Talk:Elvis Presley/Archive 23

• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive1
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive2
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive3
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive4
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive5
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive6
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive7
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive8
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive9
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive10
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive11 (accusations of racism, "stealing black music")
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive12 (Elvis as the second- or third-greatest, etc.)
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive13 (where User:195.93.21.65 and his/her alter ego User:195.93.21.67 can moan about Presley)
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive14
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive15

Male Friendships

I've deleted the last two paragraphs in the male friendships section. This is a discussion that has been done to death and has no real place in an encyclopedia. User Onefortyone has an agenda that he follows with a fanatical zeal. He uses secondary sources that were all published after Presley's death and are of questionable merit. Additionally, he takes pieces from reputable works like Guralnik's to back up his wild claims. For example, in no way, shape or form does Peter Guralnik suggest that Presley was gay or bi-sexual. Guralnik is considered by many to be the ultimate Presley biographer and yet somehow he has missed the incest and homosexual claims? This page should not be used for what is turnin into an out and out slanderous attack on Presley. We have pages and pages on this "debate" all with the same user. We should have higher standards than this.

Further, in the 'Lasting Legacy' section User Onefortyone references obscure plays about Presley and then notes reviews that support his claims that Presley was gay man who had incestous relations with his mother (despite wife, child and numerous girlfriends). I'm sure User Onefortyone can dig up something suggesting Elvis killed Jimmy Hoffa and was secretly a drag-queen! The point is, the man was one of the most documented entertainers in human history. His FBI files fail to mention any of these things. This is an encyclopedia but this entry is so bogged down in innuendo that it's hard to tell he was even a musician.

If I may finish my rant I'll also note that just because User Onefortyone cites to a secondary source it does not mean that said source is valid. He continually abuses the concept of 'peer-reviewed' in an effort to bolster his claims. Moreover, all of his sources are from marginal figures in Presleys life. He is unable to quote directily from reputable sources (other than as a set-up for his more outlandish claims) and he resorts to quoting unpublished manuscripts for support. This is not a historical figure from a bygone age with little contemporary documentation. This is a public figure with over 2,000 books published about him 99% of which offer no support to User Onefortyone's agenda. This article really has become a tribute to one posters fantical agenda. Lochdale

• I have reinstated the deleted paragraphs as they are all supported by several independent sources, among them university studies. As every reader can verify, I have quoted directly from reputable sources. In my opinion, you seem to have an agenda, Lochdale, as you are frequently deleting passages which are not in line with your personal view of Elvis. This is not acceptable. Onefortyone 02:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you are purposefully missing the point. You cite secondary sources and give them credibility despute the dearth of evidence supporting your POV. You are manipulating Wiki rules to suit your agenda. Lochdale

You are wrong, Lochdale. I have included material from publications on Elvis by Peter Guralnick, Elaine Dundy, Alanna Nash, Thomas Fensch, Albert Goldman, Earl Greenwood etc. and from current university studies on race and gender, which extensively deal with the Las Vegas Elvis, such as Marjorie Garber, Vested Interests: Cross-Dressing & Cultural Anxiety (1992), Patricia Juliana Smith, The Queer Sixties (1999), Joel Foreman, The Other Fifties: Interrogating Midcentury American Icons (1997) and Bonnie Zimmerman, Lesbian Histories and Cultures (1999). These are all important and reliable sources, not minority views. Onefortyone 02:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not wrong at all. You include reputable sources only insofar that they support you position by inference. Put another way, you cite Guralnik only so much as you can then use what he wrote as innuenedo for your own point of view, and a warped one at that. It's not a scholarly approach and it's certainly not a NPOV (and it never has been). Lochdale

What I have cited are historical facts supported by most Elvis biographies. Try to find a source that contradicts what I have cited. There is no such source. Onefortyone 00:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't this constitute a violation of your probation? --Pcj 13:00, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Certainly not, as all of my contributions are well sourced. Indeed, they are supported by several independent publications, among them the best Elvis biographies available and some critical university studies. This means what I am inserting is not poorly sourced information or original research. Quite the reverse! Interestingly, as a relatively new contributor to this discussion page, Pcj, you seem to be well informed about matters that took place many months ago ;) Onefortyone 03:18, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I fail to see why that would be particularly interesting. I would rather expect people to be informed in discussions.

As to your sources, I would contest that Guralnick cites Greenwood in his book (granted, among numerous others), whereas Greenwood - from what I can tell - got other facts about Elvis wrong (and his book received generally poor reviews); perhaps Greenwood was not as close of a cousin as he claims to be. I would also say that Playboy is hardly a reputable source, and that the content which was cited earlier in that passage seems to hinge on that interpretation (cited in Playboy) in any case. --Pcj 13:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The Playboy article is certainly a reliable source as it was written by Alanna Nash, a reputable Elvis biographer. For your information, here is an excerpt from the review of Greenwood's book in the Library Journal (by David M. Turkalo, Social Law Lib., Boston):

Having literally grown up with Elvis Presley in Tupelo and Memphis, Greenwood also served his cousin for some years as his press agent, claiming a front-row seat for the best and the worst of rock music's late king. As with so much written about him, this book is simultaneously interesting and lurid and often the former because it is the latter. But its saving grace, in addition to being well written, is Greenwood's closeness to Presley, rendering this an eyewitness account (the first ever by a blood relative) to the formative childhood years and the inner workings of the Presley family that played such a large part in the musician's personality development. Revelatory and credible in these and other areas, but never descending to either blathering idolatry or merciless crucifixion (a la Albert Goldman), this fast-paced, no-white-wash look at the rock icon will surely find an audience among the millions for whom Elvis Presley still holds fascination.

Onefortyone 00:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

If the Playboy article was written by a reputable Elvis biographer, then why didn't she put it in one of her published works? In any case, her revelation seems to be a result of gossip and rumors, as quoted. Also, for your information, another review of Greenwood's book, this one from Publishers Weekly, reads:

This sensationalized, dull "portrait," written with freelancer Tracy, claims that Elvis's turbulent life and career resulted from his unstable youth. "Glossing over his cousin's professional accomplishments, Greenwood concentrates instead on the juicy details of his bizarre personal relationships, his drug abuse and his sexual encounters."

