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

Elvis the song producer?

The intro reads:

Elvis Aaron Presley (January 8, 1935 – August 16, 1977), also known as "The King of Rock 'n' Roll" and "Elvis the Pelvis", was an American singer, song producer and actor.

What songs did Elvis produce? If he did produce any music then it should say "music producer" or "record producer", not "song producer". So can someone give a credible source to that says Elvis produced his own music? Otherwise, this will have to be deleted. It's an encyclopedia entry, you can't just make things up. So was he, or was he not a record producer?--Street walker 13:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Elvis produced a lot of his records, as documented in the documentary "Elvis '56".

Phil Spector also considered Elvis to be an excellent producer. Not sure what better endorsement he could get.

Lochdale

Other artists

Mentioing that other artists broke some of presleys records is fine, but there is no need to add three select artists, as you could name others as well. This is an Elvis Presley-article and noting that some records were broke by others without names is enough.

Michael Jackson was included by the user StreetWalker because he had "outsold" Elvis. This is disputed by many, many sources and therefore can not be verified. Also, there is no need at all to mention other acts, because not only have acts who broken Presleys records also had those records broken by others since, you could list Boys To Men, Garth Brooks or others. Therefore, there is no need to name names, espically on information that is disputed.

Elvis is the biggest seller ever, not Jackson. Please!

Elvis's Sinti-heritage

Any thoughts? (Source) His parents ancestors were part of the Sinti people commonly known as "Black Dutch" or "Melungeons". It is also likely that from his mother's side, Smith by surname, the family would have been of Romanichel origins.--81.77.78.217 18:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Elvis the alleged sex symbol

There should be a special paragraph concerning Elvis's allegedly wild sex life in the Wikipedia article on Elvis. As a recent Playboy article by reputed Elvis biographer Alanna Nash (See also this), Priscilla Presley's statements in her book Elvis and Me (See here) and similar statements by Suzanne Finstad in her book, Child Bride: The Untold Story of Priscilla Beaulieu Presley prove, Elvis was not overtly sexual towards his wife and other women as has been claimed in the "Relationships"-section of the Wikipedia article. Further, according to Peter Guralnick and other sources, he spent the whole day and night with men from the Memphis Mafia, "living on speed and tranq's." See Talk:Memphis_Mafia#Additional_sources, so that even Elvis's friend Natalie Wood was of the opinion that the singer and the men from the Memphis Mafia might be homosexual. It could well be that Elvis was a victim of his own image, of all these built-in expectations of him as a womanizer and a sex symbol. There should be some critical remarks concerning these facts in a special paragraph of the article. There has not yet been a sufficient discussion on this topic.--Onefortyone 15:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who has ever taken strong prescription medications, especially tranquilizers, b/p meds, etc., knows it does affect the sex drive and sexual performance. Elvis was a handsome gentleman that the women were crazy about. However, I'm sure it got old really fast. It has too be tiring to know that a herd of half-crazed females are going to try to rip off your clothes and will beat the day-lights out of you attempting to do so. I wouldn't care for it one bit. The man had no life because of his fame and because people acted irresponsibly and would not respect his privacy.--Bumpusmills1 12:03, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Some aspects of this interesting remark may also be included in the new paragraph.--Onefortyone 15:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

It seems totally unnecessary to have these sections in the bio at all. Elvis has to be one of the most documented entertainers of all time. There have been over 2,000 books written about him yet user onefortyone seems to be fixated with unsubstantiated allegations about his sex life. Of the over 2,000 books less than 3 (one being a proposed manuscript) have suggested anything other than the notion that Elvis was a philanderer. I think it is highly volative of the NPOV to include what basically amounts to muck racking and what is against the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Looking at the history of this page it is clear that Used Onefortyone has a clear agenda of focusing solely on the sex live of Presley. That relates to his music how exactly?

Lochdale

For your information, Lochdale, there are parts of the lyrics to Elvis's famous song Jailhouse Rock that might resemble talk about same-sex relationships between inmates. Like "Number forty-seven said to number three:/You're the cutest jailbird I ever did see./I sure would be delighted with your company,/Come on and do the jailhouse rock with me." By the way, I am not focusing solely on the sex life of Elvis. For instance, I have also created the Alphabetical list of all of Elvis Presley's songs. Onefortyone 03:16, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure how relevant that is given that Elvis did not write the song. Indeed, it had been covered by other artists both before and after Elvis. Does that mean that they are all homosexual? This is a nonsensical debate. Elvis life has been raked over more than anyother entertainer who has ever lived. Pretty much every detail of his life has been presented and now people who are desperate to make money off of his name are making claims with no credible support. An encyclopedia shouldn't include such nonsense.

A figure whose life and fame, works, image and presence have so saturated culture that he has affected nearly every group within it in some regard, tends to attract stories and myths as readily as adulation. There can't be any doubt that Presley's own physical beauty was a great factor in his promotability and commodification, nor that as many homosexual men as heterosexual men, girls and women actually bought his records. The element of fandom, the way an artist is preceived by his audience, is as important to their story as the simple facts of biography and discography. The objective truth or otherwise of such myths hardly matters, and is not in dispute.

Nuttyskin 01:56, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Lochdale

User Onefortyone has added the following to the page:

In her book on Priscilla's life, Child Bride, Suzanne Finstad also confirms that Elvis hated sex.

There is no discussion on who Finstad is. No discussion as to the context of the book or the extremely broad suggestion that Elvis "hated sex". This should be removed from the page as it contradicts direct first person testimony from people who actually had relations with Preselty, bigoraphers who actually knew him etc. The issue here is that there have been so many books published about Presley that in order to get any attention later-day books have become more and more scandalous. Each book making an effort to "one up" the other.

If a book is published that suggests Elvis was a necrophiliac should we have a section for that? Under user Onefortyone's standards it would be entirely legitimate.  This entry should be edited to comport with basic standards of credibility. Lochdale

I removed user OnefortyOne's edits to the article regarding the Playboy article. He appears to have taken quotes out of context and there is a genuine question as to the veracity of the article itself. Lochdale

The Playboy article reports what was observed by an eye-witness in 1956 and 1957. Certainly this is useful information, especially since Elvis biographer Alanna Nash is co-author of this article and other editors have claimed on our Elvis page that the singer was a womanizer. Onefortyone 01:54, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

It turns out that the entire article has been denied by Lamar Fike: "This story is not true. There is no way that any of this ever happened. I was there."[1]. Marty Lacker doesn't seem to have good things to say about the article either: "It's very interesting that everyone who was there when Byron Raphael worked for the colonel (not Elvis) has passed away except Lamar Fike. It's convenient for Byron to make this crap up now but he forgot all about Lamar still being here. I guess he thought he'd get away with his bullcrap since they have all passed away. According to Lamar, as I have said before, it's all bull. I do not hold this against Alanna because it was just a writing job for her and she had personal reasons for taking the job which I will not go into. Rest assured Raphael's story is BS." Although the paragraph that Onefortyone added has been cleaned up a lot, the veracity of the Playboy source is in serious doubt and shouldn't be included in an encyclopaedic article. That said I won't be removing it myself, I'd rather see a consensus reached before any changes are made.--Count Chocula 07:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Byron Raphael is talking about the time before Lamar Fike and the other Memphis Mafia guys were on the scene. In an interview, he emphasizes,

when guys like Marty Lacker say they doubt my story, they weren't even there. Elvis didn't even know they were alive. Elvis wouldn't even know they were alive. Elvis wouldn't even meet Joe Esposito 'til the Army days. But, they're very territorial and would like people to think they were always with Elvis from the day he came to Hollywood. But, it's just not true.

Some further quotes from the interview with Raphael (see [2]):

Colonel Parker and I became very close. He'd never had a son. He kind of adopted me. He did. I called him Pops after a couple of months. He was like my father. He said to me one day, "You know Byron, Elvis has never met anybody but young Southern boys from very poor backgrounds from Tupelo." He'd never met anybody from the West Coast. He'd never met anyone who had come from a middle class family. I was his age. He said "why don't you try to become Elvis' friend. He doesn't have any friends. A year ago, he was a truck driver. He's afraid to go out and I don't want him to go out. So when you leave the office here, when we leave Paramount, Fox or MGM, go to see him. Go to the Beverly Wilshire Hotel and be his friend." And we hit it off. He used to call me "Byron The Siren." ... Later on the philosophy changed and Colonel Parker did not want people that worked for him to socialize with Elvis. The other reason the Colonel wanted me there was to be a spy. In other words, he wanted to make sure that Elvis didn't have any bad characters hanging around him, that weren't there for instance, people trying to steal him away from William Morris or Colonel Parker. You know, which I'm sure there would've been people try to do that. Or, that somebody was bringing in marijuana. He just wanted me to be there and report back to him what was happening and possibly a friend to Elvis. ...

There can be no doubt that Elvis dated several girls, as many of his female fans wanted to meet him. That's not the question. The question is what was actually going on behind closed doors. According to Byron Raphael,

Elvis was most happy, most content in not actually having intercourse with these girls, but just heavy petting. ... What I'm saying is, this was the late fifties, most young guys didn't have intercourse. They would go to drive-ins and there would be heavy petting and panting and that's about as far as is went, especially when you take into consideration Colonel Parker said "Be careful! If you get a girl pregnant, we're gonna have trouble and even if we can pay her off, it will ruin your career." And it would have in those days! ... most of the time he didn't do anything that would get them pregnant. Most of the time it was just two or three girls at a time, all in bed, with no clothes on. His mother Gladys ... said to him, having sex before marriage was a sin. And so, together with the Colonel's warnings and his mother pleading with him he shouldn't do it before he got married, to me I could understand. A lot of the Elvis fans are saying "Gee, you're making like he wasn't very good at it." Well, that wasn't it at all. That's the way he was taught from a young man, to wait until marriage. I don't think he always did, but there were a lot of fears in his mind because of his mother and the Colonel. ... Now, we had guards at the Beverly Wilshire so the girls couldn't come through unless they were with me. The Memphis Mafia want to say this isn't true, Byron wasn't there. But you see the truth is, none of those people were there in 1956. Lamar Fike was the first close associate of Elvis to follow me and he didn't come until '57. So, in '56, I was the closest confidante that Elvis had. He liked me because of the fact I was different from him. I was a West Coast guy. He had never met anyone like that.

So it is quite clear that Lamar Fike couldn't have known what was going on in 1956. To sum up, there is no doubt that Elvis dated several girls, but in most cases he didn't have sexual intercourse with them. The remaining question is, did he have homosexual affairs as well as affairs with women? Some published sources claim he had. These are the facts. Onefortyone 18:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Does Raphael have anyone to support his story? Anyone? It seems very odd that he has not been mentioned in nearly any book about Elvis. He is not mentioned in Guralnik's book either. He seems to be the only one defending his story, a story that includes his allegedly having sex with Natalie Wood. So, based on the unsubstantiated allegations of a man in his 70's with apparently no close ties to Preseley you think we can consider Presley to be a homosexual? This is beyond muckracking. Lochdale

Raphael is repeatedly mentioned in Alanna Nash's book on Colonel Parker. See [3]. This book, entitled The Colonel: The Extraordinary Story of Colonel Tom Parker and Elvis Presley, was published in 2003 to extraordinary acclaim with notable publications such as Billboard Magazine calling it a "classic of music industry reporting." Other very positive reviews in the U.S. came from The Washington Post, The New York Review of Books, Variety magazine, Publisher's Weekly and numerous other leading media organizations. In Great Britain, Mojo music magazine said her book was "the most incisive and comprehensive look at the life of the elusive Colonel available" and the respected newspaper, The (London) Observer, lauded the book as "perhaps the most thoroughly researched music book ever written." It should also be noted that Alanna Nash was presented the 2004 CMA Media Achievement Award. Onefortyone 03:26, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Just as a follow up to user OnefortyOne's general theme, there have been over 2,000 books published about Elvis. The number of articles about him probably range in the hundreds of thousands. Of all of the books detailing his life, his music and his foibles; of all of the magazine articles detailing pretty much the same thing, user OnefortyOne has managed to find three articles/sources of questionable credibility to support his agenda. In essence, this article has been hijacked by user OnefortyOne and I think it's a shame that he has been allowed to push his own agenda on this article Lochdale

Sorry, there are not only three sources to support my view. Apart from tabloid publications of the time, there is the recent Playboy article by Byron Raphael and reputed biographer Alanna Nash. Further, there are books on Elvis written by independent authors such as Goldman, Greenwood and Bret and even a theatrical play by Lee Hall, Cooking with Elvis, not to mention the unpublished book by Elvis's stepmother Dee Presley. Daniel Rancour-Laferriere also mentions the claims in his peer-reviewed study. Onefortyone 03:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Your last post is simply a fabrication. The playboy article is of questionable veracity (no one seems to be able to support any of Raphael's claims that he was anywhere near Elvis). Calling Alanna Nash a "reputable biographer" is a stretch at best given her history. Bret has made a living writing slanderous material about dead celebrities. An unpublished manuscript that even the Equirer would not touch will tell you all you need to know about it's quality.

