanley..."

• Alanna Nash, The Colonel: The Extraordinary Story of Colonel Tom Parker and Elvis Presley (2003), p.206:

"The immediate promise was that a chaperoned Priscilla would live on nearby Hermitage Road with Vernon and his new wife, Dee. That arrangement lasted only a matter of weeks, Priscilla slipping back and forth between the houses."

There can be no doubt that Parker had to hide that Elvis lived with a fifteen-year-old girl at Graceland, ElvisFan1981. Onefortyone (talk) 14:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Once again, 141, you are cherry picking what you want to see and for others to see. Your own sources even use the words that are the most important in the argument against you. Between March 1960 and March 1963, Priscilla VISITED Elvis twice - 2 weeks in the summer of 1962, and over Christmas 1962. After Elvis left Germany in 1960, they kept in touch via phone, but they did not see each other again until the Summer of 1962, so your source claiming she spent Christmas 1960 at Graceland is very clearly wrong. Not very reliable, after all. Of course, some books get it 90% right and 10% wrong, that's why it's important to know the facts yourself and cross reference before relying 100% on one source. You apparently don't know how to do that properly and instantly rush to any source that backs up your current theories. Even when Priscilla did move to Graceland in March 1963, she did spend several weeks living with Vernon and his wife Dee in their home, so she didn't instantly move into Graceland. So, to summarize....

• Between March 1960 and March 1963, Elvis and Priscilla spent approximately 3 or 4 weeks together. She DID NOT live there, she DID NOT spend Christmas 1960 there. She did not see Elvis again until Summer 1962. Your sources are wrong.
• When she did eventually move back to America, she was only 2 months shy of her 18th birthday. She was neither "barely 16" or 15, as a couple of your previous sources have claimed.
• She spent several weeks living with Vernon Presley and his wife Dee BEFORE moving into Graceland. At this moment I don't know of exact dates, but perhaps it was until May 24, her 18th birthday? (It was only 2 months away)
• Between May 1963 and May 1967 (her wedding) she lived at Graceland as an adult, not an underage child. She did age, as we all do, and did not remain a 14 year old girl for the rest of her life. Therefore, what exactly did Parker have to hide from the press?

I'm also fairly certain that I recall an interview with a showbiz reporter at the time who said that the whole media knew of Priscilla living at Graceland, but as she was old enough to do so and there was no scandal to report, they didn't bother to report it. The press knew and the fans knew. It wasn't important. You need to remember, 141, that Priscilla grew up. She wasn't 14 when she lived with Elvis, and she hasn't been for a long time. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 15:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

The sources I have cited say otherwise. It could well be that Parker officially told the press that Priscilla was only a special guest at Graceland, and many fans may believe these claims today, but she was actually living there from December 1960. That's why so many sources are talking about Priscilla's role as live-in Lolita. Therefore, Wikipedia should cite what these sources say. Onefortyone (talk) 15:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

The sources you have cited are wrong, regardless of how much you want to believe them, 141. I have a book that claims there's a man living in the moon, but I don't think it would pass as a reliable source on the article about the moon. "It could well be..." is not good enough for Wikipedia. Come on 141, by now you should know that. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 15:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I support ElvisFan's very strong and detailed analysis. And for all of his tireless efforts, 141 has still not been able to find a single high-quality source that supports the claim in question that "Colonel Tom Parker made sure that Priscilla's age did not get out to the media during that time period." DocKino (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Very strong and detailed analysis? Just a question: where are the sources that support ElvisFan's claim that the many sources I have cited are wrong? You cannot deny that all of these authors agree with the fact that Parker managed to suppress publication of Priscilla's role as "live-in Lolita" at Graceland. Onefortyone (talk) 01:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I have sources, plenty of them. My bookshelves are bursting with sources on Elvis Presley's life, music and career. Here are just a few of the most reliable that back up my information.

• Brown, Peter Harry; Broeske, Pat H. Down at the End of Lonely Street: The Life and Death of Elvis Presley. Signet; 1997. p.250-260
• Clutton, Helen. Everything Elvis. 2004. p. 81-82
• Presley, Priscilla. Elvis & Me. 1985. p. 67-120
• Guralnick, Peter. Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley. Back Bay Books; 1999. p. 126-141
• Guralnick, Ernst; Jorgensen. Elvis Day by Day: The Definitive Record of His Life and Music. Ballantine; 1999. p. 178/182/184
• Victor, Adam (2008). The Elvis Encyclopaedia. Peter Mayer Publishers Inc.. p. 415. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 01:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. But where are the direct quotes from these books? Your first source is Brown and Broeske. These authors say on p.321:

• "When word later got out that the bride had been living at Graceland for five years, the media was stunned. Rona Barrett said Priscilla was Elvis's 'dirty little secret.' Still, Tom Parker had reason to be pleased. He had breathed new life into Presley's image, averting what could have been an avalanche of ruinous publicity about the superstar and his live-in Lolita."

So this source supports the view that Priscilla was seen as Elvis's "live-in Lolita". According to another source, namely Susan M. Moyer and Jerry Osborne, Elvis: The King Remembered (2002), p.85, Priscilla "had lived at Graceland six years before marrying Elvis in 1967". Fred L. Worth and Steve D. Tamerius, Elvis: His Life from A to Z (1992) write, p.16:

• "With the help of Elvis's grandmother and stepmother, Priscilla was invited to spend Christmas with Elvis at Graceland in 1960. After the stay, Priscilla returned to Germany on January 2. It was then that Elvis realized how much he missed her. In January 1961 Elvis called Priscilla's father, Captain Beaulieu, and asked if Priscilla could finish her schooling in Memphis under the watchful guardianship of Elvis's family."

And here is Karal Ann Marling, Graceland: Going Home with Elvis (Harvard University Press, 1996), p.77:

• "Citing stories that Hollywood's most eligible bachelor was gay, and painting an equally grim picture of what would happen if Priscilla's family told the world he had seduced a minor child, Colonel Parker seems to have engineered a proposal. Married life would settle his boy down." Even during the press conference after their wedding, "Elvis managed to give the impression that he had scarcely seen Priscilla since his army days."

So he could avoid a scandal, one may add. Onefortyone (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not able to copy/paste from these books the way you do from websites. Therefore I am not going to spend my time typing out every single word that they say. I don't have to. I've given the sources and page numbers. Anyone who wishes to verify them can find the books and read them. They all state that she first visited Elvis in 1962, the first time she'd seen him since he left Germany in 1960, and they all state that she visited a second time at Christmas 1962 before moving to Memphis to live in March 1963 at the age of 17. I don't care if you want to include a line about Parker hiding her existence, that isn't important. However, it is important to clarify that she did not live in Memphis at the age of 14, 15, or 16 like some of your sources have claimed. At the very least, what we have here is a stalemate. Your sources (some very dodgy ones) claim one thing, and mine claim another. Considering that most of my sources are already included in the article now and at its time of being made a featured article, I would think most people consider them perfectly reliable. These sources of mine all cross-reference each other on the dates, so the chances of them being wrong are very slim. The best course of action at this stage is to drop the matter and move on. Like I said, I don't care about your claims about Parker as it really isn't important. Even if he did attempt to stop the media knowing about Priscilla, it was a waste of time as she and Elvis were interviewed just weeks after her arrival in Memphis. Elvis openly told the reporter that she was living there, and nothing more was said or done. If Parker's job was to keep this information away from the press, it was an impossible task as Elvis had already spilled the beans. What is very interesting, however, is that nearly all of your sources contradict each other on several issues, such as length of time she'd lived there and ages, years she'd moved there etc. With that in mind, can you really consider them truly reliable? The difference is that all of my sources say exactly the same thing. Just something to think about, and yet another thing that makes your sources slightly dodgy in places. Like I said above, so many books are wrong in places and contradict themselves. The only way to verify anything within them is to find EXACTLY the same information in several other sources. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 03:15, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can see, some sources say that Priscilla was fifteen, others say she was sixteen when she lived with Presley at Graceland. However, most sources agree that she was seen as a live-in Lolita and that Parker and Elvis managed to give the impression that the singer had scarcely seen Priscilla since his army days in order to avoid a scandal. This should be mentioned in the article. Onefortyone (talk) 03:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Why? The sources are not strong enough to warrant its inclusion, and they are contradicted by several stronger sources. I don't at all agree that any mention of her being 15 or 16 when she moved there should be added to the article, as I have absolute faith in the fact (and might I point out her own words) that she was 17 when she moved there. She was 2 months away from turning 18 and graduation High School, she was certainly no Lolita figure (Lolita was 12, for goodness sake). As I said above, the press already knew that Priscilla moved to live there a month after she did so, and they didn't care. Parker may have thought it negative publicity, but the cat was out of the bag and it still didn't raise any eyebrows within the media. What an 18 year old woman does with her time is her own business. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, ElvisFan, there are too many sources saying that Parker had to hide that Elvis lived with a fifteen- or sixteen-year-old girl at Graceland in order to avoid a scandal. Onefortyone (talk) 04:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