What the two reviews both seem to agree on is that the work is very lurid/sensationalized and focuses on juicy bits of gossip about Elvis, much like a tabloid would. --Pcj 01:58, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Just a few words about Playboy. It is certainly a good magazine including various articles on fashion, sports, consumer goods, and public figures, all written by reputable authors. It also has short fiction by top literary writers, such as Arthur C. Clarke, Ian Fleming, Vladmir Nabokov, and Margaret Atwood. So why not publishing an article on Elvis's sex life in that magazine? As for Greenwood's book, many readers are interested in Elvis's personal relationships, his drug abuse and his sexual encounters. By the way, there are also many other topics dealt with in this book. Onefortyone 01:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Certainly, 141, you are interested in Elvis's personal relationships, his drug abuse and his sexual encounters. -- Hoary 01:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Which university source are you referring to in regards to Elvis's male friendships? --Pcj 13:56, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The university sources I have used deal with the allegations of racism, the Las Vegas Elvis and the world-wide Elvis industry. Most Elvis biographers have extensively written about Elvis's male friendships. Onefortyone 00:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem here is that you are only including sources whose content that you happen to agree with, which is obviously a breach of the NPOV policy here (particulary undue weight). What I see here are secondary sources that support a fringe agenda with an exclusion of the vast majority of sources (including many primary ones) that disagree with this.--58.169.8.139 06:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that I am the only editor who frequently cites his sources, among them well-known Elvis biographies. Most other editors do not use books on Elvis or university studies on the rock 'n' roll era. If you have additional sources, please feel free to quote them. Onefortyone 00:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, parts of this article are disproportionally weighted toward a fringe agenda which is supported by a mere handful of secondary sources. I'm glad that someone had the sense to remove that stuff, this was beginning to sound more like an essay arguing in favor of a particular agenda than anything resembling an encyclopaedic article.--58.169.8.139 09:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree too. Per WP:NPOV#Undue weight, the passage in question should be reduced to at most a sentence, if it is kept at all. --Pcj 11:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I also agree. None of user Onefortyone's "sources" are reputable. What he has done is to cite from fringe works about Presley. He then adds in general quotes from respected authors to buttress his wild claims. For example, almost not reputable biograper even notes his friendship with Nick Adams much less stating that he was one of Presley's best friends. With over 2,000 books about him and a massive FBI file Onefortyone still has to dredge the very depths of works on Presley to find anything that will support his agenda. I would note that none of these types of salacious "works" were published when Presley was alive. User Onefortyone has an agenda here and it really shouldn't be entertained any longer. Lochdale

So you think that books on Elvis by authors and biographers such as Peter Guralnick, Elaine Dundy, Alanna Nash, Thomas Fensch, Albert Goldman, Earl Greenwood etc. and current university studies on race and gender and the rock 'n' roll era are not reputable, and you are calling these publications "salacious works"? This seems to be your personal problem. Did you read over 2000 books on Elvis? Certainly not. I am frequently citing my sources. Where are your quotes from books on Elvis? You are constantly denigrating reputable publications simply because the content of these sources is not in line with your personal view of Elvis. You should stick to the undisputable facts to be found in books on Elvis. The Wikipedia article is not a fan site which is only singing Elvis's praise. Onefortyone 00:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Goldman's book has been ripped to shreds. Guralnik never suggests in any way, shape or form that Presley was gay or that he had an incestual affair. Greenwood is suddenly considered reputable? There are 2,000 other authors who singularly fail to mention anything you've brought up. As for the studies, they are no Elvis specific insofar as they posit theories and they do not opine on Presley or his actual personal life. Moreover, you say "undisputable facts" when I note nearly 2,000 books who do not support your position. Hundreds of thousands of articles that do not support your position and the fact that the man was a recent historical figure yet there is no proof of any of your allegations nor is there any support for them. And please stop abusing the notion of peer review as it does not mean what you think it means. Lastly, you are the one taking the positions that are simply unsupportable beyond conjecture so it is you who should defend them. Lochdale

All I can say is that I am frequently citing my sources. This is fully in line with the Wikipedia guidelines. All you can do is denigrating these sources and deleting well-sourced paragraphs from the article. I have not yet seen you provide direct quotes from a book on Elvis. I have only seen you adding false information to the article, for instance, that Elvis's stepmother Dee Presley "never lived with Presley". Onefortyone 00:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I deleted the male friendships section because it is fundamentally unsound. For example, Nick Adams isn't noted as a particular close friend of Elvis in Guralnik's book nor is he even mentioned in any book by his ex-wife or any of his bodyguards. I've also removed the reference to Elvis being a homosexual based on the comment that "tongues wagged" mentioned in a Playboy article. Seems a little light and post-dated to be adding to this article. Lochdale

Would you please stick to the facts, Lochdale. In his book, Last Train to Memphis: The Rise of Elvis Presley, Peter Guralnick clearly says that Elvis "was hanging out more and more with Nick and his friends" (p. 336) and that "Elvis was glad Colonel liked Nick" (p.339). On p.410, Guralnick says that Elvis

enjoyed being back in Hollywood. It was good running around with Nick again - there was always something happening, and the hotel suite was like a private clubhouse where you needed to know the secret password to get in and he got to change the password every day. On the weekend Nick called up his friend Russ Tamblyn, who had a small, one-bedroom beach house on the Pacific Coast Highway just south of Topanga Canyon, and asked if he could bring his friend Elvis over. Tamblyn, who at twenty-two had been in the business from early childhood on, both as an actor and as a dancer, and who saw Nick as something of a hustler, said sure, come on out.

In his book, Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley, Guralnick writes: "Nick Adams and his gang came by the suite all the time." So it is quite clear that Elvis spent most of his time with Nick Adams. Interestingly, on p.347-348 of his book, Last Train to Memphis, Guralnick writes that June Juanico didn't doubt that Elvis loved her, but "she didn't know if she could ever get him back. Elvis told her he had just heard from Nick and that Nick was coming to town tomorrow or the next day. He started telling her all about Nick and Nick's friends and Jimmy Dean, but she didn't want to hear." This statement certainly proves that June was jealous of Elvis's friendship with Nick Adams. Guralnick even cites Nick Adams's "charming account of his friendship with Elvis" which was published in May 1957. See also these photographs showing the two men together: [1], [2],[3]. You cannot deny the historical fact that Nick Adams was Elvis's best friend. Onefortyone 01:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I also question the value of quoting Earl Greenwood who was Presley's second cousin. Greenwood never lived with Presley and wasn't part of his inner circle. Is this what we now consider reputable? --Lochdale 22:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Most good biographies aren't written by people in the "inner circle" of the subject. Opinions seem to differ about Greenwood's book (which I haven't read, don't much want to read, and certainly don't want to buy), but I haven't yet read any unfavorable review that's lucid and persuasive. Here's a generally favorable review from the NYT, not the best source of reviews, but also far from the worst. Just how bad is this book? -- Hoary 01:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting review of the book [4] which is from an admittedly biased site. That said, the site tears the book apart and suggests that Greendwood wasn't even a cousin of Presley. Griel Marcus, however, pretty much dismissed Greenwood and he wasn't seen as an important figure either of Guralnik's books. This is the fundamental problem though isn't it, there have been so many books written about Presley that a certain poster has to focus on the very few the support his position (even if somewhat tenously). The legitimate bios, such as Guralniks, simply don't support the contentions in any way. --Lochdale 03:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you really think that a fan site is a reliable source? I don't think so. Such sites are frequently casting aspersions on publications which are not in line with the positive view the fans have of their mega star. So what. More important to me is that you have included false information in the Wikipedia article. This disqualifies you from being a good editor. Onefortyone 15:26, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually the reviewer, Bill Burk, has written more than 12 books on Presley. Using your standards when it comes to the quality of sources he is as legitimate a source as any you have cited. As such, his review and critique of Greendwood is more than valid. Indeed, his criticism suggests that Greendwood's book is fatally flawed meaning we should not reference it in this article. --Lochdale 17:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can see, Bill Burk was once a reporter on the local paper, The Memphis Press-Scimitar. He claims to have been a close friend of Elvis (see [5]), though he is not mentioned as such in the major Elvis biographies. He makes talks at Elvis conventions and wrote books such as Elvis Through My Eyes, Soldier Boy Elvis or Elvis Aaron Presley: A Candle in the Wind, primarily puffed on fan sites. Significantly, he calls Elvis "a very, very wonderful person" and his books on Elvis "appreciate Elvis Presley" and "trace the dreams of this young man who one would become the personification of the American Dream". We read that the author became "privy to Elvis' battles against hunger and poverty, his dreams ... to one day become a star", etc. etc., and he predicted, "When Graceland swings its doors open ..., it will be like the founding of a new industry in Memphis". As a fan site enthusiastically exclaims,