Daniel Rancour-Laferriere suggests that there is an element of homoeroticism in people's adoration of starts like Presely or a James Dean. He DOES NOT suggest that Elvis was gay!

And lastly, Albert Goldman never suggested Elvis was either gay, bi-sexual or otherwise no infatuated with women. Of the many things in his book, that wasn't one of them. Lochdale

Daniel Rancour-Laferriere, on p. 160 of his peer-reviewed book Self-Analysis in Literary Study: Exploring Hidden Agendas (New York University Press, 1994), confirms that "Albert Goldman (1981) hypothesized about homoeroticism in the gentile male icon Elvis Presley." This is a direct quote from the book. Daniel Rancour-Laferriere is a reputed scholar. He is Professor of Russian at the University of California at Davis. Onefortyone 02:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

So, beacuse 4 out of over 2000 Presley books/articles support your view this should then be reported as fact? I don't think so. The reliability of these few sources is also questionable. I've just recently noticed that you are on probation for inserting poorly sourced information and original research 141, and if you continue to push your own agenda with unreliable and disputed sources then i'll be forced to report you.--Count Chocula 04:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, just because something (non-medical/scientific) was peer reviewed it does not mean that the review supports the contention made in the thesis or dissertation. Further, in your effort to defend Raphael and the Playboy article all you can provide is that Raphael worked for Tom Parker. Noone is doubting that but it seems clear that he had no real access to Elvis and that he certainly wasn't close enough to him to either acquire girls for him or sleep with Natalie Wood! User OnefortyOne appears to be engaging in a pattern of distortive practices. Lochdale

---

This has nothing to do with the above discussion regarding Elvis being gay, but I grew up in the 60's and 70's and he seemed to be splashed across the tabloids weekly about cheating on Priscilla, and I do recall he was with other women during their relationship (hasn't Ann Margret said she was with him while he was with Priscilla?). It seemed to me he couldn't stop cheating, and didn't Priscilla say he didn't want her sexually after she became pregnant? He definitely had some weird attitudes towards women, even at that time. Although, the latest gossip on George Clooney and Terri Hatcher is that Clooney is the love 'em and leave 'em type as well.

Elvis 2nd highest selling artist

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) has just published its updated list of the 150 highest selling artists ever. IFPI has finally come up with a list of the top-selling acts in History. It's about time.

The top 10 is as follows:

01. The Beatles: 40 400,000,000 UK 60s (1962-1970) Rock/Pop Guinness/EMI

02. Michael Jackson: 14 350,000,000 US 70s-00s (1979-) Pop/R&B

03. Elvis Presley: 150 300,000,000 US 50s-70s (1956-1977) Country/Rock

04. Madonna 16 275,000,000 US 80s-00s (1984-) Pop

05. Nana Mouskouri 450 250,000,000 Greece 60s-00s (1959-) Pop

06. Cliff Richard 60 250,000,000 UK 50s-00s (1959-1969,1977-1979,1986-1999) Rock/Pop

07. The Rolling Stones 54 ~250,000,000 UK 60s-00s (1964-1981) Rock

08. Mariah Carey 14 230,000,000 US 90s-00s (1990-) Pop/R&B

09. Elton John 43 ~220,000,000 UK 70s-00s (1972-1976,1989-1991,1997-) Pop

10. Celine Dion 21 220,000,000 Canada 80s-00s (1990-) Pop Music/Pop

Source: IFPI's website and Madonna's website.

This list is PHONY! It is MADE UP by a Michael Jackson fan. Look at the link to the "IFPI Website", it goes to a MJ fan site, not the IFPI site. Also, it is written in the same format as the list that is on wikipedia, and has been merely edited by the person who runs the fan sites, it's a load of bullcrap! IFPI's site has NO MENTION of this fake made up list whatsoever!

No it was not made up by a Michael Jackson fan. It is phony to claim that. Open your eyes.

Someone has been sticking this list in many talk pages over the past few weeks. But just to clarify, this list is actually fake. IFPI has not published such a list, and are currently tracking down the source of it.--203.51.30.130 12:18, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Allmusic.com has Elvis as the highest selling performer of all time.

http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:q1u06j6h71l0~T1

Lochdale

Migration of quotes to Wikiquote

The long list of mostly unsourced quotes has been moved to Wikiquote. Please refer to the talk page at Elvis' quotes discussion for details. Best regards.--Hall Monitor 21:36, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Elvis put a paton on his sideburns in 1975.

Elvis' family origins

The fact that Presley comes from Pressler is only a theory of one person.I dont think it should be stated as fact. At least the source should be shown.

Does this sentence make any sense :

The surname Presley was Anglicized from the German Pressler during the Civil War. His ancestor Johann Valentin Pressler emigrated to North America in 1710. Pressler first settled in New York, but later moved to the South. He was of mostly Scottish [5] and English descent; the family also has Native American, German, South African and Jewish (from a great-grandmother of Gladys) roots.

So that means that 1. Elvis Presley had only one ancestor. 2. That ancestor, Johann Valentin Pressler (an obviously German name), was of Scottish and English decent. 3. Elvis's or Johann's (??) Family is also of Native American, German, South American and Jewish descent. Wow! By the way, they forgot Asia, Africa and Australia. Stettlerj 03:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree, go to Ancestry.com at http://www.ancestry.netscape.com/trees/fft/pedigree.aspx?t=4 and you can see he doesn't have much of a known family tree, at least on that website which is a major genealogical site. Also in the facts section at the end of the article an alternative theory is suggested, that the name Presley came from the Preseli Hills in Wales. BeringStrait 02:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Continued deliberate distortions by User on probation, Onefortyone

I removed the text inserted by Oneforty both here and at Memphis Mafia as the quotes are deliberately taken out of context to promote User:Onefortyone's agenda for which he was placed on probation. The entire article presents a completely different picture than what is falsely portrayed here in Onefortyone's continued attempt to portray Elvis Presly as gay. As an example, below are other quotes from the Byron Raphael article:

Text inserted by Onefortyone and removed by Ted Wilkes:

• In a 2005 Playboy magazine article, Byron Raphael, a one-time assistant to Presley's manager Colonel Tom Parker claims he worked for Elvis in 1956-57 and he procured countless girls to climb into bed with the star, including well-known movie stars. Raphael also claimed that actress Natalie Wood was upset when Presley refused to have intercourse with her and made a snide remark to members of the Memphis Mafia. Raphael made the unsubstantiated claim that Wood "was not the only one to think Elvis and the guys might be homosexual, especially since Elvis often wore pancake makeup and mascara offstage to accentuate his brooding intensity, a la Tony Curtis and Rudolph Valentino, his favorite movie actors. There were also rumors that Nick Adams swung both ways, just as there had been about Adams’s good pal (and Elvis’s idol) James Dean. Tongues wagged that Elvis and Adams were getting it on. But Elvis was frightened of homosexuals; the Colonel had told him to be on the lookout for them in Hollywood. He was even scared of Lizabeth Scott, the icy blonde who played romantic scenes with him in 1957’s Loving You, since Confidential magazine had recently outed her as a lesbian with a busy little black book."

I did a quick search on the 'Net for the Nash article in Playboy and I've linked to it here: http://www.tcb-world.com/showthread.php?t=6104

The quote that user OnefortyOne has inserted into the article regarding Elvis not being "hot and heavy" in bed is clearly taken out of context. It appears that Elvis suffered some guilt in sleeping with what appears to be hundreds of women. He also appeared to be fond of oral sex, both giving and receiving. Now all of this is "fascinating" I suppose but I wonder what place it has on this page? User Onefortyone has used unreliable sources and taken articles entirely out of context. Lochdale

Here is a quote from the same article explaining why Elvis was loathe to go "all the way"

"Elvis seldom went all the way in these situations, for two reasons. One, he was uncircumcised, and he worried that his foreskin would tear during intercourse. And. two, he always remembered his mother teaching him that sex before marriage was a sin. One day I brought three young girls into Elvis’s bedroom — a preference he’d indulged since his earliest days on the road, when he sometimes entertained six girls at once. Soon they were all naked, but Elvis again stayed in his underwear, kissing and fondling them and eventually falling asleep with them in his arms, his own records playing softly in the background. At other times, back home in Memphis, he’d have “slumber parties,” which were threesomes with junior-high girls. He’d wash their hair and put makeup on them and let them do the same to him. But when it came to sex, Elvis was the king of kink, satisfied simply to let the girls masturbate him until he ejaculated into their hair. Then he’d send them home at four a.m. so they could go to school. "

Lastly, it appears that the author, Byron Raphael, of this article may not have had the role he said he had. There are almost no pictues of him with Presley, without Parker present, and his name just does not appear in any books by the Memphis Mafia. In this article the author has himself having sex with Natalie Wood (which also put her comments in context).

Indeed, it appears that quite a number of people are questioning just who Raphael was:

http://www.elvisnews.com/Presentation/Functional/Page/news.aspx?command=show&item=7046

Lochdale

In an interview, Byron Raphael says, "the truth is, none of those people were there in 1956. Lamar Fike was the first close associate of Elvis to follow me and he didn't come until '57. So, in '56, I was the closest confidante that Elvis had." (See above.) You cannot deny that, as a whole, the article questions the common view that Elvis was a womanizer who had sexual intercourse with hundreds of women. Byron Raphael and Alanna Nash clearly say that "the so-called dangerous rock-and-roll idol was anything but a despotic ruler in the bedroom" and "really wasn’t all that keen on doing the wild thing. 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." Onefortyone 19:21, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Here are other quotes from the Byron Raphael article:

• "Having mowed his way through the Lido chorus line in Paris on weekends while he was stationed in Germany (it was nothing for Elvis’s small entourage to entertain 35 dancers as overnight guests), the Pelvis was bewitched by the foreign charm of his G.I. Blues co-star, Juliet Prowse. Despite being one of Frank Sinatra’s girls, the South African dancer and actress eagerly engaged in sex with the hip-wiggling headliner, who bragged to his friends that Prowse liked to grab her ankles and spread her legs wide during the act."

• "His fame was already such that he couldn’t take a woman to dinner without being mobbed by fans, but that also worked in his favor, helping ensure he'd get laid each night. He simply invited girls to the party he held in his suite every evening at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel."

• "Other members of his entourage could take the blame if an unfortunate pregnancy should arise. That may have happened a few times, as Colonel Parker had several important dinners with the parents of young girls who spent too much time with Elvis. After that, Parker had a directive. “When any girl comes up to Elvis’s room, I want to make sure at least two of you guys are around,” he said. “That way if any problems come up, you can say, ‘Well, we made it with her also.’ ” Any girl who came up to see Elvis — even a famous actress like Monroe — would have to sit around with one of the other guys before she went in alone with Elvis."

• "And. two, he always remembered his mother teaching him that sex before marriage was a sin. One day I brought three young girls into Elvis’s bedroom — a preference he’d indulged since his earliest days on the road, when he sometimes entertained six girls at once."

And as to Presley being "scared of Lizabeth Scott", Onefortyone made sure not to add:

• “Don’t worry, I’m gonna have sex with her,” Elvis shot back nervously, trying to hide his discomfort. And he did try to sweet-talk her to see if he could get her up to the suite and make some time with her. But Scott wanted no part of it. She was a sophisticated, reserved lady — nothing like Elvis’s type — and she knew the guys had put him up to it."

- Ted Wilkes 15:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Don't remove content which is backed up by three different sources, Ted! You have included a lot of stuff relating to Elvis's alleged relationships with hundreds of women. The article should be well balanced. So some disagreeing opinions must also be mentioned. Here is the text I have included in the Elvis article:

You have one article from a questionable source who has nothing to support his allegations. Further, the article in question doesn't exactly support your position as your took a number of quotes out of context. Lochdale

However, according to a recent article by Byron Raphael and Alanna Nash, "the so-called dangerous rock-and-roll idol was anything but a despotic ruler in the bedroom" and "really wasn’t all that keen on doing the wild thing. 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." Priscilla Presley relates that Elvis told her that he didn't make love to Anita Wood the whole four years he went with her. "Just to a point," he said. "Then I stopped. It was difficult for her too, but that's just how I feel." In her book, Child Bride, Suzanne Finstad also confirms that Elvis hated sex.