And there are too many sources saying that it's impossible as she was 17 before she even went to live there. If she was 17, how could Parker possibly have had to defend her being 15 or 16? What do we have to do to resolve this when there are contradicting sources? Your sources are quite dodgy in places, and certainly not acceptable for inclusion in a featured article. Your sources even contradict each other, which only makes them weaker. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 04:14, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

You could also argue that the sources differ because of Parker's successful strategy to hide the "dirty secret" from public view that Priscilla lived much earlier with Elvis than officially stated. And if there are published sources that contradict each other, then this fact must be mentioned in the article according to Wikipedia policies. Onefortyone (talk) 04:31, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Support adding the sentence, cited to one or two of the most reliable sources shown here. Binksternet (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

• Well, not quite. The proposed sentence is this: "Colonel Tom Parker made sure that Priscilla's age did not get out to the media during that time period." We now have some good sourcing that Elvis and Priscilla's mutual romantic interest did not become public for some time, but no firm attribution of that to Parker. I believe we can support an addition here, but rephrased and working off the existing sentence. Something like this: "They would eventually marry after a seven-and-a-half-year courtship, which did not become public knowledge for some time." That's what we can support based on high-quality sources at this point--and we should be able to improve on it. The vagueness of "for some time" is unsatisfactory. Let's keep hitting the books and see if we can determine exactly when their romance became public. DocKino (talk) 01:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Why not just write what the reliable sources say:

• If the press had uncovered Priscilla's role as "live-in Lolita" at Graceland, the scandal would have destroyed the singer's mainstream image that the Colonel, Wallis, and Elvis himself had constructed. See Dirk Vellenga and Mick Farren, Elvis and the Colonel (1989), p.166. Susan Doll, PhD, Elvis for Dummies (2009), Chapter 7.

This is a clear statement. Onefortyone (talk) 01:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

No. That is very obviously not a clear statement at all. You sound very much like a troll. In the past, experienced editors have identified you as a troll. Based on your behavior here, you seem like a troll. Are you a troll? DocKino (talk) 10:05, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

If other Wikipedians cite reliable sources that prove you wrong, you are accusing them of being a troll. Very interesting behavior, DocKino, and certainly not in line with Wikipedia policies. Onefortyone (talk) 14:25, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

"Them"? No, 141. There's no "them." You are the only participant in this discussion who has been identified by multiple experienced editors as a troll. DocKino (talk) 21:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I just did a CTRL+F search to make sure, but you're the only one that's used the word troll in this entire discussion, on this entire talk page. You are acting extremely negative and rude to everyone that opposes your viewpoint in this discussion, rather than focusing on the sources given. Silverseren^C 02:56, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Silver seren, the editors of this article have a long, l-o-n-g history with 141's disruptive behavior here.

I apologize for any rudeness I've shown you. However, I have focused on the sources--the original one, a single sentence in a newspaper article on Michael Jackson, was completely inadequate. As we have looked at more sources, we have--as ElvisFan states--reached at best a stalemate, though her sourcing in general is much stronger. Strongest, of course, is Guralnick, whose two-volume Presley biography is widely recognized as the most authoritative. He confirms that Elvis and Priscilla did not see each other after Germany until mid-1962, in Los Angeles, and that her first visit to Graceland was around Christmas 1962. Case closed on that. What Guralnick also makes clear is that their romantic connection was public knowledge even during the period in Germany, though the media was under the impression at the time that Priscilla was 16 years old. Guralnick in no way attributes that error to any effort by Parker, nor it seems, does anyone else. In sum, the proposal we've been discussing here is a no go. DocKino (talk) 03:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I have never been disruptive as I frequently cite my sources, but I would say that you have a long history in attacking me and removing my well-sourced contributions. Onefortyone (talk) 04:03, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Could you please cite the exact wording of Guralnick's statement that Elvis and Priscilla did not see each other after Germany until mid-1962? Onefortyone (talk) 04:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

"He had started talking to Priscilla about it in March [1962], two years after they had last seen each other and months since their most recent telephone conversation." p. 126. She arrived in June, meeting Elvis in LA. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 04:30, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Considering that I, 141, PassaMethod, and Binksternet are in support of this proposal, it clearly has nothing to do with disruption. And Guralnick is clearly not the only accredited author who has written about Elvis and a significant number of them mention the issues that came up with Priscilla's age, which is clearly and obviously glossed over in the article. Silverseren^C 03:58, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, the proposal as stated has obviously failed. If you wish to make a new proposal about a sentence you'd like to add addressing "the issues that came up with Priscilla's age", please do so in a new thread--and please make sure that the content of your proposal is supported by our highest-quality sources: as ElvisFan observes, that's Guralnick and Jorgensen. If you want to pursue this, that's what we'll do: Wrap this up and start fresh in a new thread with something that can better withstand scrutiny. And, as Collect has indicated, definitely keep in mind the very high standard we have to meet for anything involving Priscilla--a little refresher read on WP:BLP is probably in order. DocKino (talk) 04:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Completely agree here with you, DocKino. Guralnick, and might I add Jorgensen, can both be considered as authorities on Elvis' life and career. Their research has unearthed so much information that previous sources (including some of those put forward by 141) had either not known or had gotten wrong through poor research or false information. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 03:59, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

I suggest that the proposed contentious claim involving a living person neither has consensus, nor does it meet WP:BLP. Cheers. Collect (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Exactly, Collect. This isn't just an issue of "this source says this, that source says that". There are people involved in this that are still alive and thus all information, especially negative, should be considered very carefully before being included. Even more so when there are conflicting sources. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

It is a fact that several sources contradict each other. Guralnick cannot be right, as remarks by the Memphis Mafia members who were with Elvis at the time say otherwise. For instance, according to Alan Fortas, Elvis

• "had an image to maintain. Just how that image differed with each person's perception came to full light that Christmas, the December he came back to Memphis before he got his release on 'Wild in the Country.' [i.e. December 1960] That was the Christmas Elvis worked a miracle. Using Dee and Vernon as a shield, Elvis persuaded Priscilla's step-father, Captain Joseph Beaulieu, to let Priscilla come to Graceland for Christmas. She would fly from Frankfort, West Germany, to New York, where Vernon and Dee would meet her, and escort her back to Memphis. They, of course, would also serve as chaperones during her visit. Priscilla stayed at Graceland about two weeks, returning to Germany early in January, just before Elvis went back to finish 'Wild in the Country.' We eventually ended up going to Las Vegas..."

See Alan Fortas, Elvis: from Memphis to Hollywood (1992), p.137. Robert Matthew-Walker also writes,

• "...Elvis welcomed Priscilla Beaulieu to Graceland to stay with Vernon and Dee for Christmas. This was an unusual circumstance, for Priscilla was still only fifteen, and the idea of her staying at the Presley household would have raised several eyebrows. It was clearly explained that she would be chaperoned by Elvis's family..."

See Robert Matthew-Walker, Heartbreak Hotel: The Life and Music of Elvis Presley (1995), p.57. In her more recent Elvis biography, Kathleen Tracy says:

• "As the end of Priscilla's holiday vacation neared, the thought of her leaving drove Elvis to despair. The solution was simple – she simply had to stay. She could go to school in Memphis and live at Graceland full time. Vernon was in full support. After weeks of peaceful cohabitation, Vernon was apprehensive of the mood Elvis would revert to if Priscilla left. Like everyone else, he believed Priscilla's mere presence would solve everything and make Graceland a home, happily ever after. With Vernon on the upstairs extension, Elvis talked to Joe Beaulieu for close to an hour, while Priscilla sat listening quietly but anxiously. ... After a sometimes-impassioned conversation, it had been miraculously arranged. Priscilla would move to Graceland as a guest of Vernon and Dee's, who would take personal responsibility for chaperoning her."