Thank God for the continued publication of Bill Burk's "Elvis World" and Darwin Lamm's "Elvis International." Thank God for the Elvis Presley fan clubs, still faithfully in operation today, twenty five years after The King left us. And finally, thank God for the many Presley sites now in operation throughout this new medium we call the world wide web. His legacy is unsurpassed by any entertainer in our lifetime.

However, if you have a published source (not a fan site) which confirms the claims by this author, then cite it. Otherwise, it seems to be fan stuff in no small degree. Onefortyone 20:25, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It's quite clearly written by the author of 12 books on Presley. The website is the author's own website. Based on that review, the credibilty of Greenwood's book must be called into question. Are you even begining to see that just because something is published it does not mean it is a credible source? Given the vast amount of information published on Presley and the actual information we know about the man does it not strike you as both unfair and biased to include every allegation from less than credible sources? Put another way, just because it is in print does not make it credible or correct. I find it laugable that you, who would cite to an unpublished manuscript, suddenly are deciding what is and is not a credible source. This goes to the fundamental dishonesty of your position and your agenda --Lochdale 20:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

That the author has written 12 books on Elvis, all including surprisingly new information on the mega star, suggests that he is endeavouring to make money with Elvis's name. However, as I said, if you have a published source which confirms his claims, then cite it. As for Dee Presley's manuscript, it has been cited by reputable authors in published sources, that's the difference. She has also written a summary of her accusations for a newspaper. Onefortyone 07:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Some further information: Bill Burk's books are all published either by Burk Enterprises, Memphis, TN, or by a Memphis publisher called "Propwash", formerly affiliated with Red Oak Press. Propwash seems to be Burk's own publishing company, as it only publishes books and magazines about Elvis Presley and reaches the market primarily through direct mail and fan sites. Burk's recent book, Elvis Aaron Presley: A Candle In The Wind (2005), for instance, is illustrated with many attractive full-page photographs of Elvis in order to feed the fans' ravenous appetites for anything related to the perfect image of their mega star. It is on Elvis's generosity to others, includes "first hand accounts" of his relationships with early girlfriends and relates what the singer's female co-stars thought about the nice guy Elvis. Other topics include: Elvis with the King and Queen of Thailand, Elvis with three Scandanavian princesses, Elvis's first four-wheeler, the day young Tanya Leny met Elvis, etc. etc. There are no critical voices to be found in this and the other books. So much for the quality of Burk's writings. Onefortyone 14:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

All this talk of Dee Presley made me start to wonder who (aside from stepmother from hell) she was (is), anyway. So I googled, and one of the top hits for her is this illuminating page, which in turn brought me to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Onefortyone. It makes interesting reading. -- Hoary 08:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, on these pages you can find all the misinformation produced by Ted Wilkes last year, who (thank heavens!) is now banned for one year. However, I am wondering whether one or two of the relatively new editors who are now frequently deleting paragraphs I have written, may be new sockpuppets of my old "friend". As for Dee Presley, it is a historical fact that Vernon Presley, his new wife Dee and Elvis lived together for a period of time at Graceland. On page 213 of his book, Hero Myths: A Reader (Blackwell Publishing, 2000), Robert Segal says, "Soon after Dee Presley became part of the family, Elvis showed her a picture of Priscilla, commenting that Priscilla was special to him." See also the account in Elaine Dundy's book, Elvis and Gladys (2004), where the author relates (p.329-330) "that Vernon had settled down with Dee where Gladys had once reigned, while Dee herself - when Elvis was away - had taken over the role of mistress of Graceland so thoroughly as to rearrange the furniture and replace the very curtains that Gladys had approved of." This was too much for Elvis who still loved his mother. One afternoon, "a van arrived ... and all Dee's household's goods, clothes, 'improvements,' and her own menagerie of pets, were loaded on ... while Vernon, Dee and her three children went by car to a nearby house on Hermitage until they finally settled into a house on Dolan Drive which ran alongside Elvis's estate." For some websites dealing with Dee Presley, see [6], [7], [8], [9]. However, these seem to be fan sites which may not be reliable enough. There is also a website providing the content page of Dee Presley's unpublished book. Unfortunately, it is nearly unreadable. Perhaps somebody is able to decipher what is written on this sheet of paper. Onefortyone

14:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The fact of the matter is that Burk has published more than 12 books on Presley. Using your standards, he is as a legitimate of a source as any you have quoted. His factual deconstruction of Greenwood's book means we should discount Greenwood's book as being unsound. Also, just so everyone is clear, the "newspaper" that published excerpts from Dee Presley's unpublished manuscript was the National Enquirer. Once again user Onefortyone reaches new lows in credible editing. --Lochdale 16:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