The text Ted Wilkes has cited above is a paragraph written for the Memphis Mafia article. Significantly, Ted Wilkes is frequently removing this text from the Memphis Mafia page, although I have accurately cited my sources. You are clearly violating your probation, Ted! The arbitration committee says that "Ted Wilkes and Wyss are banned from any article regarding a celebrity regarding which there are significant rumors of homosexuality or bisexuality..." and that "Ted Wilkes and Wyss are banned from making any edit related to a person's alleged homosexuality or bisexuality." See [4] and [5]. Onefortyone 16:19, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Onefortyone's conviction for fabricating information in Wikipedia articles

NOTE: Edits by User:Onefortyone need to be carefully checked as he is on Wikipedia:Probation after being found guilty of fabricating information and deliberately inserting it into Wikipedia articles:

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Onefortyone/Proposed decision :

Verified information

1) Contentious facts which cannot be verified as having been published in a reputable source cannot be included in a Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Verifiability, see especially Wikipedia:Verifiability#Dubious_sources. Information should have been published in a reliable source Wikipedia:Reliable sources. In the case of unusual or scandalous assertions this becomes even more important, see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Exceptional_claims_require_exceptional_evidence

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
2. ➥the Epopt 21:23, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:24, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
4. I've tweaked the above (information -> "contentious facts") →Raul654 21:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
5. Kelly Martin (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
6. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. 0

Abstain:

1. 0

Citing of nonexistent sources by Onefortyone

4) Onefortyone, in at least one instance, cites a source which does not exist in the form cited [6], see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Onefortyone/Workshop#Citing_of_nonexistent_sources_by_Onefortyone

Support:

1. Fred Bauder 16:11, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
2. ➥the Epopt 21:23, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
3. James F. (talk) 19:24, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
4. →Raul654 21:44, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
5. Kelly Martin (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
6. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:09, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Oppose:

1. 0

Abstain:

1. 0

- Ted Wilkes 14:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ted Wilkes blocked for one week

For your information, Ted Wilkes has now been blocked for one week for repeatedly violating his probation. See [7]. No further comment. I accepted the arbcom votes and I am now frequently citing my sources. Therefore, I have not been banned from any article. But truth be told, Ted, the arbitration committee did not mention in their statement that what I have cited was published on two different websites and was based on information from the World Entertainment News Network. Here is one of these internet sources: [8] or [9]. Further, did you mention that the arbcom also said that I am a good editor who sometimes went too far (in the past)? It is a fact, Ted, that you, according to the arbitration committee, are "banned from making any edit related to a person's alleged homosexuality or bisexuality". See [10] and [11]. And there was good reason for this. Here is a statement from the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard:

Wilkes has repeatedly violated the arbcom ruling. I banned him for 24 hours some days ago because of a number of violations, but treated them collectively as one breach. He has now committed two more unambiguous breaches. I have imposed a 1 week ban for the two breaches and am treating them as two clear and deliberate breaches. He is now up to three. If (and given his behaviour it seems a case of when) he hits five as per the arb ruling he will be banned for one year. He seems to treat arbcom rulings as a joke. They aren't. If he doesn't get the message then he will soon have a year to cop himself on. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 20:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

This is a clear statement. No further comment. We should now return to Elvis-related topics. Onefortyone 23:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Making fun and denegrating Religious beliefs

Anita Wood is a Pentecostal and an active member who teaches in her church. She adheres to her Church doctrine that states that "pre-marital sex is a sin." Do not, under any circumstanxces, make fun or denegrate people's religious beliefs be they Cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad or the teaching of the Pentecostal, Baptist, Methodist, and numerous other major world religions. - Ted Wilkes 14:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Truth be told, Ted, I do not think that I made fun or denigrated people's religious beliefs, as you falsely claim. In her book Elvis and Me, Priscilla Presley relates that Elvis told her that he didn't make love to Anita Wood the whole four years he went with her. "Just to a point," he said. "Then I stopped. It was difficult for her too, but that's just how I feel." So it seems as if Anita Wood wanted more. Onefortyone 23:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Or perhaps Presley was merely telling his very young wife what she wanted to hear. That is, he was faithful to her and was still a virgin just like her.

You seem overly obsessed with Preseley's sex life. That's really not what this should be about as it's his music and cultural impact that should be the issue of this page not innuendo about his sex life.

Lochdale

Birth & Childhood

Is there any way that we can update this section? It's seems rather threadbare and should have more detailed information. For example, the notion that Elvis copied his style from Captain Marvel seems fairly incredulous and has been mentioned only by one author. I'll try to update the section myself but would appreciate editorial help.

Lochdale

Banning the Beatles from America

Surely the article should mention how Presley wrote to Nixon requesting a meeting, and then asked the President to ban the Beatles from the States. We should also mention how he wrote to J. Edgar Hoover requesting to join the FBI during its campaign against political dissent.

Do you have a citation for this? I have never heard it suggested that Elvis wanted to ban the Beatles from America. Seeing how he had met them before an quite liked them it seems very strange. Lochdale

Yes, it's all in the Nixon tapes. Apparently it was because of their political activism and drug use, but Paul and Ringo said the only threat was to his career.

Very interesting, thanks. By 1970 I don't think the Beatles were a threat to Elvis' career though. He had totally changed as an artist (as had they). I think it's more a case of all of the drugs in Elvis' system affecting his brain. This is the same guy who when flying to meet Nixon (un-invited) boarded a plane with 2 guns, in a cape and with a cane and expected to be able to travel incognito!

Lochdale

Ya, I heard about Elvis trying to ban The Beatles from America as well. --GorillazFanAdam 03:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

THE BEATLES>ELVIS PRESLY

Yeah, Elvis was garbage..It's a fact that The Beatles Was the BIGGEST act in the 20th century..Oh and btw..The Beatles were HUGE fans of Elvis :)

The Beatles were never as big as Elvis, they said so themselves.

Not after they found he was trying to have them deported, just check the Beatles Anthology.

No, I know what your talking about, John Lennon.....Not the BAND itself..But just John Lennon for his political activism. Like Paul Mccartney for example, still, and forever will..Respects him..Oh and btw..John Lennon gave props to Elvis by saying "before Elvis, there was nothing" He said that AFTER he was aware that elvis was trying to remove him.

Lennon also said, "Elvis really died the day he joined the army, that's when they killed him and the rest was a living death". You can check out on imdb.com what Sir Paul and Ringo had to say about Elvis trying to ban the Beatles from America in 1970. 195.93.21.67 21:20, March 7, 2006

Elvis himself said that he couldn't stand John Lennon but he liked the rest of the Beatles. George Harrison even attended Elvis' funeral.

Interesting sources concerning Elvis's alleged bisexuality

Here is the first issue of the Hollywood Star Magazine (1979). The cover headline says, "Elvis was bisexual: Nick Adams was his lover." Onefortyone 20:43, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hollywood Star Magazine, vol 1 no 1, 1979.

Onefortyone... I can't even tell when you're being serious and when you're not. Do we really have to explain why this isn't a valid source? Please see Wikipedia:Reliable sources for complete information, but suffice it to say that a tabloid magazine is not one of them. --DDG 20:49, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I didn't claim that this is a reliable source. However, this source proves that there were rumours as early as during the 1970s about Elvis's alleged bisexuality. In their 2005 Playboy magazine article, Byron Raphael and Alanna Nash also mention these early rumors. They say that Natalie Wood (1938-1981) "was not the only one to think Elvis and the guys [from the Memphis Mafia] might be homosexual, especially since Elvis often wore pancake makeup and mascara offstage to accentuate his brooding intensity, a la Tony Curtis and Rudolph Valentino, his favorite movie actors. There were also rumors that Nick Adams swung both ways, just as there had been about Adams’s good pal (and Elvis’s idol) James Dean. Tongues wagged that Elvis and Adams were getting it on." According to Peter Whitmer's book, The Inner Elvis: A Psychological Biography of Elvis Aaron Presley, Phyllis Diller said that if Elvis's twin had lived, I am sure that he "would have been gay." Further, there are lots of photographs which prove how intimate the relationship between Presley and Adams was. This photograph shows Elvis laying his arm around Nick Adams's shoulders. This one is a private snapshot of the two men riding together on a motorcycle. In this photograph they are sitting together in a car. Onefortyone 22:58, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Yo, onefortyone, u r the biggest douche bag i've seeen in my life..Really, if you think the F****** TABLOIDS ARE RIGHT..well..wow..you are more dumb then I thought you little pussy ass bitch

Yes, I read that Elvis had sex with Nick Adams and even his own mother. Perhaps the article should mention those revelations as well as the charges of racism and stealing black music. 195.93.21.67 21:25, March 7, 2006

Re: Claim by Onefortyone, the ArbCom-convicted liar:

• Let's see: Published in 1979, two years after Presley died and after Nick Adams had been dead for eleven years. At the time its gay publisher William Kern was hiding behind the name "Bill Dakota" he was also hiding behind U.S. libel laws that allow anyone to fabricate anything about a deceased person. And, oh yes, Alanna Nash made no such claim (another lie by Onefortyone) in Byron Raphael's Playboy article quoted out of context here (as Onefortyone regularly does) but thanks to this magazine cover, we now know where Byron Raphael got his information! - 12:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Don't call me a liar, Ted, as this is a personal attack. You are again denigrating my sources as you did in the past. The Playboy article was written by Byron Raphael with Alanna Nash. They are talking about rumors that arose during the lifetime of Elvis. As Raphael is not a professional writer, it is clear that most parts of the text are from the pen of Nash. Onefortyone 16:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

FACT: You were convicted for lying by the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee for fabricating information that you deliberately inserted into articles to perpetuate your agenda and to mislead readers and you continue to do so. And, I repeat that Alanna Nash made no such claim, ever. - Ted Wilkes 17:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Would you please stop calling me a convicted liar. Remember that you have already been blocked for one week for violating your Wikipedia probation. Onefortyone 19:51, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Onefortyone, merely by mentioning this clearly unreliable source here you are clearly violating your probation under the clause here: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Onefortyone#Sources cited by Onefortyone. Please follow the terms of your probation. I have absolutely no more patience with you in this matter and I am not going to debate this with you, I am merely letting you know that if you continue this in any way, I will be forced to notify the ArbCom of your violation. Drop it now. --DDG 20:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

As I am also of the opinion that this source is not reliable enough to be included in the Elvis article, I have only cited it here on this talk page, as my opponents have repeatedly claimed in the past that there were no such published rumors. Further, you must admit that there are many more claims of this kind. For instance, Albert Goldman, in his Elvis book of 1981, has suggested that Elvis's promiscuity masked latent homosexuality. Even Daniel Rancour-Laferriere, on p. 160 of his peer-reviewed book Self-Analysis in Literary Study: Exploring Hidden Agendas (1994), confirms that "Albert Goldman (1981) hypothesized about homoeroticism in the gentile male icon Elvis Presley." Onefortyone 20:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

For decades the FBI kept files on all the threats and crimes aimed against or relating to Elvis. In his book The FBI Files on Elvis Presley (2001), Thomas Fensch reproduces actual texts from numerous FBI reports dating from 1959 to 1981,which represent a "microcosm [of Presley's] behind-the-scenes life." In the extensive appendix, the author reprints 36 pages of original documents as full-page illustrations, showing exactly how the FBI handled these cases. So we have now some well documented sources. Interestingly, on p.30-33, there is an account of Elvis being the victim of Laurens Johannes Griessel-Landau of Johannesburg who represented himself to be a doctor specialist in the field of dermatology. When Presley was in the military service in Germany, he hired this man "proported to be a medical doctor and a skin specialist." Among the documents the author provides are copies of letters from Griessel-Landau to Elvis and one of his secretaries. There can be no doubt that Griessel-Landau made homosexual passes at the singer and his friends. According to the FBI files, Griessel-Landau had

admitted to Presley that he is bisexual. His first homosexual experiences took place early in his life in the orphanage in which he was brought up. On 24 December 1959 Presley decided to discontinue the skin treatments. At the time that he told Griessel-Landau of this decision he also thoroughly censured Griessel-Landau for embarrassing him...