See Kathleen Tracy, Elvis Presley: A Biography (2006), p.115-116. It seems that Guralnick is just following the official version of the story invented by the Colonel and the Beaulieus for the press that only in 1962 Elvis phoned Priscilla's stepfather, Captain Paul Beaulieu, for his permission assuring the Beaulieus that the young girl would live at Vernon's house, attend a good school and always be chaperoned, and implied that he would marry her when she came of age. However, the Memphis Mafia members know better. It is no wonder, then, that Vanity Fair magazine would eventually call Priscilla "the original rock 'n' roll Lolita". These facts must be mentioned in the article. Onefortyone (talk) 00:09, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

No, not at all. Those "facts" are, in fact, disputed recollections. Guralnick, regarded as the most authoritative biographer, and several other strong sources state that Priscilla did not visit Graceland until Christmas 1962. And, whether her first visit was in Christmas 1960 or 1962 is simply not a significant enough fact to raise in an article that must summarize Elvis Presley's entire life and career. If done very, very carefully, the history and the historical dispute could be handled--at the length it requires per WP:BLP and basic good historical practices--in the article on Priscilla Presley. DocKino (talk) 00:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

It's really strange to be arguing about facts in an article that contains a sentence such as "Like some of his peers, he may have attended blues venues—of necessity, in the segregated South, only on nights designated for exclusively white audiences." Reading over this talk page and being reverted for "overlinking", it appears that some editors of this page have some serious ownership issues. Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not a haigiography for fanboys. Tom Reedy (talk) 05:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

How about reserving the personal attacks until after making a substantive contribution to the discussion of the topic? Thanks. DocKino (talk) 08:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

How about you looking in the mirror. You have called other editors in this discussion trolls and even even called one "evil"! Any objective observer can see who is dishing out the personal attacks. Paul B (talk) 13:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Paul, you seem to be confused. This Talk page exists to facilitate discussion of how to maintain and improve the quality of the Elvis Presley article. Any objective observer can see who has contributed substantively to that discussion (e.g., myself) and who has not at all (e.g., you, Tom). Also, it's not good to misrepresent what others have said--I have suggested that one and only one participant in this discussion may be a troll, a figure who has been identified as such by multiple experienced editors in the past; it was that same figure whom I jocularly referred to as "evil." So...don't pass that mirror along until you've gazed in it for a while. (But tell us what you find somewhere else...)

Back on substance: If anything more is to be gotten out of discussion of these matters, it would help if Pass a Method or Silver seren would launch a new thread with a new, very carefully worded proposal that recognizes the issues with WP:Verifiability, WP:BLP, WP:DUE, and WP:LENGTH. DocKino (talk) 14:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

As for the behavior of DocKino, the participants in this discussion should also consult this page. Onefortyone (talk)

Remember that the behavior of another editor does not excuse you from the rules of civility. Continue to comment on the edits, not the editor, and especially don't talk about the editor's behavior on other pages not related to this one, which means keep mention of WQAs and RFCs off article talk pages. Mmyers1976 (talk) 20:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I see Pass a Method has rejoined us. Would you care to move the discussion forward by making a new, policy-mindful, carefully worded proposal, or not? DocKino (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is a carefully worded new proposal:

The Colonel, Wallis, and Elvis endeavored to hide Priscilla's role as "live-in Lolita" at Graceland, because they were aware that the scandal may have destroyed the singer's career. (See Dirk Vellenga and Mick Farren, Elvis and the Colonel (1989), p.166. Susan Doll, PhD, Elvis for Dummies (2009), Chapter 7.) Onefortyone (talk) 20:58, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I dont mind the new one, but you should preferably discuss this with Silverseren, because he worded the original proposal. Pass a Method talk 21:37, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm fine with the change. I just feel like the information in general is something that should be mentioned in the article, per numerous mention in sources. Silverseren^C 21:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Except that this is a terrible, ill-considered proposal that will be reverted on sight for violating our Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy: "Material about living persons added to any Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoiding original research."

• It is not verifiable that Priscilla Presley ever lived with Presley before she was of the age of consent. Most authoritative sources agree that Priscilla did not live with Presley until around her eighteenth birthday—if she did live with him before turning 18, it was for at the very most a few weeks. The claim by Elvis for Dummies Doll that they lived together when she was sixteen is contradicted by the prevailing historical view.
• It is very far from neutral to promote a description of her as a "live-in Lolita". Nabokov's famous Lolita character was twelve years old when she began a sexual relationship with Nabokov's Humbert Humbert character. Even Elvis for Dummies Doll, who claims that they lived together when she was sixteen, does not assert that they had a sexual relationship at that time.

In sum, this "proposal" is potentially libelous, clearly biased, and poorly sourced contentious material that violates our policy on biographies of living persons. Not only will any attempt to bring it into the article be reverted on sight, but per our policy, such reversions are not subject to the 3-revert rule. DocKino (talk) 05:27, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Elvis on Beale Street

Hey, yeah, it's just like old times here, only with some new names. Meanwhile, I'd like to suggest that BB King's Elvis on Beale Street be moved. "Clearly, it was Dewey who introduced Presley to Beale Street's juke joints and night spots, and he did so only after making hi instantly famous on Jluy 10, 1954... Dewey and Elvis: the life and times of a rock 'n' roll deejay. By Louis Cantor page 148. currently available (along with evidence to support this) through Google Books.) Oh, and Bill Haley was doing rockabilly in 1951, (Listen to Rocket 88 for example. [5] three years before Elvis was one of the "originators". Steve Pastor (talk) 23:43, 3 January 2012 (UTC) Yeah Steve,this sort of information you've put forward,I myself find so very interesting,rather than all that other irrelevant dribble. I also read someone that they say that the song "Rocket 88" by Jackie Brenston and the piano playing was Ike Turner,back in the 40's was considered by many to be the first R&B song.--Jaye9 (talk) 00:33, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The rockabilly thing jumped out at me too when I read the article - the claim that he was one of the originators is somewhat poorly sourced. "Popularizes" - of course! "Originators" - somewhat dubious.VolunteerMarek 22:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

"Somewhat poorly sourced"? Are you serious? It's sourced to Paul Friedlander's Rock and Roll: A Social History, one of the more highly regarded reference works in the field, published by the well-respected Westview Press. Just to check myself, I grabbed my old copy of the Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll off the shelf and looked up "rockabilly". Here's how the entry begins: "Rockabilly was Elvis Presley's music, the hybrid of blues and country that become rock & roll." In Rock Music Styles: A History (from McGraw-Hill, again a very well respected publishing house), Katherine Charlton flatly describes Presley as "rockabilly's originator." You may "feel" that he's not one of the originators of the genre, but high-quality sources belie that. DocKino (talk) 23:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

By March 1954 Bill Haley and Saddlemen/ Comets had 14 releases that Terry Gordon of the Rockin’ Country Style web site rate as “pertinent” in a discussion of what is most commonly known as “Rockabilly”. [6] Note that Sun hadn't recorded anything that would be released by Elvis. The problem is that many if not most authors either don't know about, or chose to ignore everything that came before Elvis. It would be more correct to state that "to the public at large", or "on the national stage", Elvis was appeaered to be an originator of the style. Steve Pastor (talk) 02:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

(1) While Gordon's efforts are impressive, in the end you're citing what a personal website calls "pertinent" to a discussion of rockabilly. That's rather meager countersourcing.

(2) We do not claim that Presley invented rockabilly. We identify him as "one of [its] originators." That modest claim is very well founded in high-quality sources. DocKino (talk) 05:08, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

"But would you agree with me that rock 'n' roll started with Sam Phillips' Sun label? He was recording-" "No, not really, no," Gene interrupted. "Can't say that Sorry. I know Sam real well and Sam picked up on something that was already happening." Gene Vincent being interviewed in "Race with the Devil" pgae 219. Steve Pastor (talk)

I agree with what I believe is your general philosophical point, which is that it's hard to identify anyone person or event as the "origin" of any musical genre. But again, we don't claim that Presley invented rockabilly and/or rock 'n' roll. We describe him as an originator. That's a different, much more modest, and very well support description. Right? DocKino (talk) 01:49, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I only mentioned this in passing, but when another editor picked up on it, I decided to begin sharing what I've learned over the past year or two (or three?), since I decided my time on this article was no longer justified and decided to pursue other interests that turned out to lead back here. Anyhow, it's my opinion that a more nuanced statement would better represent the facts, rather than simply going with what most authors have written. If no other editors agree, and I have completed the presentation of those facts, or it turns out that no one is interested, I will rest my case.