You may quote some passages from Burk's books, as these are indeed published sources, though the quality of his writings is questionable. You should not delete quotes from Greenwood's book, as this is also a published source and there are positive reviews of this book in reputed journals. I have now added to the article, "According to Greenwood...", "Greenwood claims..." etc. I hope this is satisfactory to all. Onefortyone 18:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, I find it insulting that user Onefortyone feels free to quote from an unpublished manuscript but then have the gall to critique works from authors who disagree with him. I am more than happy to stick with reputable secondary works and the actual facts of what we know about Presley. If we did that, however, pretty much every single one of user Onefortyone's edits would be deleted. Since he has thrown credible research under the bus I think it is entirely fair to quote the likes of Burk as reason enough to remove any reference to Greenwood's book. --Lochdale 16:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't quote from an unpublished manuscript, as you falsely claim, I have quoted from reputable authors citing Dee Presley. If you have published sources which disagree with my contributions, then cite them. I have now deleted the following sentence included by Lochdale, as this is false information: "However, Adams is not noted as being a particularly close friend of Presley in either of Peter Guralnik's lengthy works on Elvis or in any of the books written by Presley's former bodyguards." See the quotes from Guralnick's book on this talk page. Onefortyone 18:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

You quoted from the National Enquirer which I do not believe is a credible source. I have listed published sources who disagree with you but suddenly you find them to be objectionable. Further, 99% of the secondary sources out there on Presley never even mention any of the allegations you keep bringing up time and time again because there is nothing to mention. You specifically quote from a secondary source saying that Adams was "closest of friends" with Presley. Guralnik does not support that in either of his works. He notes they were friends but not "the closest of friends". Again, with the sheer volume of works on Presley you have to resort to unpublished manuscripts and the National Enquirer to support your fringe position. I have cited an author who has published more than 12 books about Presley. This author raises serious questions about the validity of Greendwood's book. Given the standards of your sources we should have no problem accepting Burk's review and remove any reference to Greenwood's work. Moreover, I am reverting the note about Adams re: Guralnik, Schilling, West et al. --Lochdale 18:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Parents, childhood and youth

Elvis' father Vernon Presley is described as a "taciturn to the point of sullenness," whereas his mother Gladys "was voluble, lively, full of spunk." The family was active in church and community. However, in 1938, when Elvis was three years old, his father was convicted of forgery. Vernon, Gladys's brother Travis Smith, and Luther Gable went to prison for altering a check from Orville Bean, Vernon's boss, from $3 to $8 and then cashing it at a local bank. Vernon was sentenced to three years at Parchment Farms Penitentiary. Though after serving eight months Vernon was released, this event deeply influenced the life of the young family. During her husband's absence, Gladys lost the house and was forced to move in briefly with her in-laws next door. The Presley family lived just above the poverty line during their years in East Tupelo.

In 1941 Elvis started school at the East Tupelo Consolidated. There he seems to have been an outsider. His few friends relate that he was separate from any crowd and did not belong to any "gang", but, according to his teachers, he was a sweet and average student, and he loved comic books. In 1943 Vernon moved to Memphis, where he found work and stayed throughout the war, coming home only on weekends. This certainly strengthened the relationship between mother and boy. According to Peter Guralnick, the common story that the Presleys formed a popular gospel trio who sang in church and travelled about to various revival meetings is not true.

In 1946 Elvis started a new school, Milam, which went from grades 5 through 9, but in 1948 the Presley family left Tupelo, moving 110 miles northwest to Memphis, Tennessee. Here too, the thirteen-year-old Elvis lived in the city's poorer section of town and attended a Pentecostal church. At this time, he was very much influenced by the Memphis blues music and the gospel sung at his church.

Elvis entered Humes High School in Memphis taking up work at the school library and after school at Loew's State Theatre. In 1951 enrolled in the school's ROTC unit, tries unsuccessfully to qualify for the high school football team (he's cut by the coach when he won't trim his sideburns and ducktail}, spending his spare time around the African-American section of Memphis, especially on Beale Street. In 1953 Elvis graduated from Humes, majoring in History, English, and Shop.

After graduation Elvis worked first at Parker Machinists Shop, and then for the Precision Tool Company with his father, finally working for the Crown Electric Company driving a truck, where he began wearing his hair the trademarked pompadoure style.

Elvis's parents were very protective. He "grew up a loved and precious child. He was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother." His mother Gladys "worshiped him," said a neighbor, "from the day he was born." Elvis himself said, "My mama never let me out of her sight. I couldn't go down to the creek with the other kids."

In his teens, Elvis was still a very shy person, a "kid who had spent scarcely a night away from home in his nineteen years." He was teased by his fellow classmates who threw "things at him - rotten fruit and stuff - because he was different, because he was quiet and he stuttered and he was a mama's boy." Gladys was so proud of her boy, that, years later, she "would get up early in the morning to run off the fans so Elvis could sleep". She was frightened of Elvis being hurt: "She knew her boy, and she knew he could take care of himself, but what if some crazy man came after him with a gun? she said...tears streaming down her face."

I think these paragraphs are well sourced, but you may change or rearrange some parts of the text before including it in the article, if you like. Onefortyone 10:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Right, I am going to include the above paragraph in the actual article - I'll let you work on talk as I stated on your talk page for another day - then we'll see where we can arrange items and agree. --Northmeister 04:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC) - PS. I see it is already added. Looks good. --Northmeister 04:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I removed the reference to Greenwood's book seeing as it's credibility is in question. I also created a new heading under "political beliefs" without changing the succeeding paragraph. It didn't make sense to place it under the same heading as "Allegations of Racism". As Greil Marcus is referenced several times I think it is also appropriate to reference his devastating and detailed criticism of Goldman's book. I will try and add that in when I can actually get it down to a sentence or two. --Lochdale 05:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed the POV sentence stating that Presley's relationship with his mother had been strengthened. It is a narrative and should read like one. --Lochdale 23:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Just a spelling nit

RE: the first sentence —

"Elvis Aron Presley (1935-01-08 – 1977-08-16), known simply as Elvis and also marketed as "The King of Rock 'n' Roll" or "The King", was an American singer and actor."

The King's full name is Elvis Aaron Presley. --Chris 16:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

You are incorrect. At birth, his name was Elvis Aron Presley[10]. He used both spellings throughout his life and apparently considered officially changing the spelling to Aaron, but never did. The Aaron spelling does appear on his gravestone.Shsilver 16:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I was about to change it in the article. Seems like some of the "regular sources" aren't clued in about this either... --Chris 04:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. It seems to say "Aaron" at the top now, inconsistent with what it says later on - Jim Mason. .... added at 11:03, 1 August 2006 by 194.80.193.160

This page includes a photo of the tombstone, showing "Aaron". I don't have any particular PoV on this, but the consensus hereabouts is that (i) he was born "Aron" but (ii) his "official" [huh?] name was "Aaron". It's hardly believable that the tombstone had a misspelling; ergo, it's the correct spelling of, uh, well, of his "official" name. (And no, I don't know what that actually means, if anything.) -- Hoary 11:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I thought the whole point was that the tombstone was wrong. It says elsewhere on this page that that is one of the main arguments suggesting Elvis isn't dead (although quite why it suggests that I'm not sure). Also, in the photobox thingy at the side right near the top, under "birthname" it says "Aron" so this just looks inconsistent to me. Also, it says in another section "Elvis Aron Presley was born ..." etc. Surely the name on his birth certificate rather than his tombstone should be considered his "real" name. The article suggests that Elvis's parents went out of their way to make sure it read "Aron" on the birth certificate. Jim Mason again (with a different IP address this time as I'm on a different computer).