This made Griessel-Landau angry and he decided to extort sums of money from the singer. Elvis "was interviewed on 28 December 1959 concerning his complaint that he was the victim of blackmail..." The case was referred to the FBI. According to the FBI files, Griessel-Landau "threatened to expose Presley by photographs and tape recordings which are alleged to present Presley in compromising situations." An investigation determined that Griessel Landau was not a medical doctor. Finally, "By negotiation, Presley agreed to pay Griessel-Landau $200.00 for treatments received and also to furnish him with a $315.00 plane fare to London, England." Onefortyone 03:50, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

So a potential blackmailer with allegedly "compromising photos" of Presley settled for a grand total of $515.00? Clearly the most incompetant blackmailer, ever. None of these alleged pictures have ever been revealed despite the near constant attention and scrutiny Presley was under. You have an agenda user Onefortyone and it's destroying this entry. Lochdale

I am only summarizing what is written in a reliable source. It is a documented fact that there was an official negotiation. This means that Elvis didn't take the matter to court. The blackmailer was never arrested for his crime. Onefortyone 23:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually you aren't. You're speculating based on innuendo which is what you have done throughout this article. You are fixated on Preleys' sexuality despite all evidence suggesting that he was a hetrosexual (and a philandering one at that). FBI files simply gather any and all pieces of information. Such information will contain rumour etc. Unless they are preparing a case or an investigation they will not go through and corroborate every piece of information.

This "blackmailer" made off with $500 which appears to be for medical services provided. If he really had such photos he, or his estate, could sell them for untold amounts now or even then. This is a non-story but you are too fixated, too obsessed to think or approach this rationally. Lochdale

$550.00 was quite a lot of money in 1960. It is an undeniable fact that the blackmailer had not been sentenced by a court. According to the FBI files, Elvis officially paid Griessel-Landau $200.00 for treatments received and furnished him with a $315.00 plane fare to London. These are the documented facts. You never know what actually may have been paid in such cases. Onefortyone 23:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually $550 was not that princely sum in 1960. Considering that a famiy sized Chevy cost $2,529 you can see that $550 was not the sort of money a blackmailer would be seeking against a star of Presley's calibre. Sticking with the facts and not your conjecture, all we can see is that Preley paid a doctor for his services and for his plane flight. How you go from there to alleging that Presley was bi-sexual is unfathomable. Lochdale

Further source

Here is another source which is fully in line with Byron Raphael, Priscilla Presley and Suzanne Finstad who also say that Elvis wasn't overtly sexual towards women. According to her memoir, Breathing Out (St. Martin's Press, 2005), model and actress Peggy Lipton, who played the hip chick of TV's undercover Mod Squad in the late 1960s and early '70s, had a fling with Elvis: "He was a great kisser," she says, "but that was about it." On p. 172 of her book, she relates that Elvis was like a "teenage boy":

"He didn't feel like a man next to me - more like a boy who'd never matured. The petting went on for quite a while. And then we made love. Or tried to. Elvis knew he was sexy; he just wasn't up to sex. Not that he wasn't built, but with me, at least, he was virtually impotent.

Because he couldn't consummate sex, the eye-witness adds, Elvis

became embarrassed and went into the bathroom. I knew he felt badly, because he left me a poem scrawled on a torn-off scrap of paper on my pillow. He disappeared into the bathroom for hours. What was he doing in there? I sat in the bedroom in a daze. Waiting for him to emerge and forever hopeful that we could try again to make love. ... Elvis had made an effort to communicate. He had been touched, he had wanted to connect. Nothing was said about the lack of sex. Conversation by now had shut down. I didn't know what Elvis was feeling. I didn't even know what he was doing for such a long time in the bathroom. Waiting in bed, I was beginning to feel trapped. I couldn't just amble out into the next room to get a breath because all his guys were in the front of the suite gearing up for show time. I could hear their piercing laughter and loud voices against the background of the blaring TV. Elvis finally came out. He was in full ceremonial dress: pancake makeup and slicked-back, blackened hair. It was as if he had unpacked his old self and changed into someone else.

I would say that this account speaks for itself. Onefortyone 03:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

There is no denying the fact Elvis was a homosexual.

Actually there are plenty denying it, and one User (Onefortyone) doing everything to make it up. Here's an interestined article from MSNBC suggestion that Lipton was dumped because she was a Scientologist:

http://www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/celebrities/celebrities11.html you think, perhaps she may have an agenda? And isn't this odd that is all coming out long after Presley has died? Lochdale

And her account doesn't even allege that he was homosexual; it alleges that he was impotent. If you read the full citation (which Onefortyone has ommitted), she attributes his impotence to drugs. No one contests that Elvis did a lot of drugs. In either case, Lochdale, you can just ignore Onefortyone. He's banned from posting to this talk page until April 16th. Hopefully by then he'll get a better idea of what credible, relevant sources are. --DDG 16:16, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed a section, added by user Onefortyone who, once again, has deliberately misinterpreted a secondary source in this case Lipton's book. He entirely leaves out the context of her comments that Elvis was allegedly so drugged up that he could barely function. Instead, he attempts to manipulate the book to suggest that Elvis was impotent because he was gay or bisexual or whatever user Onefortyone's agenda is. Can we either lock this page or otherwise ban user Onefortyone from editing it? All of his edits are tidbits from questionable (at best) secondary sources that do nothing to enhance the article and serve only to furher push user Onefortyone's agenda. Lohdale

I have now added that Lipton attributed Elvis's impotence to drug abuse. In my opinion, the paragraphs I have included are well supported by several independent sources based on eye-witness accounts. I have cited three published books and one article. Could it be that it is your agenda to suppress information which is not in line with your personal view of your star? Onefortyone 00:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Elvis had no problem getting it up for Gladys and Nick Adams.

Fat Elvis

I think the article needs more coverage and most likely a picture of the fat, vegas elvis. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 02:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Elvis was heavy but (by todays standards) was never fat. Added in this edit by 66.168.115.168 (contributions)

Is that a joke? Presley was nearly 300 lbs when he died. Added in this edit by 195.93.21.65 (contributions, previous contribution)

"Pounds"? How quaint. The matter of units aside, do you have any evidence? -- Hoary 07:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I love Wikipedia

This place is hilarious! Why isn't the article protected? Is there a possibility that something special might happen in his life which would need to be include in the article? I imagine that this page is an absolute magnet for looney tunes without Wikipedia accounts. I'm not sure, but I think there are still some parts which say that he is "supposedly" dead, but these might have already been fixed by the recent revert. In case I've been logged out again (damn cookies!) I'm User:Zyxoas. 216.239.58.136 00:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Incest

I have read allegations that Elvis had sex with his own mother, as well as with Nick Adams. The article should mention this in order to present a balanced picture.

I am glad nobody dignified this with a response... oops! I responded! HighInBC 03:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

The allegations are well known and have been around for decades. I suggest you read Dee Presley's book.

Its not a book its an unpublished manuscript, and certainly not a credible source.--Count Chocula 15:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

In your opinion.

Discussing the claims by Dee Presley, reputed author Greil Marcus writes in Double Trouble: Bill Clinton and Elvis Presley in a Land of No Alternatives (2000):

"It makes sense," said Jip Golsteijn, pop critic for the Amsterdam Telegraaf. "It's what I heard again and again in Tupelo, years ago. Nobody meant it as a condemnation. Given the way Elvis and Gladys were about each other, it was simply the conclusion everyone drew." (p. 6)

There are similar accounts of Elvis's close relationship to his mother in other publications on the singer, for instance, in Earl Greenwood's book, The Boy Who Would Be King. On p.96, the author says,

When he was ... sharing her bed ..., Gladys told him he was her little man. Not only was Elvis Gladys's son, she also made it clear he was her mate.

On another occasion, when they

were ready to walk out the door, Gladys grabbed Elvis and held him close. "Jus' you 'member, nobody loves you like I do. You always got me." Translated to mean: You best not put any girl before your mama again. ... Gladys wanted to be everything to Elvis and wanted more from him than what was right or healthy to expect. (p.116)

These are original quotes from published books on Elvis. Onefortyone 04:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Nice quotes, but in no way do they prove incest. Any interpretation/translation of these quotes by yourself to make them support your arguements is original research, as I'm sure your well aware--Count Chocula 05:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Here are some further quotes from Greil Marcus's book:

• Newsbreaks included the National Enquirer's Dee Presley explosion: HIS OWN STEPMOM REVEALS SHOCKING TRUTH AT LAST-ELVIS AND HIS MOM WERE LOVERS. (p.3)
• About his mother, it's said"—Gladys Presley, who died in 1958, at forty-six, after, if Dee Presley is right, years of bliss with Elvis in her bed, or she in his. "It makes sense," said Adrian Sibley of the BBC's The Late Show. "America has brought Elvis up to date: now he needs therapy just like everybody else. Don't they have twelve-step programs for incest survivors?" (p.6) Onefortyone 05:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

So he cites the National Equirer as a credible source? Again, note how none of these revelations were made until after Presley died. Once again user Onefortyone appears to be involved in a concerted effort to cloud this article. This is getting wearisome. Lochdale

I have only cited what a reputed author has written. He is not only quoting from the National Enquirer. Just for your information, here is another source. In his book, Elvis The #1 Hits: The Secret History of the Classics, Patrick Humphries says about Elvis and his mother,

When he entered the Army it marked the longest and furthest distance from her that he'd ever been. For a man who'd slept in the same bed as his momma until his early teens, that was a cruel reality. (p.99)

The author adds on another page of his book,

There is a widely held belief among psychologists that the disappearance of Vernon from Elvis' life when the King was three (Vernon was jailed for passing bad cheques) had a profound effect upon Elvis' emotional development. At that age a child naturally goes through a separation anxiety from its mother, which fathers can often help with. Elvis only had Gladys. They slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen. Elvis loved his father, of course. But a big part of that love was probably based upon his mother's love for the elder Presley. (p.117)

Where are your sources which prove that Elvis wasn't his mother's darling? Onefortyone 00:24, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't have to prove a negative. You are the one who has to prove your accusations. At the moment, you have nothing but innuendo and slander published long after the man had died. This article is a disgrace and it's been disgraced by user Onefortyone and his capricious agenda. Lochdale

I don't think that salacious nonsense belongs in an encyclopedia. Tom Harrison ^Talk 23:44, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. The paragraph you have deleted from the Wikipedia article is mainly on Elvis's close relationship to his mother. There can be no doubt that he was a mama's boy. This historical fact, which deeply influenced the singer's life, is discussed by all Elvis biographers. It must be included in a biography, though I can understand that some Elvis fans are not happy with these facts. The paragraph I have written only mentions in passing that there were also claims that Elvis slept with his mother. This was discussed by Greil Marcus and David Wall, two reputed authors. Onefortyone 23:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I do not believe either author actually alleged Elvis was having incestual relations with his mother. It's more a case of you trying to read into things to justify your position. Further, there have been extensive biographies about Presley (such as Guralnik's) and they said no such thing. Don't you think something like an incestual relationship might have found its way into his 600 page FBI file? Lochdale

Marcus cites two other authors who say that Dee Presley's claims make sense. Why should Elvis's close relationship with his mother be of interest to the FBI? They were interested in death threats made against the singer, a major extortion attempt while he was in the Army in Germany, the likelihood of Elvis being the victim of blackmail, complaints about his public performances, a paternity suit, the theft by larceny of an executive jet which he owned and the alleged fraud surrounding a 1955 Corvette which he owned, and such things. Don't you think that an incestual relationship is possible? There can be no doubt that Elvis slept in his mother's bed until he was a young teen. His father was openly talking about these facts. Goldman and Greenwood are writing on Elvis's Oedipal relationships. Onefortyone 02:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

The FBI had its own screwy logic. I believe that it was interested in what the nutball Hoover was interested in. Yes of course an incestual relationship is possible. Questions: What's encyclopedic about the possibility that something happened? Who's interested in this crap other than you, the ghost of Hoover, and simple souls who devour tabloids? What's the significance to his music or movies of what Presley might have done with his dick? Why don't you just go off and create a fork (141HollywoodBabylonopedia?) where you could attract like-minded folk to witter on endlessly about the predilections of dead celebs? -- Hoary 02:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I am only citing what is written in books on Elvis. The biographers are discussing these topics which deeply influenced the singer's life. Many readers are interested in these topics. Therefore, according to the Wikipedia guidelines, they are encyclopedic. You and some other users may add some paragraphs on Elvis's music and other aspects of his life. There is much to be done. What about the late Elvis of the 70s? What about the worldwide Elvis industry? Onefortyone 03:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Many readers are interested in these topics. It's certain that you are. Anyone else? Me, I haven't the slightest interest in "the late Elvis of the 70s" or "the worldwide Elvis industry" and very little in Presley's life. I have some slight interest in his earlier music and its immediate impact. I don't have books about this. It seems that you do have books about Presley; I'd hope that somewhere between titillating passages about who he porked and how (and mumbojumbo about the "Oedipal"), they'd find the space to say something about his music. Perhaps you could turn your attention to that. -- Hoary 07:38, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

It's also tabloid journalism. With more than 2,000 books written about him each successive book has to be more outlandish than the last. If there were even a shred of evidence that Elvis had a incestual relationship with his mother then Dee Presley's book would be published. For the record, she barely knew Presley. This just does not belong in an encyclopedia. Lochdale

Mistakes in intro

For some reason, I can't edit the intro without deleting the backend of the article. So I'm putting the info here so that a more technically able Wikipedia user can do so.