Vincent goes on to say, "But a lot of people were doing it before that, especially Carl Perkins." Steve Pastor (talk) 20:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Although we did not agree in certain points in the past, Steve, in this case I would like to support your view. Colin Escott and Martin Hawkins write:

• "It is now established that rock music did not originate with the Beatles or even with Elvis Presley a decade earlier and much rock literature has rightly emphasized the importance of the many forms of ethnic music that preceded the rock revolution. 'Rockabilly' was there at the beginning. It was basically hyperactive country music which borrowed in mood and emphasis from commercial rhythm and blues. Rockabilly has become identified with Sun Records..."

and therefore Escott and Hawkins's book "uses a study of Sun — its distinctive sound, its artists, and its market — as a starting point for a wider study of rockabilly music." See Colin Escott and Martin Hawkins, Sun Records: The Brief History of the Legendary Recording Label (1980), p.i. The authors add on p.64:

• "What made rockabilly fascinating was its compulsive rhythm with the accent on the second and fourth beats, usually achieved without the use of a heavy drummer. Other instruments used in the early days were the fiddle and, later, the saxophone when artists had designs on a hit record."

Did Elvis's band members use fiddles? Earlier rockabilly artists obviously did. This means that Elvis was not the originator of rockabilly. Here is another source that discusses the "Rockabilly ideal", i.e. "rebellion against societal controls, excess, hedonism, and a sense of a community among outsiders":

• "These points indicate that Rockabilly was not an isolated phenomenon; its salient features relate it to other musical and cultural movements taking place all over the United States in the 1940's and 1950s. Most of the studies of Rockabilly have emphasized its regional origins. This specific musical fusion of black rhythm and blues and white country music and gospel took place in and around Memphis, Tennessee in 1954; it spread throughout the mid-South region (Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas) between 1954 and 1956; and finally became a national and international form of popular music from 1956 to 1958, when it was absorbed by a developing mainstream rock 'n' roll. Early Rockabilly was characterized by a set instrumentation of acoustic rhythm guitar, electric lead guitar, and stand-up string bass, with drums and piano sometimes added later; the use of echo on lead vocal; and heavy rhythms with accents on the second and fourth beats (...). Colin Escott and Martin Hawkins call Rockabilly a "basically hyperactive country music which borrowed in mood and emphasis from commercial rhythm and blues" (...). The musical influences on Rockabilly were only partially regional, and even the immediate regional precursors of Rockabilly — hillbilly boogie, honky-tonk, western swing, and bluegrass — had already been affected by national popular musical forms such as jazz, blues, vaudeville, and rhythm and blues."

See The Southern Quarterly, vol. 22, 1983, p.79. Calling Elvis one of the originators of rockabilly (as in the Wikipedia article) seems wrong to me, in view of the sources cited above. Other musicians were the originators. Onefortyone (talk) 23:34, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Great. Now in addition to one strong source that identifies Presley as "rockabilly's originator" and a second that calls rockabilly "essentially an Elvis Presley construction", we now have confirmation from a third that says of rockabilly, "This specific musical fusion of black rhythm and blues and white country music and gospel took place in and around Memphis, Tennessee in 1954"--exactly where and when Presley's career began. Just as the "rockabilly" entry in the Rolling Stone Encyclopedia of Rock & Roll puts it: "Rockabilly was Elvis Presley's music." The matter is settled: the historical consensus is very, very clear--Presley was one of rockabilly's originators. Let's move on. DocKino (talk) 23:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, DocKino, it is a historical fact that the origin of Rockabilly was only partially regional, as the same source later emphasizes (contrary to the studies of Rockabilly that have made the claim of its regional origins), and that Elvis was not its originator. Rockabilly was already there before Elvis appeared on the scene. He only made Rockabilly very popular, that's true. Onefortyone (talk) 23:52, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, exactly! We don't say that rockabilly had an originator. And, of course, the influences on it were by no means merely regional. But all the sources agree that it arose in and around Memphis in 1954, and that Presley was one of the originators. We nailed this one! DocKino (talk) 00:11, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong as Rockabilly was already there shortly before Elvis appeared on the scene. According to Escott and Hawkins's book, Sun Records — its distinctive sound, its artists, and its market — was a big starting point for rockabilly, and Sun started operations on March 27, 1952. Onefortyone (talk) 00:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

What?! You've lost the thread, my friend. Sun Records didn't invent rockabilly by opening its doors. You must have been joking there, right? So: We have one high-quality source that flatly describes Presley as "rockabilly's originator". We have a second high-quality source that calls rockabilly "essentially an Elvis Presley construction". Where's the high-quality source that claims "rockabilly was already there shortly before Elvis appeared on the scene"? I haven't found that source. Steve Pastor hasn't found that source. And you most certainly haven't. So...we're done here. DocKino (talk) 00:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I have already cited my sources above. Onefortyone (talk) 00:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, we've all cited many sources. And no high-quality source asserts that rockabilly was a fully formed genre before Elvis started his professional career. Thanks for all your hard work. DocKino (talk) 00:31, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is a reliable source explicitly stating that Elvis was not the originator of Rockabilly. It cites Carl Perkins who

• has been called one of the originators of rockabilly. But Carl steadfastly refuses to take primary credit for this accomplishment. " [Sam] Phillips, Elvis, and I didn't create rockabilly; it was just the white man's response to the black man's spiritualness. It was born in the South. People working those cotton fields as I did as a youngster would hear black people singing . . . There's a lot of cats that was doin' our things, and maybe better, that were never heard of — they're the ones that created rockabilly, the ones who never even got on record. We're just the lucky ones."

See Wayne Jancik, The Billboard Book of One-Hit Wonders (1998), p.16. This means that neither Elvis nor Perkins were the originators of Rockabilly. Onefortyone (talk) 01:18, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Let's note that when Haley covered Rocket 88 in 1951 - that's 3 years before Elvis - Sam Phillips did the production in Jackie Brenston's version. Those are a fact, unlike the opinions written by many writers whom DocKeno continues to cite. Perhaps Phillips never heard what Haley did with the song, an arrangment that had the esential elements of "rockabliiy", again, as evaluated by someone who spent thousands of hours creating a database on the subject.

In 1953 just about one year before Elvis recorded at Sun, Haley and the Comets had a song that was #12 in the nation, having climed the charts since April of that year. Haley's rockabilly effort was even featured on the The “Glory in the Flower” episode of the CBS Omnibus dramatic series, broadcast on October 4, 1953 from 5:00-6:30pm Eastern time. the ifirst time this type of music was played on national television in the US. It would have been hard for Phillips and Elvis to miss that one. Again we are still in the days BE (Before Elvis). Steve Pastor (talk) 22:15, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Once again, Steve, Terry Gordon ("someone who spent thousands of hours creating a database on the subject") has a wonderful, useful site in "Rockin' Country Style", but this is simply not a reliable source per our WP:Verifiability policy. Also, you need to recognize Gordon's own definition of his site's scope: it "attempts to list every rock & roll single aimed at the country & western market and every pop rock & roll single whose style was primarily derived from country-oriented rock & roll." Gordon never uses the the term "rockabilly" and obviously, far from every song he lists would qualify as rockabilly--do keep that in mind when you use the site for your personal research purposes in the future. Finally, note his five strongly positive criteria for inclusion in the category of "Genres":

• Sounds like Elvis on Sun
• Sounds like Carl Perkins
• Sounds like Jerry Lee Lewis
• Sounds like Elvis on RCA, 1956-58
• Sounds like Charley Ryan's "Hot Rod Lincoln"

That's Elvis first, and Elvis twice. But you think it's a stretch to identify him as an originator of the sound Gordon is interested in? That's just not a viable position.