Interesting little article from Yahoonews that briefly discussed the spelling of Presley's middle name. Lochdale 20:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Allegations of racism

A new version of this section has replaced the former one. The old version ("Version 1") was well sourced, as there were many quotes from university studies. Therefore, I have reinstated this version. But we should discuss those parts of the new version that sound reasonable. Are there any sources that support the allegations of the new version ("Version 2") ? Significantly, Elvis counted no blacks among his closest friends from the Memphis Mafia. Far from it, most of these friends were southern white boys from Mississippi. This fact, for instance, is not mentioned in Version 2.

Version 1

As Elvis's star rose controversy seemed to follow. Sam Phillips' idea of the "white negro" was born of racism. "Racists attacked rock and roll because of the mingling of black and white people it implied and achieved, and because of what they saw as black music's power to corrupt through vulgar and animalistic rhythms. ... The popularity of Elvis Presley was similarly founded on his transgressive position with respect to racial and sexual boundaries. ... White cover versions of hits by black musicians ... often outsold the originals; it seems that many Americans wanted black music without the black people in it," and Elvis had undoubtedly "derived his style from the Negro rhythm-and-blues performers of the late 1940's." "Many White people would be surprised to learn that Elvis Presley's hit 'Hound Dog' was first popularized by a Black woman, Big Mama Thornton. Elvis and his music live on the collective memory of Whites, yet Little Richard, some of whose work Elvis borrowed, has been forgotten." A southern background combined with a performing style largely associated with African Americans had led to "bitter criticism by those who feel he stole a good thing," as Tan magazine surmised. No wonder that Elvis became "a symbol of all that was oppressive to the black experience in the Western Hemisphere". What is more, Presley was widely believed to have said, "The only thing black people can do for me is shine my shoes and buy my records." It was claimed that the alleged comment was been made either in Boston or on Edward R. Murrow's Person to Person. A black southerner in the late 1980s even captured that sentiment: "To talk to Presley about blacks was like talking to Adolph Hitler about the Jews."

In 1957, the African-American magazine Jet looked into the allegations that Elvis was a racist who was stealing black music. The magazine found no proof that Elvis Presley was a racist or had made any statements indicating racism repudiating the charges. Elvis himself claimed that quotes attributed to him that were racist were fabricated and that he was not a racist. The fact that Presley was "a white performer whose financial success rested upon the songs and styles of black artists historically excluded from the popular music marketplace", together with other factors that would have made him highly suspect in the eyes of blacks, namely his poor, white origins in the then deeply racist Mississippi, his purchase of an old Memphis mansion, or his association with racially conservative politicians such as George Wallace and Richard Nixon has often been used to chastise him. Whether or not it was justified, the fact remains that distrust of Presley was common amongst the general African-American population after the allegations were made public. According to George Plasketes, several songs came out after the singer's death which are a part of a "démystification process as they portray Elvis as a racist." In his book, Colored White: Transcending the Racial Past, David Roediger considers contemporary "wiggers" (white kids "acting Black") in light of the tensions in racial impersonation embodied by Elvis Presley.

Controversy remains as to Presley's political beliefs, if any. In the early 1960s he described himself as an admirer of the Democratic President John F. Kennedy. In 1970 however he wrote to J. Edgar Hoover requesting to join the FBI at the height of its campaign against political activism. In December of that year he met with President Richard Nixon in what was widely seen as a show of support at a time when most artists in the music industry were highly critical of the Nixon administration. Presley told the President he was a huge admirer of everything he was doing, and asked to be made a "Federal Agent at Large" in order to help get the country off drugs. Presley also denounced The Beatles to Nixon, describing their left-wing political beliefs as "very anti-American." Many fans maintain Presley was non-partisan as he never attended fundraisers or donated money to any candidates, and that his infamous conversation with Nixon was caused by jealousy of The Beatles' success and concern for his own future in the recording industry.

Version 2

Although there had been allegations of racism on Elvis Presley's behalf there is abolutely no shred of evidence to support this. There is, however, evidence to support how friendly and appreciative he was of fellow human beings who happened to be black. Such examples are as follows:

Elvis was a white country boy brought up in an area and time of total racism and legal segregation. However, he was drawn to the music many black performers sang. White racists only scorned anything connected to "black" culture. Elvis met and became friends with B.B. King and other such black musicians. He was only a teenager then and "black" music was not commercially popular. Elvis recorded blues music with a country and gospel blend at a time which there was no thought of making big money from. This makes the idea of "stealing" black music for financial reasons void. (Music can not be stolen as it is a natural emotion).

Early in his career Elvis embraced songs from black singers such as Little Richard and Ray Charles and this helped catapult their fame.

Elvis broke segregation laws by attending functions for black people in the 1950's so he could meet his black musician friends. At an earlier stage he also attended black church services as he found their spirituality more uplifting.

Every single black person who met Elvis found him generous, mannerly and respectful towards them, such as Ivory Joe Hunter, BB King, James Brown, Jackie Wilson, Muhammad Ali.

Elvis met James Brown on several occasions. He is known for not having much time for The Beatles but he had no trouble meeting James Brown when he was just as much a success in the 1960's.

Elvis had a backing group for his 1968 comeback special called "The Blossoms". It was a black female trio, including Darelene Love (star of Lethal Weapon movies). She has since expressed a great deal of respect for Elvis.

Elvis had a backing group from 1969 until his death known as "The Sweet Inspirations". This was a female quartet. In 1970 Elvis Presley refused to play Texas as he was asked to leave the black girls at home. When the show officials accepted the fact he was bringing the black girls the show went ahead.

Myrna Smith, one of the black members of "the sweet inspirations" has recalled a night she had a passionate kiss with Elvis.

Elvis invited black boxer Muhammad Ali to his suite in 1973 where they chatted and joked. Ali later said "Elvis is the greatest".

Elvis paid the hospital bills of black singer Jackie Wilson in 1975 when he had a stroke.

Elvis met Nixon because he was pursuing his hobby of collecting law enforcement badges. Elvis had recently received death threats so this made him more anxious to have the help of powerful forces. Elvis meeting Nixon is just an extreme rock 'n' roll moment. On medciation, wearing liberal clothing, carrying a gun and asking for a narcotics badge. This only makes Elvis stand tall as a rock 'n' roll giant. Who since has done anything as daring. The only president Elvis is known to have respected is JFK, an Irish blooded democrat.