The intro currently states: He has had more than 120 singles in the US top 40, across various musical genres, with over 20 reaching number one.

Two of the claims are incorrect, and one is exaggerated. Presley has had 104 Top 40 singles, not "more than 120." They span only a few distinct genres. And 17 hit #1, not "over 20" (18 if you count "Hound Dog," which was once counted but has since been deleted by a change in Billboard's methodology).

Out of curiosity, what other genres are there? Presley had pop, rock, country and gospel hits. That's an incredibly varied pallet and one that very few other artists can come close to.

Also, can you provide a citation that billboard removed Hound Dog as a number one hit? Billboard.com suggests your wrong. http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/bio/index.jsp?&cr=artist&or=ASCENDING&sf=length&pid=5444&kw=Presley

Lochdale

Sure, here's a column from Billboard.com discussing the controversy (scroll down to "HOW THEY GOT TO 17"): http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/chart_beat/bonus_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001736670

Presley's best-known gospel songs, "(There'll Be) Peace in the Valley," and "How Great Thou Art," did not chart in the Top 100. I may have missed one, but the biggest charting gospel single I can find for Elvis is "Where Did They Go, Lord," a minor #33 entry that helps round out his 104 Top 40 singles list, rather than defining it. ("Crying in the Chapel," though a church-themed hit, isn't much of a gospel song.)

Presley's gospel albums sold well, so I suppose the "various genres" credit could be retained with a small rewrite. However, the distinction between "pop" and "rock" is often blurred, and Presley is no exception. And there are many performers who have had charting singles in as many or more genres-- Bing Crosby, Paul McCartney, Elton John, Louis Armstrong, Madonna, Bobby Darin, Ray Charles, Paul Anka, and on and on. For example, Paul Simon can be said to have had hit singles in the genres of rock, pop, folk, salsa, gospel, world music... and that's not counting his flop Broadway musical. Moderate genre-hopping is not so rare or remarkable that it needs to be emphasized in an introduction, and Elvis Presley certainly doesn't need such a claim to boost his profile or credibility (in my opinion).

That's a good point but Presley had repeated cross-over success whereas I'm not sure most of the artists you mentioned did. Put another way, Presley consistently charted on the country and gospel charts whereas the likes of Paul Simon did not. I think that is a more endearing notation and it should be included in the main article. Lochdale

Stealing black music

Perhaps the article should mention how Presley became famous as a white singer who stole black music. Quoted references can be found from Marlon Brando, Chuck D, Eminem, etc. ... added at 18:49, 4 April 2006 by 195.93.21.67 (contributions)

Well it's quite obvious in this day and age that Elvis stole popular tunes from black artists from as far back as the 20s and 30s and "covered" them, but of course you have to take into consideration the fact that if it were not for Elvis singing them, they may have never became even minutely as popular as they are now, because of the fact they were essentially barred from white America until the Civil Rights movement, and by then those tunes had become obscure, outside of Elvis' version(s) of them. -Buddhist- 01:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Should Louis Armstrong's Wiki page characterize him as a black singer who stole white music, because his popular recordings included "All of Me," "I Got Rhythm," "After You've Gone," "Hello Dolly," "On the Sunny Side of the Street," and "Stardust"? What about when Armstrong covered "Alexander's Ragtime Band"-- was he then a black artist stealing from a white artist who'd stolen from a black artist? Is this popular music, or salugi?

Since Presley was indeed a bridge between black-dominated music and white-dominated music, it's worth referencing Sam Phillips' alleged prediction "if I could find a white boy with the Negro sound, I'd make a million dollars." Calling him a thief is more problematic, and something less than accurate. ... added at 03:32, 5 April 2006 by 64.131.196.46 (contributions)

Marlon says otherwise. ... added at 17:00, 5 April 2006 by 195.93.21.67 (contributions)

Do you have any citations for these wild claims or are you just going to continue to post annonymously? Presley fused blues music with country, roackabilly, gospel and basically created rock & roll. It's simply inaccuarate to say that he "stole" black music. Lochdale ... added at 23:49, 16 April 2006 by 24.148.51.62 (contributions)

"It seems to me hilarious that our government put the face of Elvis Presley on a postage stamp after he died from an overdose of drugs. His fans don't mention that because they don't want to give up their myths. They ignore the fact that he was a drug addict and claim he invented rock 'n' roll when in fact he took it from black culture; they had been singing that way for years before he came along, copied them and became a star." - Marlon Brando "Elvis was a hero to most, but he never meant shit to me you see. A straight up racist that sucker was, simple and plain. Mother fuck him and John Wayne." - Chuck D "Though I'm not the first king of controversy I am the worst thing since Elvis Presley to do Black Music so selfishly and use it to get myself wealthy. Hey, there's a concept that works." - Eminem ... added at 16:42, 17 April 2006 by 195.93.21.67 (contributions)

So we have an unsupported quote from Marlon Brando (who was not a musician), a lyric from a song by Public Enemy who were big on shock value and who came around long after Elvis had died and another lyric from Eminem....wow, I'm convinced. This is an encyclopedia, not a forum for nonsensical rantings. Lochdale ... added at 20:30, 17 April 2006 by 63.85.72.242 (contributions)

Contradictions

First off, it says that Elvis was an only child because his brother Jesse Garon was stillborn, and that he recieved the middle name Aron with one 'a' so he would never forget his brother, Jesse Garon. But then in the beginning, and at any other points in which they mention Elvis' middle name, it's Aaron with two 'a's.

Until credibility can be shown for either one, i'm gonna change it back to Aron. -Buddhist- 01:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

'Aaron' is the spelling used by his estate. I've seen no source that states that Elvis' middlename was a homage to Jesse garon, only that the name was misspelled on his birth certificate and later changed to the correct spelling of 'Aaron'.--Count Chocula 09:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Elvis was named "Aron" at birth but being a very religious man he later changed his middle name so it would be the same as the Biblical Aaron, the brother of Moses.

There's an explanation for the middle name somewhere, and I believe it's an estate-confirmed one -- maybe on the website? Jason 01:45, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Album Sales ?

(Paul0991 20:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC))how many album sales in units has elvis got to date ?

Not as many as Michael Jackson, who is the biggest seeling solo artist in history and has the biggest selling album of all time.—This unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.67 (talk • contribs) .

As far as I know, Elvis' global sales have been estimated at over billion by RCA records.--Count Chocula 00:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The official Presley website makes it clear they can only account for half a billion sales.

Where on the site does it say that? I can only see the estimate by RCA of over billion.--Count Chocula 13:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Estimates maybe, but they can only account for half a billion. Btw, Bing, Michael and the Beatles have outsold Presley, and they didn't have to steal black music - or commit suicide on the can.

Good grief. I posted a link in the discussion above highlighting the fact that Elvis outsold both the Beatles and Michael Jackson. As for stealing black music, see above. Lochdale

Nope. Michael is the biggest selling artist of all time. Just check his official website. Presley was just a dumb racist hick who had sex with Nick Adams and his own mother.

Nice. So you're saying we should believe Jackson's own website over impartial websites that calculate actual sales? Lochdale

According to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries in 2006, the Beatles are the biggest popular music act of all time, with 400 million albums sold (50 million more albums than their runner-up, Michael Jackson).

Interesting info about Elvis

During his time when Elvis was feeling depressed, not many people knew that he was a follower of Self-Realization Fellowship. He had close ties with Daya Mata and he subscribed to the lessons published by them. However, he hardly received any as his manager stongly discouraged his involvement with the group. Can anyone who is also aware of this shed further information about this? --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 16:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow, he was even more of a weirdo than I thought.

Religion

Someone has been adding the 'Jewish-American' category to this article. Is there any source for this? I've never seen anything written that says Elvis was Jewish. His parents were both Pentecostal and the biography on the official website states Elvis attended the Assembly of God Church with his family [12].--Count Chocula 04:23, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

New paragraphs

I have now added the following paragraphs on Elvis's close relationship to his mother. All statements are well supported by several independent sources quoted in the text:

Mama's boy

There can be no doubt that the first woman in Elvis's life was his mother Gladys. In a newspaper interview with The Memphis Press Scimitar, of which Earl Greenwood gives a short summary in his book, The Boy Who Would Be King (p.155), Elvis himself was honestly open about the relationship to his mother. "She was the number-one girl in his life, and he was dedicating his career to her." The writer called Elvis "a hillbilly cat ... and Mrs. Presley's son. He poked fun at Elvis's closeness to his mama, implying he was a mama's boy, and insinuated Elvis was talented but simple." Indeed, as Elvis biographer Peter Guralnick confirms in his book, Last Train to Memphis: The Rise of Elvis Presley (p.13), "Elvis grew up a loved and precious child. He was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother." His father still openly talked about this fact after his son had become famous. Throughout her life, Guralnick writes, "the son would call her by pet names, they would communicate by baby talk, 'she worshiped him,' said a neighbor, 'from the day he was born.' " According to the reputed biographer, Elvis himself said, "My mama never let me out of her sight. I couldn't go down to the creek with the other kids."

Guralnick describes Elvis as a very shy person, as a "kid who had spent scarcely a night away from home in his nineteen years" (p.149) 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." (p.36) These early experiences had a deep influence on his clumsy advances to girls. According to Guralnick (p.149), 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." Guitarist Scotty Moore attested that Elvis's parents were very protective: "His mama would corner me and say, 'Take care of my boy. Make sure he eats. Make sure he-' You know, whatever. Typical mother stuff." But Elvis "didn't seem to mind; there was nothing phony about it, he truly loved his mother. He was just a typical coddled son, ... very shy – he was more comfortable just sitting there with a guitar than trying to talk to you." Guralnick writes that Gladys was so proud of her boy, that she "would get up early in the morning to run off the fans so Elvis could sleep" (p.280). She was frightened of Elvis even going out of the house: "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." (p.346)

On p.117 of his book, Elvis The #1 Hits: The Secret History of the Classics, Patrick Humphries draws attention to the fact that psychologists believe "that the disappearance of Vernon from Elvis' life when the King was three (Vernon was jailed for passing bad cheques) had a profound effect upon Elvis' emotional development. At that age a child naturally goes through a separation anxiety from its mother, which fathers can often help with. Elvis only had Gladys. They slept in the same bed up until Elvis was a young teen." Greenwood says (p.96) that, when Elvis was sharing his mother's bed as a boy, "Gladys told him he was her little man. Not only was Elvis Gladys's son, she also made it clear he was her mate." On another occasion, when they "were ready to walk out the door, Gladys grabbed Elvis and held him close. 'Jus' you 'member, nobody loves you like I do. You always got me.' Translated to mean: You best not put any girl before your mama again. ... Gladys wanted to be everything to Elvis and wanted more from him than what was right or healthy to expect." (p.116) For Humphries (p.99), it is understandable that, when Elvis entered the Army it marked the longest and furthest distance from his mother "that he'd ever been. For a man who'd slept in the same bed as his momma until his early teens, that was a cruel reality." No wonder if this close relationship with his mother would adversely affect the singer's future relationships with girls. In his book, Elvis (McGraw-Hill, 1981), Professor Albert Goldman goes as far as to call Elvis a "pervert" dating fourteen-year-old girls. In his book, The Boy who would be King, Earl Greenwood also confirms (p.239) that Elvis had a predilection for underaged girls, as "with teenage girls, he felt more secure he wouldn't be pleasuring himself with a mother." The author adds (p.254) that home movies were made with these girls. One of Elvis's "favorite things was to watch the girls have sex with each other. The faces changed and each group got younger, until on the final evening there were four fourteen-year-olds ... The movies were Elvis's latest pride and joy. He and his boys watched parts of them every day..." In his second book on the singer, Elvis: The Last 24 Hours, Goldman cites Presley's closest friends and relatives in order to support his view that the star was an undisciplined, self-indulgent hillbilly with a sickly Oedipal relationship with his obese, smothering, mother. Greenwood even suggests (p.245) that "Long-buried Oedipal desires scratched at the surface of his consciousness and threatened to come forth," when Elvis "put Priscilla on a pedestal alongside the gilded image of his deceased mother." Indeed, there were accusations based on claims by the singer's stepmother, Dee Presley, that Elvis may have had an incestuous relationship with his mother. In his book, Double Trouble: Bill Clinton and Elvis Presley in a Land of No Alternativse (2000), reputed author Greil Marcus cites some reactions to the "shocking truth" that Gladys may have had "years of bliss with Elvis in her bed, or she in his": " 'It makes sense,' said Adrian Sibley of the BBC's The Late Show. 'America has brought Elvis up to date: now he needs therapy just like everybody else. Don't they have twelve-step programs for incest survivors?' 'It makes sense,' said Jip Golsteijn, pop critic for the Amsterdam Telegraaf. 'It's what I heard again and again in Tupelo, years ago. Nobody meant it as a condemnation. Given the way Elvis and Gladys were about each other, it was simply the conclusion everyone drew.' " (p. 6) Be that as it may, when his mother died, Elvis was "sobbing and crying hysterically", as Guralnick relates (p.478). "He was grieving almost constantly, the papers wrote." According to several eye-witnesses, "He'd cry all day," and when they had get him calmed down, "the next day it would start all over again." (p.480) Onefortyone 18:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