So that leaves us with this from your most recent comment: In 1953, Haley and the Comets had a #12 hit--"Crazy Man, Crazy", to be specific. It's not clear what relevance that has to the description of Presley as one of rockabilly's originators. Does any high-quality source, for instance, describe "Crazy Man, Crazy" as the song that defined the new genre of rockabilly? Anything like that at all? DocKino (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I did some further research. In his Complete Idiot's Guide to Elvis (1997), p.85, Frank Coffey writes that " 'Crazy Man Crazy' was the first rockabilly record to make the Billboard pop chart in 1953." According to Michael Campbell’s Popular Music in America (3rd edition, 2009), p.161, Carl Perkins was of the opinion that "rockabilly music was a country man’s song with a black man’s rhythm" continuing a long line of country takes on black music. The author adds that "the sound of rockabilly was not confined to Memphis or even the South. The idea of countrifying rhythm and blues had spread throughout North America." This author further writes that "Bill Haley recorded the first big rockabilly hit." According to Craig Morrison’s Go Cat Go! Rockabilly Music and its Makers (1996), p.35, Bill Haley’s Rock the Joint of 1952 is "bona fide rockabilly, perhaps even the birth of the style." In his Supremely American: Popular Song in the 20th Century (2005), p.134, Nicholas E. Tawa writes that the first white offerings of rock 'n' roll were given the designation "rockabilly" and that "Rock 'n' roll emerged more clearly as a white genre with the 1953 record 'Crazy Man Crazy,' sung by Bill Haley." According to Brock Helander’s The Rockin' '50s: The People who made the Music (1998), p.13, "Rockabilly developed in the early to mid '50s. It usually featured frantic, uninhibited lead vocals, a wild stinging lead guitar, and thumping stand-up bass. Rockabilly found its first widespread expression thanks to Sun Records... Bill Haley and the Comets were perhaps the earliest purveyors of rockabilly... They scored major pop hits from 1953 to 1956 with songs such as 'Crazy, Man, Crazy,' 'Dim, Dim the Lights,' the classic 'Rock Around the Clock' (...), 'Burn That Candle,' and 'See You Later, Alligator.' " All of these sources clearly support Steve Pastor's view that there were rockabilly songs before Elvis appeared on the scene. Onefortyone (talk) 00:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Wow. Talk about cherry picking, and intellectual dishonesty. Let's take a look at just one of your sources: Morrison's Go Cat Go! He states in his preface,

Rockabilly crystallized into a recognizable style in 1954 with Elvis Presley's first release, on the Sun label of Memphis. Presley announced the arrival of rockabilly through his dynamic stage act, and the style spread into Arkansas, Mississippi, Texas, Louisiana, and neighboring states. Musicians inspired by Presley joined the movement, bringing their own backgrounds. (p. x)

Let's take a look at another source you've brought in, Tawa's Supremely American:

Rockabilly ripened in Memphis, where Sam Phillips' Sun Records, a small regional outfit nurtured it.... Among the most seminal musicians were Elvis Presley, Carl Perkins, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, and Roy Orbison.... Over the next two years [beginning in 1956], a string of number-one recorded hits [by Presley] dominated the charts and went a long way toward defining the rockabilly style.... (pp. 134–35)

There is no question that Haley was an important influence on the development of rockabilly; similarly, there is no question that Presley was one of the style's originators--indeed, multiple sources (Friedlander, Charlton, Morrison, Rolling Stone Encyclopedia) identify him as the most significant originator. That there were songs before 1954 that may retrospectively be identified as rockabilly does not contradict that observation in any way. Once again, and for the last time, the critical consensus is undeniable: Presley was one of rockabilly's originators, exactly as we state. We don't need to spend any more time and energy on this. DocKino (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

No, according to the sources I have cited, Elvis wasn't an originator of Rockabilly. He was among those (and perhaps the most significant musician) who made it very popular. Onefortyone (talk) 03:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's just a blatant falsehood. Morrison, as quoted above, inarguably identifies Presley as an originator of rockabilly--"Rockabilly crystallized into a recognizable style in 1954 with Elvis Presley's first release." We're done here. DocKino (talk) 03:53, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Does this author state that Elvis was an originator of Rockabilly? No, he doesn't. Onefortyone (talk) 04:12, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Ha! He obviously does, as anyone who understands the English language and is intellectually honest can plainly read. As does Friedlander. As does Charlton. As does Tawa. As does the Rolling Stone Encyclopedia. But you go on pretending otherwise...it won't make any difference to the content of our Featured Article. DocKino (talk) 04:33, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

My dictionary of the English language says that "origin" , "crystallization" and "recognition" are different things. As Carl Perkins says: " [Sam] Phillips, Elvis, and I didn't create rockabilly; it was just the white man's response to the black man's spiritualness. It was born in the South. People working those cotton fields as I did as a youngster would hear black people singing . . . There's a lot of cats that was doin' our things, and maybe better, that were never heard of — they're the ones that created rockabilly, the ones who never even got on record. We're just the lucky ones."Onefortyone (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you've quoted Carl Perkins before. This may come as a surprise to you, but quoting him again doesn't bolster your position. DocKino (talk) 04:50, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

And what about the rockabilly experts who say that 'Crazy Man Crazy' was the first rockabilly record?" Onefortyone (talk) 04:59, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

This is the last time I'm going to repeat myself here. As I stated above, that there were songs before 1954 that may retrospectively be identified as rockabilly does not contradict the evident critical consensus that Presley was one of the originators of rockabilly. DocKino (talk) 05:10, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

This may be your personal opinion, but it is not in line with the sources I have cited above. Onefortyone (talk) 05:12, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, but what you've just said is false. Not only is it in line with the sources already cited in the article, it's in line with both Morrison and Tawa, who you happily brought to our attention. In fact, I think it will be most useful to quote Morrison's comment, "Rockabilly crystallized into a recognizable style in 1954 with Elvis Presley's first release", in our article. DocKino (talk) 05:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

If it is also mentioned that Elvis was not the originator of rockabilly but helped that it could crystallize into a recognizable style in 1954, this may be a good idea. Onefortyone (talk) 05:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Bill Haley (The Saddlemen) Rock the Joint Essex 303— "Jumpy opus is an odd mixture of c.&w. and r.&b." from Billboard Apr 26, 1952. More than two years B.E. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Steve, you repeatedly referred to Gordon's "Rockin' Country Style" in a vain attempt to somehow prove that Presley was not a seminal rockabilly figure. I demonstrated conclusively that Gordon--if we are to interpret "rockin' country style" to mean rockabilly--MUCH more strongly identifies the rockabilly style with Presley than with Haley. What do you have to say about that? Were you, perhaps, wrong? DocKino (talk) 08:21, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Now that you are familiarizing yourself with the RCS site, you might want to go to the Advance Search page and do a search for "perintent" songs in the year 1952, then 1953. You will see numerous songs by numerous artists. You will also see that there are many more in 1953 than in 1952. Thank you for your continuing comments as I continue to present the information I have come across since leaving this article years(?) ago. Upon completion of that presentation, and perhaps a more concise statement of the points presented, we will see if other editors agree with my suggestion that the current statement should be modified. Steve Pastor (talk) 17:38, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Steve. I'm perfectly happy with that--it would be great if we had other editors joining in...any editors other than 141, who I do not believe is participating honestly or for sincere reasons. That said...

Here's what I'm seeing as I consider the wealth of information on the RCS site: yes, there was a lot happening in 1952 and especially 1953 that was pertinent to the development of rockabilly. But the consensus among critics/historians is that it didn't all come together in the form we now recognize as quintessential rockabilly until 1954. Looking at the range of how that's stated, I believe it is Morrison who comes closest as any one writer can come to expressing the consensus view: "Rockabilly crystallized into a recognizable style in 1954 with Elvis Presley's first release."