Elvis broke down in tears when Martin Luther King was murdered. He often recited "I had a dream" to friends. Elvis soon after recorded the song "If I Can Dream" as a mark of respect for King. Such a song was completely out of character for Elvis as it was political. He felt he had to pay some respects to Martin Luther King, a man he deeply admired.

In 1969 he recored a moving song, sympathetic to poor black neighbourhoods called "In The Ghetto". Again a song totally out of character for a southern white performer.

In 1969, Elvis broke production on his film "Change Of Habit" so he could meet the black soul singer Mahalia Jackson, who was in the studio that day.

A black Memphis blues singer and radio presenter named Rufus Thomas explained that Elvis did far more for the ressurection of blues music than anybody else has ever done. He also compared Elvis to Martin Luther King.

Black comedian, Eddie Murphy, who never met Elvis considers him "the greatest entertainer of all time".

BB King stated, "They didn't make a mistake when they called him The King".

In over 50 years since Elvis became internationally famous not one black person who met or worked him has ever revealed signs of racism on his behalf. They have all found him a decent person who was polite and kind. The idea of Elvis being racist was fabricated by black racists who don't accept how a white boy helped a part of their culture. These black racists also lack the the education or natural common sense to make the transition between race and support. Elvis supported black people. He is a hero to black people but a great deal of black people are not attempting to look beneath the surface or find some depth in the actions that took place. As Little Richard said, "Elvis opened the door for black people".

Besides all this, Elvis could not be stereotyped as a typical white American. Elvis had the blood of several races. These include the Irish, the Jewish and most of all, the Native Americans which can be argued are the most victimised race in America's history.

To my mind, the second version indicates a rather uncritical and idealized view (quotes: "Every single black person who met Elvis found him generous, mannerly and respectful towards them" -- "Elvis meeting Nixon is just an extreme rock 'n' roll moment. On medciation, wearing liberal clothing, carrying a gun and asking for a narcotics badge. This only makes Elvis stand tall as a rock 'n' roll giant"). We should discuss the two versions. Onefortyone 02:41, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry but there is nothing to discuss. The second version is too POV and isn't even worthy of discussion.

"I" in "I'm sorry" is AOLuser, who appears to have learning difficulties concerning the "~" key.

One thing to say about both versions is that they are ludicrously prolix. -- Hoary 14:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I have now reinstated your short version of the "Male relationships" section. Perhaps you could also write a shorter version of the "Allegations of racism" section. Onefortyone 01:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Make sure you mention his affairs with Nick and Gladys. ... posted at 03:37, 23 July 2006 by Wikipedia's very "special" 195.93.21.67

The second version looks at Elvis from inside his life, not some cowboy attempting to sound academic. "Elvis was jealous of the beatles" from the 1st version is a completely off the cuff remark. The 2nd version states fact and rarely goes into any personal opinion. It also counter acts comments made in the 1st version, helping to blaance the whole issue. Despite all this, If any black person who met Elvis had expierence of Elvis being racist, let them come forward and balance it with all the other black people who met him and their feelings towards him. Then this issue may start to posess some merit. As of now it is a totally pointless issue and completely worthless of discussion. ... added in two edits on 24 July 2006 by 2006already.

No. The second version is so subjective and heavily biased in his favor that it is unworthy of inclusion in any encyclopedia. It is a fact that Presley became famous because he stole black music and he was frequently accused of racism, also he did indeed try to ban The Beatles from America. Any article must show both sides of the argument. One must wonder why it all went wrong. ... added at 08:18, 24 July 2006 by 195.93.21.67

AOLuser, your constant repetition of the claim that "Presley stole black music" does zero to make it credible; it just makes you more obviously a troll. Your only "evidence" so far is what you presented here: Chuck D (not an IP lawyer) saying nothing about Presley stealing anything; Marlon Brando (not an IP lawyer) saying that Presley took and copied black music (of course he did; it's normal for people of any pigment in the US to take and copy the music of others); and Eminem (not an IP lawyer) saying something obscure but apparently blaming himself for it almost as much as he blames Presley. Please run away and play somewhere else. Thank you. -- Hoary 08:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

"Presley" versus "Elvis"

Naming conventions

There was a very interesting question posted on the King of Rock and Roll talk page on what the agreed-upon convention for using Elvis's name is in Wikipedia. Here is the reproduced question

I changed a couple instances of "Elvis" to "Presley" in the belief that this conforms with encyclopedic style. This might be a special case though, since Elvis was well-known under simply his first name. I checked the Elvis Presley article to see if there's any preference there, but there is no consistent convention. (It uses "Presley", "Elvis", and "Elvis Presley" interchangeably.) Is there an agreed-upon convention for Elvis's name in Wikipedia? Honestly, I didn't want to shift through the entire Presley discussion haystack to find that needle, so I decided to go with his last name simply to make it consistent with references to Chuck Berry as "Berry" in this article.

Has this issue been decided in the past before? and if not, should we establish some guidelines? Geedubber 18:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

This topic is specifically covered in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies).

• After the initial mention of any name, the person may be referred to by surname only.

That's the standard. -Will Beback 19:44, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Should we change the article to reflect that then? Geedubber 01:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, by all means. The only exceptions would be where more than one Presley is being discussed, in which case "Elvis", "Priscilla", etc would be appropriate to distinguish between them. -Will Beback 01:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with Will Beback. Indeed, a look through the page history shows edits such as this one in which I've replaced "Elvis" by "Presley"; these rewritings of mine (and others) have been effectively reverted by other editors, for whatever reasons. -- Hoary 04:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

There was even a time when he was referred to as "The King" several places throughout the article.[11] We're making progress. -Will Beback 05:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

LAST name on second and later references

This is Wikipedia policy, yet throughout and inconsistently in this article, Presley is referred to by his first name. That makes the article look shoddy and unprofessional, and puts it at variance with Wikipedia policy. Moncrief 16:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with you, and that's why, some months ago, I went through the entire article making all possible conversions. My good work was undone. Recently I've redone bits and pieces. Perhaps you'd like to contribute to this (boring) work. -- Hoary 07:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not just "Wikipedia policy" -- it's the general policy of every scholarly publication in the English language. -- Odinson777 22:57, 16 August 2006 (EST)

We should change 'Madonna' to 'Ciccone' on the Madonna page as well!

Er, no we shouldn't. She specifically calls herself "Madonna" with no last-name reference. Elvis had a last name, and he used it throughout his professional life. Why is this even a discussion? Of course all references after the first one should be "Presley." This is an encyclopedia, not a fan site. Moncrief 11:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality (in particular, allegations of racism)

I had added the NPOV boilerplate when the 'Male Friendships' debate was brewing. Now that that's effectively over with, is there any other reason to keep the boilerplate?