It would be a lot better if you trimmed it down to one paragraph. Having three large paragraphs on his relationship with his mother is just way too much.--Count Chocula 00:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

It's way too much for you, Count, and for me; but there's plenty of evidence that certain editors think there can never be too much "information" of the tabloid variety about US celebrities. Perhaps we're missing something and Presley was really notable not for his sometimes good records or for his reliably dreadful but money-spinning movies or even for his hilariously glitzy taste but instead for his sex life (or lack thereof) and drug intake. Perhaps something analogous is true for all celebrities. Or indeed even for you and me! -- Hoary 08:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

It probably belongs in the birth and childhood section anyway as well--Count Chocula 00:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

These "independent" sources are of questionable veracity. Further, with more than 2,000 books published about the man we're really scraping the bottom of the barrel in order to justify salacious claims such as these. User OnefortyOne has gone from claiming that Elvis was gay to claims that Elvis had sexual relations with his mother. It's a vicious, demaning attack that lessens the entire article. It has no support from any credible sources and it is so far from left field that it should be removed from the article. Additionally, User Onefortyone has a history of distorting secondary sources on this page. For example, he quotes Guralnik and then makes an effort to tie Guralnik's book into Goldman's books (even using the title "Professor" to give some additional credibility to Goldman. Guralnik has never suggested that Elvis had sexual relations with his mother. Instead, user Onefortyone would rather we take outlandish theories as accepted fact. Lochdale

I believe this section should be removed. It's a very serious claim to suggest that someone was having incestual relations with their own mother. User Onefortyone has cleverly tried to link a credible source (Guralnik) with questionable sources. Even Goldman never suggested that Elvis had an incestual relationship with his mother. His 600 page FBI file contains no such suggestion. More than 2,000 books written about the man contain no such suggestion. Numerous articles in reputable periodicals contain no such suggestion. Instead, we have a user who is trying his best to concoct a story that Elvis is either gay and/or having incestual relations. What's next, Elvis owned a dog therefore he is into beastiality? Lochdale

What are you talking about, Lochdale? Truth be told, I have only quoted from Guralnick's book in order to show that Elvis was a mama's boy. There are many other books on Elvis including the same topic. The last part of the paragraph I have written mentions in passing that there was also the claim by Elvis's stepmother, Dee Presley, that the singer slept with his mother. These claims have been discussed by Greil Marcus and David Wall, not by Peter Guralnick. A Wikipedia article should cite what is written in published sources, not what you think should not be mentioned, and Guralnick, Marcus, etc. are reliable sources. Where are your sources which prove that Elvis wasn't a mama's boy? Could it be that you are not happy with this historical fact, and therefore endeavor to remove content you don't like from the article? Onefortyone 23:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Not at all. The fact that Elvis was devoted to his mother is one thing, your effort to make him out to be a "mamma' boy" is another thing all together. Your efforts to then tie that into a notion that Elvis was having incestual relations with his mother is disgraceful. He was close to his mother which Guralnik notes. Guralnik also spends some 700+ pages on other issues. Guralnik never suggested that Elvis was a "mamma's boy" as you so pejoratively put and he never suggested an incestual relationship. At best, this is a one or two sentence addition to this page. Lochdale

Truth be told, Lochdale. On page 36 of his book, Last Train to Memphis, Guralnick writes on Elvis that 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." By the way, Guralnick is discussing Elvis's close relationship with his mother on many other pages of his book, as most Elvis biographers do. Onefortyone 02:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

The fundamental problem with the addition is that it requires tortured logic to reach its conclusion. Put another way, you've gone to tremendous pains and effort to paint a one-dimensional picture about Elvis and his mother. In essence, you have created a strawman by linking disconnected prose to suggest that Elvis was a "mamma's boy". No writer actually alleges an incestual relationship. This sort of conjecture simply doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Moreover, Guralnik noted that it was a testament to Presley's character that he was able to overcome such teasing and 50's conventionalism to create rock & roll. Lochdale

The fundmental problem is that you are unable to cite sources which prove that Elvis wasn't a mama's boy. You further claim "Guralnik noted that it was a testament to Presley's character that he was able to overcome such teasing and 50's conventionalism to create rock & roll." Where is your original quote? As an Amazon search proves, Guralnick does not use expressions such as "testament", "teasing" or "conventionalism" in the sense you imply in his books. See [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. Onefortyone 23:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

The fact is, however, that Guralnik never suggested that Presley's relationship with his mother was hurtful or that he was a "momma's boy". You are using that term in the pejorative sense. Guralnik says Preseley was teased but never that he was bullied. Perhaps the section could be rewritten to note that Presley was close to his mother but that's really about it. You are taken quotes out of context or using them to support less than reputable sources to promote your agenda that Presley was a "mamma's boy" and/or that he had incestous relations with her. Neither position is suppported by the vast weight of the evidence on Presley. Nothing like this has been noted by any biographer of note and it also failed to appear in over 600 pages of FBI files. Lastly, I don't have to prove anything. You are the one inserting a POV into this article (again and again) despite the fact that no credible evidence supports your position. Lochdale

On further review of Guralnik's first biography I note that he does not mention that Presley slept in his mother's bed until he was a teenager. Rather odd that perhaps the most comprehensive biography of the man doesn't mention that fact? Further, Guralnik notes that Presley was being teased for how he dressed and how he wore his hair rather than his relationship with his mother. User Onefortyone seems to delight in focusing solely on the sexual mores of Presley. He clearly has an agenda that is supported by questionable sources and using quotes out of context. It is an agenda that is destroying what could otherwise be a useful article. Lochdale

Would you please stick to the facts. Here are some direct quotes from Guralnick's book:

• Elvis ... was, everyone agreed, unusually close to his mother. Vernon spoke of it after his son became famous, almost as if it were a source of wonder that anyone could be that close. Throughout her life the son would call her by pet names, they would communicate by baby talk, "she worshiped him," said a neighbor, "from the day he was born."
• Elvis' own view of his growing up was more prosaic. "My mama never let me out of her sight. I couldn't go down to the creek with the other kids.
• Many of the other children made fun of him as a "trashy" kind of boy playing trashy "hillbilly" music, but Elvis stuck to his guns. Without ever confronting his denigrators or his critics, he continued to do the one thing that was important to him: he continued to make music.
• ... a few of the "rougher-type" boys took his guitar and cut the strings ...
• [his fellow classmates 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."

Here are some further sources: On page 19 of their book, Elvis Presley, Richard Nixon, and the American Dream, Connie Kirchberg and Marc Hendrickx refer to the "already common 'mama's boy' teasing he had endured since the first day of school, when Gladys walked him to the door." On page 2 of his book, Rockabilly: A Forty-Year Journey, Billy Poore writes that it is "a fact that in 1953 Elvis was a shy, introverted mama's boy in a town full of bullies." In his book, Elvis After Elvis: The Posthumous Career of a Living Legend, Gilbert B Rodman calls Elvis "the dutiful mama's boy" (p.104) 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." (p.142) Onefortyone 03:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Guralnik never suggests that Presley's relationship with his mother was anything abnormal.

He clearly says that he was "unusually close to his mother". Other biographers are more outspoken. Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Guralnik further notes that Presley was often teased for his clothing and his hair. Guralnik is quite clear, however, that Presley stood up for himself. Using your own quotes, a "Dixie-bred mama's boy" is not a pejortative. Put another way, Elvis was respectful and deferential towards his mother. That isn't a bad thing and should not be portrayed as such.

What about including a well-resourced passage in the said section? Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

This is the way both Guralnik and Priscilla Presley paint his relationship with his mother. The fundamnetal problem with your comments user Onefortyone is that they are agenda driven.

I would say that your deletion tactics are agenda driven. Where are your well-resourced contributions to the article? Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Your sources are either unreputable or taken out of contest.

This is your false opinion. In line with the Wikipedia guidelines, I have used several independent sources to support my view, among them biographies on the singer. Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Ask yourself this, why wouldn't the FBI files (over 600 pages) not note an unusual relationship with his mother? Why didn't his wife mention this in her book? Why doesn't Peter Guralnik (widely considered to be Presley's greatest biographer) not focus on this relationship beyond noting that Elvis was a southern boy who was close to his mother (not unusual for an only child)? Why didn't the "Memphis Mafia" members who wrote widely about Presley ever mention anything like this? Instead, you are making an effort to take quotes out of context and support questionable sources by interweaving their quotes with credible sources. The fact is, Presley's life has been the cornerstone of modern tabloid journalism. Even with that, you are still struggling to find anything (other than quoting out of context or inferring something that is not supportable) to support your positions. This is not a NPOV.

Why should the FBI be interested in Elvis's relationship with his mother? (See also my statement in another section of this talk page.) However, the FBI had maintained a file on Elvis since the 1950s when they considered him to be a "pervert" who represented a threat to the moral well-being of young American women, and the file had never been closed. Guralnick says a lot about Elvis's close relationship with Gladys, as most other biographers do. Are you really of the opionion that the Memphis Mafia guys thought that Elvis wasn't a mama's boy? And what about the strategies of the world-wide Elvis industry that have been discussed by Professor Wall? Fans frequently endeavor to suppress information about the life of the singer which is not in line with a positive view of their star. Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Instead, much like your claims that Elvis was gay etc. you have an agenda. It's an agenda that is not supported by the evidence and should not be supported here. Lochdale

Truth be told, Lochdale, I am not of the opinion that Elvis was gay, as he had relationships with women. But there is some evidence that he had also a relationship with his best friend, Nick Adams. Thus you might say that he had also bisexual leanings. Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the paragraph calling Presley a "mama's boy" until we can agree as to what being a "mama's boy" actually means. Further, the paragraph contained the POV language that Presley felt "inadequate" and thus needed beautiful women around him. I guess every man on the planet must not be considered inadequate. It isn't written as a NPOV and, again, goes to User Onefortyone's agenda relating to this article. Lochdale

Your removing strategies are not acceptable, as my contributions are well-sourced. The passage that Elvis felt "inadequate" and thus needed beautiful women was not written by me. Perhaps this was Ted Wilkes's contribution to the Relationships section. What we need is a balanced view of the singer's life which does not exclude critical voices. Onefortyone 12:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

In his review of Guralnick's book, Careless Love, Ted Drozdowski shows how Elvis's unusually close relationship with his mother influenced the singer's life:

Right up until his own death, Elvis could not make peace with his mother's having died in 1958 -- and somehow that fueled a chain of insecurities leading back to his childhood as a loner and mama's boy. He grew up afraid of the night, which kept him from sleeping and gave him an excuse for his pharmacological intake. And the drugs, though they might initially put him out, would also wake him as their conflicting chemistry did battle within his body. See [19]

It may be added that his experiences as a mama's boy also explain in part why Elvis could be manipulated by his manager, Colonel Parker. Onefortyone 14:23, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

The removal is entirely consistent. Firstly, why not quote from Guralnik's book itself rather than a review? Are you suggesting that a writer as good as Guralnik would miss something like this? That publications such as Rolling Stone, Time, Newsweek, New York Times are so blind that they didn't notice it either? That the FBI failed to figure it out? With more than 2,000 books published on the man you can barely find two that allude to an incestousrelationship? This simply does not rise to the level of credible sources. Here is a good critique by a Professor of Physchology at the University of California (Davis)[20] of Goldman's book. An sample of the critique:

" Goldman holds firm to elitist academic attitudes, but charges ahead without the slightest sign of scholarly biographical skills." or "Lacking both in detailed citations of sources and in clear criteria for judging the validity of biographical evidence, Goldman's narrative becomes impossible to trust on virtually any point of fact."