Steve, if you know other Wikipedians who are familiar and/or interested in this period of popular music history who you'd like to invite to look over the sources and weigh in, I'm all in favor of getting more eyes on the topic. DocKino (talk) 21:49, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Just another opinion on Elvis for today. “Elvis Presley is an after-the-fact personality in regard to the origin of rock ‘n’ roll, but his sudden and enormous popularity played a key role…” Rock! It’s Still Rhythm and Blues. Lawrence N. Redd. The Black Perspective in Music, Vol 13 No 1 Spring 1985 p 39. More to come over the next few days. Steve Pastor (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

More on Haley in 1953. Billboard noted in the “Popular “ record section, “Real Rock Drive” (Essex 311) had a “relaxed, free swing” delivery, while “Stop Beatin’ Round the Mulberry Bush” had “a driving beat” in an “exciting lively rendition” with a “frenetic quality”. Jan 24, 1953 p 37. For the June 1953 release of “Fractured” and “Pat-a-Cake” Essex (327) Billboard wrote that both sides were “mighty potent,” “another wild driving disking,” “crazy backing” “that really goes,” “a driving beat” <Aug 1, 1953>. Next Haley releases in September “A wild and wooly item” that could easily cut across classifications” according to Billboard reviews. After the release of “Rock the Joint” promotional materials for Bill Haley and the Saddlemen went like this They’re Rockin’ the Show World with a Modern Cowboy Swing and Jive… ” “Jive, Cowboy, Popular, Hillbilly, The Most Versatile Band in the Land”. Soon we'll see that even the name that stuck for this music has an origin story from Before Elvis recorded his first session with Scotty and Bill. Steve Pastor (talk) 02:27, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

That may well be, but while the fascinating information you've provided is obviously highly relevant to Bill Haley, clearly relevant to the history of rock 'n' roll, and likely relevant to the history of rockabilly, it is not particularly relevant to THE question: whether Elvis Presley was one of the orginators of rockabilly. Historians clearly concur that he was, and none of this information about Haley's "driving beat" does anything to change that. DocKino (talk) 07:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

There's a book I've been looking into purchasing today, mainly because it includes information about Elvis, but it's primarily about the history of Rockabilly. It's from last year, so I'm assuming fairly up to date with its research, and is written by Greil Marcus with input from Michael Dregni, Peter Guralnick, Luc Sante, Robert Gordon, Sonny Burgess. Each of these names are very well known within the Elvis community, and all of them are considered very knowledgeable when it comes to his life and career. Several of them, if not all, are considered highly credible music historians in their own right outside of Elvis. Here's some of what the book had to say regarding Elvis and Rockabilly.

• "Rockabilly came and went like a Saturday night. Its arrival can be pinpointed: July 5, 1954, the night Elvis Presley, Scotty Moore, and Bill Black recorded “That’s All Right” in Memphis’ Sun Studios."
• "They struggled as well to find a name for the music - a label to denigrate it for do-gooders and moral watchdogs; a code name for the adherents to recognize each other. Elvis’ audience in the early days was mostly country fans - albeit a younger country fan and, more and more, a female one as well. His music was labelled country bop or hillbilly bebop, blending the sense of backwoods mysticism with the hottest and wildest jazz then making the rounds. Some few newspaper and magazine writers called it “rockabilly”, but it was not common coin back then. Still, it proved a fine term, distinguishing this Southern white country music from the rock ‘n’ roll perpetrated by Little Richard and Fats Domino in New Orleans, Ike Turner and Jackie Brenston, Chuck Berry and Bo Diddley laid down in Chicago, and even the Tin Pan Alley rock ‘n’ roll of Bill Haley and His Comets."
• "“That’s All Right” was more than just all right - it was the song that jumpstarted rockabilly. The story of the session has become legend: Derived from Mississippi Delta bluesman Arthur “Big Boy” Crudup’s 1946 recording, “That’s All Right, Mama” Elvis and the erstwhile Starlite Wranglers created rockabilly ground zero."
• "At the start, this was Southern music. And even more so, regional music. It came of course from Memphis, but soon spread across the South from Alabama to Mississippi to Arkansas and Louisiana and on to Texas. Then inspired by Elvis, there was soon rockabilly being cut in California, even in the cold north from Washington to Minnesota to Massachusetts - and across the ocean to France and Great Britain - anywhere the germ could travel."
• "Released on April 25, 1955, “Baby Let’s Play House” immediately became Elvis’ most imitated song - a blueprint for rockabilly thereafter."
• "Elvis invented rockabilly. He also invented Rockabilly Style. Looking back at Elvis’ slicked-back pompadour, two-tone shoes, baggy pants, and too-sharp suits in pink and black, he personified the classic 1950s rockin’ look. But before Elvis became famous, his style was considered so outlandish and weird that it was downright shocking. As Elvis’ guitar man, Scotty Moore, remembered, “When I first met Elvis, when he came to my house on that Sunday afternoon, he had on a pink shirt, pink pants with white stripes down the leg, and white shoes. And I thought my wife was gonna go out the back door. Again, just the shock, because people just weren’t wearin’ that kind of flashy clothes at the time. He had sideburns and the ducktails - just a lotta hair.”

I don't know all that much about the history of rockabilly, but when I read parts of the book I thought it might be relevant to this conversation. The book is called Rockabilly: The Twang Heard 'round the World - The Complete Illustrated History, and it's available to buy now. Here is a link to the google pages that I have quoted above. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 14:26, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Johnny and Dorsey Burnette, assisted by their friend guitarist Paul Burlison, jumped ahead of history in 1953 by rocking up the traditional country songs of the day and performing forbidden up-tempo, segregated black songs in the joints around Memphis, Tennessee. In fact, they were the first musical pio­neers who helped to found Rockabilly music-a year before Elvis Presley's Big Bang "accident" of 1954. from "The Rockabilly Legends" by Jerry Naylor and Steve Haliday. 2007. More to come from this source. Steve Pastor (talk) 21:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

That same book you've mentioned cites Elvis as one of the "Rockabilly Legends celebrated in this book". As this discussion is primarily about whether or not Elvis can be considered one of the originators of rockabilly, I think nearly every source so far has agreed that he can be. The article doesn't state he was the inventor, so I don't see the problem. Perhaps the word "originator" is the problem. Maybe a word such as "innovators" or "groundbreakers" would be more appropriate? Or "trendsetters", "trailblazers", "pioneers"? The book also says the following;

• [In the fifties]... a powerful new movement in music began to change the world, led by a young truck driver from Tupelo, Mississippi, who became the “King of Rockabilly”!

That's pretty plain to me. However you look at it, Elvis had a huge role to play in the history of rockabilly music, not necessarily as it's creator, but certainly as one of the most important characters in its success and movement. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 22:26, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Right. We'll get to where you can hear Elvis says that what he Scotty and Bill just recorded "sounds like Carl Perkins", and how he knew what Perkins was already doing (and the Dorsey's et al). To me that means he knew he hadn't exactly created something new. So, don't anyone get me wrong. Elvis was HUGH in his impact, and he did bring something new - mostly his voice - to the mix. I like "trendsetter". But even a footnote might capture it. Don't know yet. But thankfully, I've got just a few more items to post over the next few days. Steve Pastor (talk) 22:39, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm glad you like the term "trendsetter". I think it's a good middle ground. Although to be fair to the current article, that's two sources I've read now, including your own, that state Elvis was there at the birth of Rockabilly. With statements like that, it's very easy to understand how Elvis could be thought of as some sort of originator. Sounding similar to something does not make it any less new. Nearly every musical genre in the last 50 years could have been compared to something that came before it, in some form. Reading a little further in the book you've just introduced to us, it says the following with regards to rockabilly music;

• The only fact on which most everyone agrees is that Rockabilly music was born on the sweltering night of July 5, 1954, when a young truck driver turned struggling singer was nervously horsing around during a coffee break of a demo session at a tiny Memphis recording studio. That young Mississippian led the rockabilly explosion - a new type of music that ignited young people all across the nation while at the same time causing panic among parents and preachers. But he never would have caught anyone’s attention at all without the help of a creative, eccentric businessman named Sam Phillips. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 22:48, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

When Elvis walked into the Sam Phillips Recording Service, he was asked by Phillips's assistant Keisker, "What kind of singer are you?" Elvis said, "I sing all kinds." ... "Hillbilly?" "Yeah, I sing hillbilly." He just summarized what was already there - various blends of blues, R&B, country etc. Only his voice was unique. There can be no doubt that the earliest rockabilly songs were sung by others. As Michael Campbell, in his Popular Music in America, says: "Bill Haley recorded the first big rockabilly hit." (3rd edition, 2009), p.161.) Onefortyone (talk) 01:38, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