--Pcj 15:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I suppose it's OK to remove it. -- Hoary 08:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

What about the discussion on the "Allegations of Racism" and the "Other Relationships" sections? I am hoping to put together new drafts and run them by User Hoary before making any edits. Until then, perhaps we can keep the neutrality tag? --Lochdale 18:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

"Allegations of racism" - I came to this Page after finding a factual error in the Patricia Bosworth article that should never have occurred and whose author had numerous edits to this Talk Page and to the Elvis Presley article itself. I have examined the "Allegations of racism" section in detail but have only skimmed through the rest of the article. I was going to correct what I perceive to be the problems in the writing on racism but am a little reluctant to get involved as I see this subject has been a source for much discussion and at times, rancor. I checked the edit history for the Elvis Presley article but could not determine who originally wrote the "Allegations of racism" section. However, the same author of the Patricia Bosworth article did make numerous comments on this matter and on this Talk Page said:

• • "Could it therefore be that you endeavor to remove critical voices from the article which put Elvis in a negative light, although these voices are based on several independent sources, among them Elvis biographies by reputable authors and a critical study on Elvis's alleged racism published by a university press? Onefortyone 12:50, 17 June 2006 (UTC) "

This Wikipedia editor asserts the information comes from independent sources and reputable authors which is true. However, the entire "Allegations of racism" section certainly appears to be a title with text misrepresentation intended to create the Editor's desired "negative light." Whoever the Wikipedia editor actually was, they used text taken out of context in the statement attributed to George Plasketes then added their own words to intentionally misrepresent the actual facts by adding: "in light of the tensions in racial impersonation embodied by Elvis Presley."

Worse though, is that by design the Wikipedia editor in question quoted out of context in order to corrupt the writings of Tennessee State University professor, Michael T. Bertrand from his book Race, Rock, and Elvis. This scholarly work is a study of the relationship between popular culture and social change in America and in is not claiming that Presley was racist, but the opposite. Professor Bertrand postulates that Presley's rock and roll music brought an unprecedented access to African American culture that challenged that 1950s segregated generation to reassess ingrained segregationist stereotypes. Professor Bertrand demonstrates how Elvis Presley was a primary catalyst in helping African Americans move forward. One of the most, if not the most, prestigious source for book reviews is the American Historical Review who wrote: "(Michael T. Bertrand) convincingly argues that the black-and-white character of the sound, as well as Elvis's own persona, helped to relax the rigid color line and thereby fed the fires of the civil rights movement." The "Allegations of racism" section also mentions Professor Bertrand writing about Presley's "association with racially conservative politicians such as George Wallace." A true statement, but again, this is deliberately taken out of context.

I also see that the Jet Magazine conclusion is mentioned in the "Allegations of racism" section of the article but in reality it has been watered down so as to have little or no meaning. What Presley biographer Peter Guralnick wrote in his book "Last Train to Memphis" (p.426) actually stated was:

• "To Elvis," Jet concluded in its Aug. 1, 1957, issue, "people are people regardless of race, color or creed."

Next, there is a quote concerning Little Richard that was presented within a context deliberately adding to the desired "negative light." Little Richard's career blossomed because of Presley and his fading career had to do with personal demons, not Presley.

As to race and Presley's attitude, an impeccable source wrote:

• After he became famous, Presley often cited his debt to African American music, pointing to artists such as B. B. King, Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup, Jackie Wilson, Ivory Joe Hunter, and Fats Domino. The reporter who conducted Presley's first interview in New York City in 1956 noted that he named blues singers who "obviously meant a lot to him. I was very surprised to hear him talk about the black performers down there and about how he tried to carry on their music."

• Later that year in Charlotte, North Carolina, Presley was quoted more specifically: "The colored folks been singing it and playing it just like I’m doin' now, man, for more years than I know. They played it like that in their shanties and in their juke joints and nobody paid it no mind 'til I goosed it up. I got it from them. Down in Tupelo, Mississippi, I used to hear old Arthur Crudup bang his box the way I do now and I said if I ever got to a place I could feel all old Arthur felt, I’d be a music man like nobody ever saw. "

Further, there are writings about Presley's race relations within Wikipedia itself. The biographic article on the African American performer Ivory Joe Hunter states:

• "While visiting Memphis in the spring of 1957, Hunter was invited by Elvis Presley to visit Graceland. The two spent the day together, singing "I Almost Lost My Mind" and other songs together. Hunter commented, "He showed me every courtesy, and I think he's one of the greatest.")

Elvis Presley was no racist. On the contrary, he honored, respected and publicly praised black musicians and their extraordinary talent, doing so at a time in the 1950s when racism was an entrenched way of life in the U.S. South and black artists sold miniscule amounts of their recorded music. Presley stood up to the racist comments made by die-hard segregationists and their labeling of his sound and style as "nigger music". His "Gladys Music" company hired talented black songwriter Claude Demetrius (and others) and made him a rich talented songwriter at a time in the mid 1950s when Demetrius and other black songwriters had mostly limited horizons and pitiful incomes.

As B.B. King, James Brown and others have acknowledged, Elvis Presley opened the door for them. And, oh yes, contrary to the impression created in this article, Little Richard is quoted as saying (by the same unimpeachable source mentioned previously):

"He was an integrator. Elvis was a blessing. They wouldn’t let black music through. He opened the door for black music."

--207.67.145.214 22:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I . . . am a little reluctant to get involved as I see this subject has been a source for much discussion and at times, rancor. I'm sorry, but not surprised, that you should say that. Well, I urge you to forget your qualms and jump in and start editing (judiciously). There seems to be a bit of a lull now, which of course is conducive to constructive editing, and if things ever get bad later you will be able to drop out. Anyway, this article badly needs input of people who are interested and open-minded.