Your sources are not credible. Further, given the de minimus number of your sources versus the overwhelming evidence to the contrary I feel comfortable in deleting your edits. Feel free to take this arbitration so we don't continue to go around in circles. Lochdale

Reviews of Goldman's book make it clear that it simply isn't a credible source: [21]. Peter Guralnik's dismissal of Goldman's book [22] (dismissive of Goldman's research regarding Presley's sexuality). From the Dallas Observer noting that Goldman's book was highly biased whereas Guralnik actually made a journalistic effort [23] Lochdale

Goldman's critical study can be called the first book on Elvis which was not written in the vein of the world-wide Elvis industry. Certainly it has raised a lot of controversial discussions among Elvis fans, as it was not constantly singing the praise of the star. By the way, this book was also one of the sources Guralnick has used for his publications on Elvis. You certainly know that there are also positive evaluations of the book. As for Guralnick, even he has been criticized for all too uncritically citing from books by the Memphis Mafia members. Be that as it may, as everybody can see, I have mentioned Goldman's book only in passing, but his critical remarks should be mentioned. Did you realize that I have quoted from many other independent sources? What I have written is clearly sourced from published books with named authors and so it belongs in the article. It is a fact you cannot deny that all of my contributions are based on material to be found in published books and articles on Elvis. There is more than enough to warrant inclusion. If the Elvis article would be an academic publication, the many quotes and references I have given would make reporting of Elvis being a mama's boy automatic. Indeed failure to mention something with so many sources would be looked at as either incompetent research or agenda-motivated censorship. This is what a Wikipedia article needs: a balanced view, based on several independent sources - not only stories an enthusiastic fan wants to read. According to the Wikipedia guidelines, valid facts which are well sourced should not be removed from an article. You are repeatedly deleting paragraphs I have written which are well sourced. This behavior clearly shows that Professor David S. Wall is right with his statements about the activities of the world-wide Elvis industry. Where are your contributions to the Elvis article which are based on direct quotes from books on the singer? All you can do is criticizing other users, denigrating the sources they have used and deleting content you don't like. Interestingly, this is the same strategy multiple hardbanned editor Ted Wilkes has used in the past. This is not NPOV. Therefore, would you please refrain from removing paragraphs which are not in line with your personal view. Onefortyone 16:35, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with my POV. You are introducing sources and notions that are not NPOV. This "Elvis industry" that you talk about wasn't so effective that they could keep his philandering and rampant drug abuse now did they? You quote Griel Marcus to support your POV when he destroyed Goldman's book pointing out the numerous factual errors in the book itself. The indpendent sources that you quote from are rebutted by the overwhelming number of sources who do not support the notion that Elvis had an incestual relationship with his mother. For example, Marcus quotes Elaine Dundy's book "Elvis and Gladys" [24]which destroys the notion that Elvis was a "mamma's boy" much less that he had an incestous relationship with his mother. Your sources are also misquoted. Marcus does not consider Presley a "mama's boy" rather a man who could not control his own urges which went against his upbringing. Lochdale

Citing conjecture by one author does not make it fact. To accuse someone of an incestous relationship without any real proof is not appropriate for an Encyclopedia. Again, how do legitimate biographers such as Guralnik fail to note any such relationship? Moreover, Greenwood's book itself is riddled with inaccuracies and an inability to cite to actual sources other than "the Memphis circle". Lochdale

One of the problems with Earl Greenwood's book is that Greenwood barely knew Evlis and certainly didn't live with him. Again, we're raising tabloid journlism to the level of conjecture when there is no support of such conjecture. Adding utterly unproven claims of incest to this page does a disservice to the Encyclopedia as well as to the many reputable journalists who have covered Presley. There are over 2,000 books on the man, perhaps a million articles and a 600 page FBI file. Other than the ones mentioned by User Onefortyone, none of these have ever alleged or even suggested incest. There hasn't been a refutation of these allegations because they hasn't needed to be. Greil Marcus, who utterly destroyed Goldman's book in the Village Voice, noted how Elaine Dundy's book "Elvis and Gladys" removed any lingering myths about Presley's relationship with his mother. All we are left with is tabloid journalism on the most covered celebrity in human history. Are we now to give some legitimacy to that type of hackery? When reputable biographers like Peter Guralnik fail to mention anything about this, when Presley's wife and best friends fail to mention this then I think it's safe to say that it should not be detailed in an encyclopedic entry. Lochdale

Are you sure that Elaine Dundy's book Elvis and Gladys "removed any lingering myths about Presley's relationship with his mother", as you are claiming above? Here is what the book says about Gladys's close relationship with Elvis:

it was agony for her to leave her child even for a moment with anyone else, to let anyone else touch Elvis. Maternal love was not for Gladys a prettily sentimental attachment. Rather it was a passionate concentration which deepened into a painful intensity when her son was not there, directly in her sight. She imagined all sorts of horrors. She imagined he was being tortured and she was not there to stop it. It was physical torment for her to be separated from him. Maternal devotion is constantly misrepresented as either grasping, clinging, stifling or pathetic. It is none of these things. Every mother of a very young child has the primordial conviction, deeper than reason, that as long as her child is within her eyesight she will be able to protect him from all harm. Generally the mother outgrows this as the child grows up but Gladys all her life remained anxious over each one of Elvis' separations from her. (p.71)

Does this sound like a usual relationship between mother and son? I don't think so. Onefortyone 22:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

On page 109 of his peer-reviewed study, Theorizing About Myth (University of Massachusetts Press, 1999), Robert A. Segal calls Elvis "a consummate mamma's boy who lived his last twenty years as a recluse in a womblike, infantile world in which all of his wishes were immediately satisfied yet who deemed himself entirely normal, in fact 'all-American.' " Onefortyone 21:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Interestingly, Joe Harrington, on p.166 of his book, Sonic Cool: The Life & Death of Rock 'n' Roll calls Elvis's "Kissin' Cousins" an "incestuous Rock n Roll song." According to Jim Green, the record, The King and Eye "incisively portrays Elvis's life and work as a misguided abandonment of innocence in favor of a sad yet comedic Oedipal journey" (quoted in George Plasketes, Images of Elvis Presley in American Culture, 1977-1997: The Mystery Terrain, p.37). Onefortyone 22:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Pedophilia

The article should mention how Elvis was sexually abusing Priscilla from the time she was 14. He is listed as a pedophile at www.amiannoying.com and many other sites.

Thrilling stuff! Have you got any hard evidence, or is this just innuendo? -- Hoary 08:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this is well known. Presley could not marry Priscilla until she was 21 because he didn't want to get caught like Jerry Lee Lewis. What a pedophile.

Please sign your comments (by typing "~~~~"). Whether some factoid is "well known" -- to whom? the denizens of gossip websites? -- is beside the point. Was there a criminal conviction? Or is there any other evidence? -- Hoary 05:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Military service

We read:

Presley sailed to Europe on the USS General George M. Randall (AP-115) and served in Germany, attaining the rank of sergeant. During his service, he met many people in the US Army bases he was trained at, and abroad, both in Germany and in France, where he travelled on leave on at least three different occasions. Years later, many still recall with much admiration and affection their time together with Presley, no matter how casual or short-lived the encounter may have been. [. . .] In 1992, a book was published about Presley's time in Germany titled Soldier Boy Elvis, written by his Sergeant Ira Jones.

For anybody who's desperately interested in the "Elvis-was-gay!" angle, note how the third sentence makes Presley sound like a queen!

Um, back to the subject. Yes, this somewhat gushing description is unsourced. And at the end there's a seemingly pointless plug for a book. Or is mention of this book meant to imply that it's the source of the material on his military service? (I really don't know as I'm not a Presley fan.) -- Hoary 08:47, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Nick Adams fondly recalled his encounters with Presley. ... added at 19:23, 23 April 2006 by 195.93.21.65

The "shocking truth" of what may have happened

I'm removing the following chunk from "Mama's boy":

In his book, Double Trouble: Bill Clinton and Elvis Presley in a Land of No Alternatives (2000), reputed author Greil Marcus cites some reactions to the "shocking truth" that Gladys may have had "years of bliss with Elvis in her bed, or she in his": " 'It makes sense,' said Adrian Sibley of the BBC's The Late Show. 'America has brought Elvis up to date: now he needs therapy just like everybody else. Don't they have twelve-step programs for incest survivors?' 'It makes sense,' said Jip Golsteijn, pop critic for the Amsterdam Telegraaf. 'It's what I heard again and again in Tupelo, years ago. Nobody meant it as a condemnation. Given the way Elvis and Gladys were about each other, it was simply the conclusion everyone drew.' " (p. 6) Be that as it may,

Even by Wikipedia fancruft standards of prolixity, listing reactions to the "shocking truth" of what may have happened seems tertiary barrel-scraping. (Yes, yes, Greil Marcus is a reputed author. I infer that the reputation was made earlier.) -- Hoary 14:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

The fact is that you have removed a paragraph based on a book by reputed Presley expert Greil Marcus. This material shows that the claims by Elvis's stepmother Dee Presley were widely discussed not only in America but also in Europe. You may also remember that, in addition, Professor David S. Wall has demonstrated that the world-wide Elvis fan clubs refused to endorse Dee Presley's claims. See [25]. The problem is that there are a few Elvis fans who endeavor to suppress critical voices from the Wikipedia article, although the material has been published in books and articles on Elvis. Interestingly, another user wrote concerning this problem in October last year:

what I find weird is that whenever someone writes something "bad" about Elvis (be it drug abuse, derogatory nicknames, sexual orientation or the way he died ), somehow the "system" prevents those things from staying there for too long. See [26].

One of these people who prevented critical remarks from staying in the article was User:Ted Wilkes who is now blocked for one year. Count Chocula and another anonymous user (see [27], [28], [29]) seem to follow his footsteps, as they are deleting well-sourced references which are not in line with their personal opinion. A Wikipedia article is not a fan site. It should give a balanced view of the star, his life, his personal relationships and his music. Remember that Professor Wall says that one of the strategies of the worldwide Elvis industry is " 'community policing' to achieve governance at a distance and typically effected through the various fan clubs and appreciation societies to which the bulk of Elvis fans belong. These organisations have, through their membership magazines, activities and sales operations, created a powerful moral majority that can be influenced in order to exercise its considerable economic power." To my mind, a similar strategy seems to be at work concerning the Wikipedia article. Significantly, User:Hoary makes personal attacks against me calling me "dread 141" on the User talk:DropDeadGorgias page. There he claims, without evidence, that he has "a hunch that a lot of the quoting by 141 is highly selective (or worse)" (although I have given the exact page numbers for my quotes) and that he "can't assume good faith" (see [30]), simply because my contributions are not in line with his positive view of Elvis. This strongly suggests that this user may have a personal agenda. Be that as it may, I am happy to see that another user now seems to share my view, though I am not satisfied with the quality of his/her contributions. Perhaps this user can add some direct quotes from the sources he/she has used. Onefortyone 17:13, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

A Wikipedia article is indeed not a fansite. It's also not a bottomless pit into which one shovels as much "information" as possible, especially when that "information" is the reactions of people to stories of what "may have happened" (dressed up as the "shocking truth"). An encyclopedia article needs to be moderately concise, or so I'd thought.

I'm interested by the claim that an article on someone like Presley "should give a balanced view of the star, his life, his personal relationships and his music": I'd have put music first (though I realize that more dollars were made off the movies), and his "personal relationships" last (if anywhere), but I notice that 141 puts music last.

I can't speak of the motivation of "Elvis fans" as I know next to nothing about them and certainly am not one of them: I've never seen any of Presley's movies and don't much want to, and while I enjoy some of his earliest music I'm bored or repelled by the rest. (Actually my favorite Presley song is the Bonzos' "Canyons of Your Mind".) I have no positive view of Presley and no negative one: I have fairly clear views about his music and a general idea (quite possibly mistaken) about his movies, and I derive considerable and presumably unintended amusement from photos of him in some of his stage outfits.