This is another one of the problems here, hillbilly music vs rockabilly. The two are different types of music. The article doesn't claim that Elvis was one of the originators of hillbilly. Rockabilly might have been born out of hillbilly music, but it wasn't hillbilly music. Every source I've read on this, including ones cited within this discussion, states that Elvis, Scotty and Bill, in Sun Studios, Memphis, created what would go on to be known as rockabilly. A new source I've read recently says "Elvis undisputably stands as the progenitor of the new idiom". I like the word progenitor. As I said above to Steve, perhaps the word originator is the problem here, maybe it should be changed. However, it cannot be ignored that what Elvis, Scotty and Bill did in early July 1954 is considered by the vast majority of sources, music historians, and other musicians, as the birth of "rockabilly". Even if we don't want to state that Elvis was the inventor or rockabilly, there's definitely enough evidence to suggest he was one of the most important figures in its development between 1954 and 1956. Now, had Marion Keisker asked Elvis if he sung "Rockabilly", you'd have an excellent point. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 09:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, let me just say that there are sources on the table that don't agree that Elvis, Bill, Scotty, and Sam Phillips started it. (see Gene Vincent's flat out statement for one.) One question would be, what do the authors do to dismiss the music that, in retrospect is rockabilly (that would be the small number that managed to get recorded)? Or, do they just ignore it. "Legends of Rockabilly" contradicts itself with their information about Carl Perkins and the Burnettes. Here's what the book says about Perkins. "Carl Perkins and his two brothers, Jay and Clayton, played all the area honky-tonks and gained a strong following with their innovatiove, high spirited type of country music. Most requests of the racous Perkins Brothers band were for hillbilly songs that the boys would jive up - classic Hamk WIlliams standards infused with a faster rhythm. Carrl ignited the songs with his black oriented lead guitar playing, borhter Clayton chopped wood by slapping that bass fiddle, while borther Jay flooged his old acoustic guitar." Change the names and you have the same line up Phillips put together for the Sun session. See also the line up for Haley's early work evaluated as rockabilly by Terry Gordan. And, it seems that Elvis, and probably Scotty and Bill knew what Perkins was doing up in Jackson.

Remember, too, that the term rockabilly was not being used widely yet. (Western Swing was didn't have that name for about 10 years from the time people started playing it.) But... Steve Pastor (talk) 23:40, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Just for a new start, why has this well-sourced and useful edit been removed from the Elvis article? Onefortyone (talk) 21:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The question, rather, is why was it ever introduced? The paragraph in question clearly seeks to summarize the consensus view among music historians about Presley's role in the development of rockabilly. Perkins, though a significant historical figure, is no historian, and his rather philosophical musings on the origins of rockabilly are more appropriate for the article on Perkins himself. DocKino (talk) 21:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The edit clearly demonstrates that there is no consensus view among music historians. Apart from Elvis, Carl Perkins has also been called one of the originators of rockabilly by some critics. If he says that he and Elvis didn't create rockabilly, then this statement is of much importance. As the quotes above show, there are music historians who are of the opinion that rockabilly developed in the early to mid '50s, i.e. before Elvis appeared on the scene, and that Bill Haley recorded the first big rockabilly hit. If these sources contradict your sources, then these contradictions must be mentioned in the article according to Wikipedia policies. Onefortyone (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The article does not claim that Elvis "created" rockabilly. And the edit in question is a quotation from the musician Carl Perkins--in no way does that demonstrate anything about the consensus among music historians concerning Presley's central role in the development of rockabilly. The argument you have presented is illogical. DocKino (talk) 21:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, as the article cites Katherine Charlton, who calls Elvis "rockabilly's originator", other opinions by experts that contradict her statement must also be mentioned. Onefortyone (talk) 22:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Perkins's involvement in the early rockabilly scene does not make him a historical "expert." As for Charlton's statement, it is no more than a particularly strong iteration of the consensus view; the voice of the article clearly takes a more moderate position. DocKino (talk) 22:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Because Perkins is a big figure in the early rockabilly scene, his statement as an expert is of much importance. He must have known what was already there before he and Elvis appeared on the scene. As for Charlton's opinion, it is not a consensus view, as several experts are of a different opinion. Onefortyone (talk) 22:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

You are going in circles. There is no point in further engaging with these illogical arguments. We'll see if ElvisFan and Steve make any progress. DocKino (talk) 22:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Steve Pastor, who is one of the rockabilly experts here, seems to agree with my opinion. Interestingly, there seems to be no consensus about the definition of "rockabilly". Here is an interesting passage from Craig Morrison's Go Cat Go! Rockabilly Music and its Makers (1996), p.9-10:

• Brian Taylor ... did not think rockabilly could be precisely defined — "one man's rockabilly is another man's hillbilly or rock 'n' roll" — but named records widely accepted as rockabilly: Presley and Perkins on Sun and the first King recordings of Charlie Feathers and Mac Curtis. He suggested that the following questions are unanswerable: "'Is no Haley or [Ricky] Nelson material rockabilly — 'Can one have fiddle or steel or harmonica on rockabilly?' — 'If Johnny Carroll is rockabilly, why not Gene Vincent? — 'Are both or neither of Holly's cuts of "That'll Be the Day" rockabilly?'"

In view of this statement by a rockabilly expert, does it make sense to call Elvis one of the originators of rockabilly? I don't think so. Why not just say, "Presley was one of the greatest performers and popularizers of rockabilly" ? Onefortyone (talk) 23:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for introducing something new. And it's yet another source that supports the description of Presley as one of rockabilly's originators. Of course, there are always questions of definition around the perimeter of any genre. But consensus defines the core. Who does Taylor identify as making "records widely accepted as rockabilly"? Why, Presley and Perkins, along with Feathers and Curtis, who came a little bit later. That strongly suggests that Presley--like Perkins--is one of the originators of the sound most widely accepted as "rockabilly". The case for the article's current language is getting stronger and stronger, though I'd like a little more information on Taylor's qualifications as an "expert". DocKino (talk) 23:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

You are wrong, DocKino, as the quote strongly suggests that Elvis should not be called "one of the originators of rockabilly", as there is no exact definition of the term and of the period of time during which the sound was actually created. The other sources cited above clearly say that what has been called "rockabilly" was already there in the early 50s, i.e. before Elvis recorded his first records. By the way, Steve Pastor is also of the opinion that "one of the originators" isn't the right expression. Onefortyone (talk) 23:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

And once again, you pose an illogical and ahistorical argument. Just because there are disagreements about the parameters of a genre definition does not mean that it is impossible to speak sensibly about a genre's "originators" or those in synonymous positions--many critics and historians do. (Indeed, by your illogic, no one could speak of rockabilly at all, because "there is no exact definition of the term.") Taylor clearly affirms that Presley is one of the earliest musicians who made "records widely accepted as rockabilly" [emphasis added]. As for Steve, I am, of course, very, very, very familiar with his position, which rests on observations about songs and musicians variously "pertinent" to rockabilly's development and which happens to be belied by the clear, explicit statements made by multiple music historians that Presley was an originator of rockabilly and was central to the genre's development. DocKino (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Though Elvis was central to the genre's development and popularization, he should not be called an originator, as, according to some experts, the sound that is now called rockabilly (a sound that cannot be exactly defined) was created before Elvis recorded at Sun Studio. Why not avoid the term "originator"? Onefortyone (talk) 00:57, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

There seems little debate here or elsewhere about the phrasing and sense of what's now in the primary text: "Presley was a central figure in the development of rockabilly." For the terser phrasing we need in the lead section, I'd be okay if we replaced "one of the originators" with "one of the vanguard performers". Let's hear from ElvisFan and Steve. DocKino (talk) 01:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Here are my thoughts on the latest source provided by 141;

• It does suggest that defining what is and isn't rockabilly is difficult. With the exception of Presley and Perkins, Feathers and Curtis, it doesn't want to name anyone as definitely being rockabilly. To me, that says that Presley can definitely be considered rockabilly, and as there are no names mentioned before him, it's not unrealistic to consider him an "originator". Every other source I've read so far, including ones cited here by other editors, has also agreed that Presley is the originator of rockabilly.
• If defining rockabilly, with the exception of the names mentioned above, is so difficult, how can we possibly be sure that anything prior to July 5, 1954 is rockabilly and not just hillbilly? As I've stated previously, they are different musical genres, and therefore hillbilly, regardless of how similar it sounds to rockabilly, cannot be considered actual rockabilly.
• By stating that it's impossible to answer whether or not recordings by Haley were rockabilly, it makes all other claims within this discussion void. If it's impossible to define Haley's music as rockabilly, then we can't accept any source that suggests it is rockabilly. Again, every source I've read so far, including several on this page, have called Haley "rock and roll", not rockabilly. I have to admit, from a personal point of view, I don't hear any similarities between any Haley recording and Presley's first recordings at Sun. I've never thought of Bill Haley's music as anything but early rock and roll.
• It does mention Perkins as a definite rockabilly musician. Other sources I've looked at have stated that Perkins' first, real rockabilly performance was Blue Suede Shoes. He didn't write that until 1955, at least six months after Presley began recording professionally at Sun. Therefore, yet again, Presley's name comes first with regards to rockabilly.