Do please also consider getting and using a username rather than an IP number. -- Hoary 00:07, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

FBI Files

I removed a portion of the FBI files section as it didn't seem to be particularly relevant. Also, I have had problems locating the specific details of the alleged blackmailing attempt as described in the actual files as described in the previous text.--Lochdale 15:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I altered the sented after Alanna Nash to note that she wrote her book on Presley a year after being named the Society of Professional Journalists' National Member of the Year in 1994. I also noted that Goldman's book was harshly criticized by literary and rock critics. --Lochdale 20:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Lasting Legacy

I removed the reference to the Lee Hall play specifically due to the reference to the critic Rich See. It appears that Mr.See may not exactly be a mainstream critic. I believe the play itself is interesting enough and should be referenced but a specific quote from one person solely for the reason of beating the gay-Elvis dead horse isn't really warranted. The actual review from See. I also removed the section regarding a rock critique of an albulm mentioning Presley. The albulm should stand on it's own without reference to a criticism one way or the other.--Lochdale 03:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

This section also seems to reference fairly obscure songs by fairly obscure artists while ignoring more mainstream tributes/critiques of Presley. Again, it seems to go to an agenda of tossing as wide a net as possible to catch every tawdry factoid possible. This appears to have been done at the expense of other references such as references to the number of books and TV movies about Presley. Fairly major motion films such as Bubba Hotep, True Romance, 3000 Miles to Graceland etc. are excluded (if we assume that they should be included) in favor of obscure references. --Lochdale 03:41, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Devotion to his Mother

I removed the references to Greenwood given the criticism of his book noted above. I'd also question the selective quotation methodology used in this section. For example, the fact that he grieved for days after his mother's death is not particularly unusual given that one would expect a son to grieve for his mother. --Lochdale 23:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Controversy surrounding death

The reference that drug paraphenalia was removed from the death scene should either be referenced or removed entirely. Wasn't Presley's doctor investigated after Presley's death? Given the sheer volume of prescription drugs Presley was ingesting perhaps this section could flesh this out a little noting that he clearly had a problem with prescription narcotics? --Lochdale 23:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup notice

This article is convoluted, to say the least, and needs a rewrite from top to bottom. I eliminated some of the redundant material but because it is so extensive it is too much for one person to tackle. Maybe volunteers can coordinate efforts on the various sections. Duisburg Dude 14:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Nice work condensing the relationships section, it looks much better now without all the gossip-like details--58.169.44.235 13:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I added some material on the racism issue plus background. Please edit to improve. BookMind 22:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it needs a little clean-up but it's a much better examination of the issue than had been there previously. Well done. --Lochdale 02:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

There are two references to first guitar. One says Jan.1945, the other Jan.1946.

Last Will and Testament of Elvis Presley

We wish to advise everyone that we (the Living Trust Network) have a copy of Elvis Presley's Last Will and Testament posted on our website, which we believe is of interest to anyone seeking information about the life of Elvis Presley. We have also discussed our desire to post a link to Elvis Presley's Last Will and Testament with Wikipedia administrators [See User talk:Livingtrust], either under "references" or "external links." Last Will and Testament of Elvis Presley. Wikipedia does not object to the link but has requested that we not put the link up ourselves since we are a commercial website. Instead, it has requested that we make it known that the Last Will and Testament is available, and anyone who wishes to add the link to the "reference" section or the "external links" section may do so. So, we solicite your help in adding the link set forth above. Thanks. Livingtrust 03:17, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Elvis and Polio

I removed the polio reference on Elvis military section because I felt it sounds really corny and lack feels a little over-exxagerated . It said he got vaccined while in military, but he got vaccinated in 1956 (elvis joined the amry in 1958) and recieved huge publicity. I felt iyt needs better info was needed on Elvis fight against polio.

Removed Phenominal succes and its content was moved into American Icon section because i felt its related. I just re-name "American Soldier" to "military service" and add more info about his military draft (in fact I could have gone to elvis mothers death but its getting too long). American Icon and Danger to American culture was moved into "Cultural impact", I am streamlining the article Jbrian80 08:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Critisism

Ok here some article that align with Chuck D and Johnny Rotten... this guy named Tom Sinclar (ok elvis fan mail bomb him now)

Elvis is Overrated

the reason?

• He can't write song
• He barely play musiclal instrument
• Fall short of artistry and creativity.

This Sinclair guy born in the 60's and by the time he gained "consiousness" err I mean he is old enough to remember craps, all he can see are some pile of 3rd rate Elvis movies in the 60's and that build up his opinion why elvis "sucked"

Well Tom is right, somewhat, Elvis can't write his own music or play his own instrument and by today standard he is more like the Backstreetboys (popular, but its all style and no "art" as Tom claims). The only thing I stronly disagree trhe fact Elvis served as catylist or insperation for other pop group and rock bands like the Beatles.

BTW Chuck D and Johnny Rotten....F--- You! (parody of tupac "Hit em up" song)They makes Courtney Love hopping with coke too tolerable. and off course I love to diss these big mouthed people with irrational opinion based on their culture of rage. Jbrian80 08:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget that Presley only became famous because he stole black music, probably the most racist action in the history of music.

Presley in the 21st century

To be honest, this section blows (vomit). Compare to other section, this one needs some help because the section was essentially some piles of trivia disguised as paragraphs. It started well then it all goes down to trivia banality.Jbrian80 05:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't banal trivia aptly describe the industry that developed after Presley's death though? Lochdale 17:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The section feels like a pile of trivia and some of them should be moved to trivia section. The only way to fix it to re-write. The JXL and okenfold remix are good but the rest are fragmented and really really lame. Since I dont have the time and capability to write huger chunks of words...Jbrian80 06:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I think there is some merit to what you are saying but there is a huge kitsch industry surrounding Presley so it makes sense to note that and to give a little flavor of what it is like. For example, the Koizumi visit to Graceland is hysterical. Sitting Prime Minister of Japan who is nigh-obsessed with Presley (including building a statue to him and recording an albulm of his favourite Presley songs). Still, I'm sure whatever edits you make will be grand.Lochdale 14:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Toilet Death

I was told recently that Elvis Presley died on the toilet. My first thought was to check on Wikipedia to see whether this was true and I was suprised to find there was no mention of this whatever whether it be to confirm, deny or even mention that it might be a rumour. I had to find this information elsewhere.

Even if it is not true I think it should be mentioned somewhere as it is a widespread belief and has a place in an encyclopedia. I can't help but think maybe that the removal of the statement was a biased decision by Elvis fans. Libd 10:22, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Well the article mentions that he was found dead on the floor of his bathroom. I think that's probably good enough.Lochdale 18:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to say I disagree. Elvis' "toilet" death is a common question in trivia quizes and the topic of general conversation because of it's very nature. People would use Wikipedia to specifically look for the answer to whether he died on the toilet, not the bathroom. Libd

Well I supposed it's not something I would be interested in but perhaps it is a big trivia question? Iguess the answer is is there any proof he died on the toilet? Guralnik makes no mention of it so it might be just conjecture. I'm not sure as I must admit it's nothing I've every researched. Lochdale 23:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It was just pointed out (and I checked it in Guralnik's Careless Whisper)that Presley did indeed die whilst on the toilet. If you feel it's important then add away. Lochdale 05:00, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Little Richard

I removed a phrase describing Little Richard as "the first African American musical artist to break through on the pop charts". This is certainly not so-- a number of African American artists (eg Louis Armstrong, the Mills Brothers) did so earlier, and even if we limit the list to rock & roll, Little Richard was preceeded in crossover hits by Fats Domino. -- Infrogmation 18:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Seems right to me. Good edit. Lochdale 18:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)