In 141's own words, this source is from a "rockabilly expert", and therefore it can be considered fair to use in the argument that Presley was the originator, not just "one of the originators", of rockabilly. I've said before that the word "originator" might be what some editors here have a problem with, yet even some sources provided by those editors has claimed Presley as the "originator" of rockabilly. If I was writing this article from scratch, taking into account the sources I've read regarding rockabilly, at this point I would have no problem with using the term "one of the originators" again. At this point, after much discussion and reading of many sources, I don't think there's enough reason to change the current article's wording regarding this matter. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 06:53, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

As an editor with very limited experience on this page, this discussion seems to be an exercise in WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. A reliable source (in fact a textbook) supports the statement; the statement is attributed in-text; and it meets the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia. That does not, of course, mean that absolutely no discussion should ensue about the topic, but as far as inclusion in the article, it's a slam-dunk.

My good deed for the day. Tom Reedy (talk) 16:43, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Tom and ElvisFan have made arguments for retaining the existing language that are quite different and both very convincing. I'm convinced by them, and by all the sources I've looked at it. Let's leave it as it is. It is clear that there will be no consensus in favor of a change for the foreseeable future, if ever, so further exhausting our time and energy on this is clearly pointless. We can move on. DocKino (talk) 05:51, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

In two consecutive months in 1953, the Burnette brothers each had a son. Johnny named his son

Rocky, while Dorsey named his newborn son Billy - both boys named after professional'boxers. The proud fathers dedicated a week of their performances, and then a whole month, to their new babies. "This is a Rocky 'n' Billy song," they'd say,and they'd romp into "Tear It Up" or something else. Eventually they wrote a song called "Rocky 'n'Boogie." Inevitably, someone in the crowd would forget the name of the song and call out, "Play that Rockabilly song." To all of us who were there at the beginning, that's where Rockabilly really got its name. The Burnettes didn't record their song until after Elvis smashed his way into the history books, but they birthed the name for this new and vibrant world-changing music. Rockabill Legends page 264 ~ (not many page #s!). According to wikipedia Billy was born May 8, 1953. "Two consecutive months" would be April/May or May/June. This isn't an exact date, but it looks like locals in Memphis knew the word "Rockabilly" a full year before July 1954. Steve Pastor (talk) 00:28, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

"Terry Gordan of RCS isn' the only one who thinks Haley did rocabilly before Elvis. Writing of Haley, "during the early 1950s, through a seuccession of experiments, to produce what he call cowboy-jive, whcih became hillbilly boogie and later rockabilly." p 193 "Let the Good Times Roll -the Story of Louis Jordan and his music. John Chilton. Steve Pastor (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

After an early rendition of "Blue Moon of Kentucky", Sun Records owner Sam Phillips exclaimed, "BOY, that's fine, that's fine. That's a POP song now!." Presley responded, "That sounds like Carl Perkins!" I posted this information on this talk page previously, before leaving the article. I asked that people check the reference. I'm not aware of anyone responding. But, Perkins was in Jackson, not Memphis. And although Jackson is in Tennessee, how did Elvis know what Perkins sounded like since at that time when Carl had never had any records released? Looks like Jackson would be too far for even his radio performances to reach Memphis. Steve Pastor (talk) 22:36, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional sources that speak volumes, Steve. I do not think that there is a consensus here. The discussion shows that only DocKino and ElvisFan1981 think that Elvis was one of the originators of rockabilly, as their sources claim. Other sources say otherwise. Therefore, StevePastor, VolunteerMarek and Onefortyone support the view that Elvis should not be called one of the originators of rockabilly. Onefortyone (talk) 21:08, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 January 2012

This article lists "Hartbreak Hotel" as Elvis first single recorded in 1956. I believe that his first single was recorded in 1954 and was "Thats All Right" on A side and "Blue Moon of Kentucky" on the B side

70.24.5.7 (talk) 16:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

First RCA single. That's All Right was produced by Sun Records. Regards.♫GoP♫_T^C_{N 02:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)}

Correction

To Whom It May Concern,

There is a correction to Elvis Presley's article page: Early Years > Childhood in Tupelo > Paragraph 2 > Line 5: "...was found guilty of altering a CHECK..." should be CHEQUE. I have not made a correction before. I hope this is how it is done. Thank you.

Sindy 41.55.153.224 (talk) 19:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

No. The article is written in American English. The spelling of "check" is correct. DocKino (talk) 19:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

'from'

To try to nip a rather silly edit war in the bud, I've asked for outside help:

Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Are_You_Grammatically_Correct_Tonight.3F

AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:17, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

May I suggest that interested editors simply...purchase...a...decent...dictionary. Merriam-Webster's tells us "graduate" may be used transitively or intransitively. American Heritage tells us "graduate" may be used transitively or intransitively.

I have now been accused multiple times on my Talk page of a grave breach of Wikipedia etiquette because I dared to identify this edit, with its edit summary "'graduate' isn't transitive" as "Ridiculous." Well, I do believe it's ridiculous for an inexperienced editor--or any editor--to edit a Featured Article while erroneously tossing around fancy words like "transitive"--a failure of English comprehension that could be entirely avoided by the simple...gesture...of...referring...to...a...decent...dictionary. DocKino (talk) 06:51, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The problem with this is that the USA appears to be the only English-speaking country where anybody currently considers it correct to use the verb "graduate" transitively with the person or persons graduating as its subject and the institution from which they're graduating as its direct object. That use is not recorded at all in the current version of the Oxford English Dictionary, which the English regard as the supreme lexicographical authority on the language they speak. Nor is it recorded in my third (1997) edition of the Macquarie Dictionary of Australian English. I haven't bothered to go to a library to try and check the fifth edition, but as far as I can tell, the usage in question is still sufficiently different from normal here that I think any well-educated Australian would instantly recognise it as an Americanism.

The lesson from all this is that before shooting one's mouth off about whether someone else's ideas of correct Grammar or word usage is wrong—or "ridiculous"—one would do well to consider the possibility that he or she may be a native of a different country from one's own, with different ideas about the grammatical propriety or impropriety of any particular expression. To some extent this would apply also to Windofkeltia's original edit, although his edit summary could in no way be reasonably described as "shooting his mouth off".

David Wilson (talk · cont) 10:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

PS: I should perhaps add that I was not here advocating the adoption of Windofkeltia's change. Since the altered text is apparently good US English, and the change has been objected to on those grounds, it shouldn't be changed unless a discussion on this talk page can reach a consensus to change it. A case for the change can be made on the grounds that it's grammatically correct in all dialects of English, including US English, whereas the current version is considered incorrect in most (if not all) dialects of English except US English. Nevertheless, it's still up to those who want to make the change to convince a consensus of editors that the change is desirable. Personally, I don't think it's worth the bother.

David Wilson (talk · cont) 13:08, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

"The problem"? There's really no problem at all, so long as editors recognize that this is an article on an American topic, written in good American English. When I edit articles on, say, British topics written in British English, you can be damn sure I refer to a British dictionary and/or stylebook, as relevant, before daring to make any grammatical "corrections." Windofkeltia's "different ideas" about grammatical propriety were completely misapplied here--that is the entirety of the "problem." But thanks for taking your turn at shooting your mouth off about the third edition of the Macquarie Dictionary. Most edifying. DocKino (talk) 21:36, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

• I've temporarily protected the page due to edit warring over this. Work it out on the talk page. Dreadstar ☥ 22:00, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

By the time he graduated high school in..... doesn't trip-up my English and seems fine. Mlpearc (powwow) 23:42, 14 January 2012 (UTC)