Calling Onefortyone "dread 141" is a direct expression of my PoV: I dread the way 141 shovels quantities of sensationalist tittle-tattle into the articles on celebs of the past, as clearing up the result takes so much time. I appreciate the way 141 is now clarifying sources, so the dread is abating very slightly; for it to abate more, all 141 has to do is share my notion that such matters as what Presley did or didn't do (and did and didn't want to do) with his dick are of negligible importance; their full, lip-smacking descriptions better left for Playboy (on occasion a good magazine, of course), National Enquirer, etc. -- Hoary 00:17, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed the section alleging that Presley had an incestous relationship with his mother. User Onefortyone sources are utterly uncredible and include an unpublished manuscript by Presley's step-mother who bare knew Presley. Furhter, Goldman is considerd, at best, a hack and while it's important to note his book it is not appropriate to give it such credence as User Onefortyone would have us give it. Again, the man's life has been utterly serialized and this article should not include every crackport theory as "fact". Lochdale

I recently picked up Greil Marcus' book, Double Trouble: Bill Clinton and Elvis Presley in a Land of No Alternatives (2001), and it simply does not support what User OnefortyOne has added to the text regarding Presley's relationship with his mother. Marcus dismisses any notion that Presley had incestual relations with his mother and makes it quite clear in Dead Elvis: A Chronicle of a Cultural Obsession (1991), that Goldman's research is third-rate and fundamentally unreliable. As such, I have removed the section added by User Onefortyone. Lochdale

So what's significant about Presley, anyway?

My fellow-editor Onefortyone is keen to inform the world of various accounts (by "reputed" writers!) of Presley's "relationships". I thought the guy was a singer. Didn't he do "Heartbreak Hotel", "Hound Dog", and "Blue Suede Shoes"? Maybe I mistyped one or more of "heartbreak", "hound" and "suede", or maybe the find function in my browser isn't working, but I don't see any of these mentioned in the article. Am I wrong -- is Presley primarily significant for such matters as his "relationships"? -- Hoary 03:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Jkelly 04:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Presley is famous for stealing black music. ... added at 15:42, 24 April 2006 by 195.93.21.65

Thank you Mr/Ms IP number. "Stole"? I dunno about that. But certainly his version of "Hound Dog" isn't up to that by Big Mama Thornton.

Hmm, hours have passed, but nobody beside Jkelly has agreed with me yet. Jkelly, perhaps you and me are in a minority. OK, let's put aside such, uh, trivia as "Hound Dog" and concentrate on what seems to fascinate Onefortyone, the Really Big Question: Was Elvis a Good Lay? I read the section of the article that's about Patricia Presley and her rivals with mounting excitement (Not!), and at the end concluded that the tell-all books disagree over the monumentally important (to some of us, though not me) questions of: (i) Did Elvis fuck Patricia before they got married? and (ii) Did he fuck all those other girls too? So as long as the tittle-tattlers disagree (and until Mouton De Gruyter or similar brings out a definitive, peer-reviewed, scholarly monograph on the subject), I suggest that all of this he-said she-said merits a footnote at best. And indeed I chucked most of this crap (aka "information") into footnotes.

I think you chucked too much of this stuff into footnotes. Therefore I have rewritten the relationships section, adding some material and shortening the mama's boy paragraph a bit. Onefortyone 22:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

And now a sanity check, please. Didn't Presley record something called "Heartbreak Hotel", and if so, isn't it worth a mention in this article? -- Hoary 15:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

You are right. Perhaps there are experts who can write some additional paragraphs on Elvis's music. Last year I started the Alphabetical list of all of Elvis Presley's songs, including some errors, of course, as I attributed a few songs by Elvis impersonators to Presley. But in the meantime, others also contributed to this section and may have corrected most of these errors (I hope). I also added some notes to the gospel section. Furthermore, I started the section on Colonel Tom Parker and on Elvis's drug abuse. You can see that I am not only interested in Elvis's relationships. However, I still think that the singer's relationships are an important part of his life. Many people are interested in these matters and many books have been written on the subject. Onefortyone 22:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

So bad it's good

It's with a touch of regret that I've rewritten what was previously:

By that measure, and according to Gregory Sandows, Music Professor at Columbia University, Elvis was all at once a bass, a baritone and a tenor, a most unique attribute amongst singers of any gender, both in the classical and popular music fields.

(Emphasis added.) I'm used to the mealy-mouthed use of the linguistic term "gender" to stand for sex. OK. But for humans (as opposed to, say, bees), how many "genders" are there? For the record, yes, I would agree that being "all at once a bass, a baritone and a tenor" would be "a most unique attribute" amongst singers of the female "gender". -- Hoary 09:08, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Autopsy report (which we don't have)

Presley died. That meant that he couldn't make any more records (or continue to be "an American phenomenon"). Why or how he died seems of little importance to me, but clearly it's of huge importance to the simple souls who consume tabloids, etc.

An autopsy did its best to determine how he died. The results won't be available for more than a decade.

In the meantime, journalists and others are welcome to speculate, and to recycle stories. Is this encyclopedic? I think it isn't, which is why I chucked it into a footnote. (It was that, or a move into "Trivia", or deletion.) Without any edit summary, let alone any explanation here, some person has pulled it all back.

What should be done? -- Hoary 04:36, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Here is Peter Guralnick on Elvis's death:

Warlick found a stain on the bathroom carpeting, too, that seemed to indicate where Elvis had thrown up after being stricken, apparently while seated on the toilet. It looked to the medical investigator as if he had "stumbled or crawled several feet before he died." ... nine pathologists from Baptist cond acted the examination in full knowledge that the world was watching but that the results would be released to Elvis' father alone. ... Francisco announced the results of the autopsy, even as the autopsy was still going on. Death, he said, was "due to cardiac arrhythmia due to undetermined heartbeat." ... But there were in fact at that time no results to report. The autopsy proper went on for another couple of hours. Specimens were collected and carefully preserved, the internal organs were examined and the heart found to be enlarged, a significant amount of coronary atherosclerosis was observed, the liver showed considerable damage, and the large intestine was clogged with fecal matter, indicating a painful and longstanding bowel condition. The bowel condition alone would have strongly suggested to the doctors what by now they had every reason to suspect from Elvis' hospital history, the observed liver damage, and abundant anecdotal evidence: that drug use was heavily implicated in this unanticipated death of a middle-aged man with no known history of heart disease who had been "mobile and functional within eight hours of his death." It was certainly possible that he had been taken while "straining at stool," and no one ruled out the possibility of anaphylactic shock brought on by the codeine pills he had gotten from his dentist, to which he was known to have had a mild allergy of long standing. The pathologists, however, were satisfied to wait for the lab results, which they were confident would overrule Dr. Francisco's precipitate, and somewhat meaningless, announcement, as indeed they eventually did. There was little disagreement in fact between the two principal laboratory reports and analyses filed two months later, with each stating a strong belief that the primary cause of death was polypharmacy, and the BioScience Laboratories report, initially filed under the patient name of "Ethel Moore," indicating the detection of fourteen drugs in Elvis' system, ten in significant quantity. Codeine appeared at ten times the therapeutic level, methaqualone (Quaalude) in an arguably toxic amount, three other drugs appeared to be on the borderline of toxicity taken in and of themselves, and "the combined effect of the central nervous system depressants and the codeine" had to be given heavy consideration. See Peter Guralnick, Careless Love:The Unmaking of Elvis Presley (1999), pp.651-2.

This is certainly one of the best sources. We do have laboratories reports which strongly suggest that the excessive consumption of drugs caused the singer's death. This must be mentioned in the article. Onefortyone 23:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

He committed suicide because his career was over, he was mentally ill, feared he had bone cancer, and was going blind from glaucoma. ... added at 19:27, 26 April 2006 by 195.93.21.65

Thanks for the comment. Next time, please sign your comment: you do this with "~~~~". Whether it was suicide is something that was presumably determined as reliably as possible by the autopsy report. That won't be available for more than a decade. The allegation that he was mentally ill is a new one to the article. (Speaking as a layman -- and one whose appreciation of fashion is very amateurish -- I find mental illness compatible with his taste in shirts. But I'm not qualified to judge.) Your IP number has already been used to say that Presley was a Nazi. A Nazi, mentally ill ... what ever are you going to allege next? Whatever it is, do please try to provide some evidence. -- Hoary 02:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Stealing black music, revisited

Some IP has plonked in a new section, "Controversy", a paragraph that accuses Presley of just about everything but mainlining heroin and screwing his pooch. (I'm particularly amused by the way his momma-in-law accused him of screwing his mother and Nick Adams. Presumably this was on separate occasions, but was it a threesome with raunchy Dee each time, was Dee hiding under the bed, or how else does she know?)

But let's put aside all of that for a moment and concentrate on this bit: Many artists, including Chuck D, Eminem and Marlon Brando have accused Presley of stealing black music. A recent poll indicated that 90% of young black people in America hate Elvis.

I'm surprised to hear that 90% of young people in America (the US?) of any pigmentation have even heard of this old guy who died before they were born: it doesn't ring true. (If he were alive, he'd be even older than Dubya!)

Chuck D, Eminem and Brando: are/were they IP attorneys? Whatever their level of expertise in these matters: (1) Are they accusing Presley, his agent, his employer, or some combination of not paying royalties? (2) Are they accusing him/them of forcing black artists into accepting unfairly low royalties? Or (3) are they just noting the fact -- a sadly obvious one -- that Presley got rich (and people got richer off him) whereas black artists didn't and indeed often died neglected and poor? I'm willing to believe (1) or (2) but I (and readers) want proof. As for (3), I believe it already (Wynonie Harris, etc etc) -- but why not write this up in some articulate way? And if it's (3), you'll have to say how he stole black music: sure, "Hound Dog" and some others were/are black, but most of Presley's money-spinners sound utterly white to me (and that's not intended as a compliment).

My uneducated guess is that during the early part of his career Presley benefited from, and black artists suffered from, a racism that was pervasive in the entertainment industry and society as a whole; and during the later part he was pretty much in a different world. -- Hoary 13:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

In this edit, Urthogie removed what he or she terms a "bullshit hoax" but which in fact is the entire "Controversy" section. Now, I happen to agree that much of this section looks like bullshit, but the removal still looks odd: after all, one or two of the issues it raises seem more important than all the drivel that comes earlier in the article about Presley's "performance" with this or that hottie. My ass is complete, "cultural theory" bores me, and I realize that being influenced isn't stealing, but I also realize that Elvis and the "Colonel" got rich and that Roy Brown, Wynonie Harris and others did not. So I'd like a lucid, informed explanation of what Presley (or his writers) did to black music and its creators. -- Hoary 15:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Right. The removal seems more like dismissing an uncited passage in the midst of other uncited passages because it doesn't sound credible. While the arbitrary statistics don't necessarily make a strong case, this section needs to be rewritten and expanded upon. MOD 16:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Right. Let's begin with removing the part that said he shtupped his mother. I'm all for establishing the fact that he benefited because racist society focused on white acts. The claims of motherfucking, under the guise of "controversy" is what led me to revert.--Urthogie 17:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I notice that the section has been replaced. You know, it is a shame that there aren't any mainstream sources on the subject of this article, forcing us to turn to the tabloid press for information... Jkelly 21:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

This is all very close to being original research. --ElKevbo 20:55, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

The notion that he "stole" black music is also very simplistic and ignores the profound influence of country, gospel and religion had on Presley. He was, of course, influenced by black musicians. That said, there really wasn't anyone like him, black or white, who fused various strands of music together with such force. Further, he was unique in how he moved on stage and his entire act. His movements etc. bear closer resemblance to white babtist ministers than black blues musicians. I don't believe that there is any real controversy over this issue as most reputable writers do not accuse him of stealing anything.Lochdale

Oh yes they do. Most black teenagers in America hate Presley because he was an evil racist who stole black music.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.65 (talk • contribs) .

Hey Mr/Ms IP, it's really easy to sign your comments. You do it like this: "~~~~". Let's put aside "evil racist" for a moment, and concentrate on the rest. Precisely what do you mean by "stealing" music? And just what evidence do you have that "most black teenagers in America [the US?] hate Presley"? You don't have to explain either claim, but do please choose between either (a) explaining a claim and (b) refraining from repeating it. I'm rather hoping that you will explain, because the claims interest me. NB would-be explanations without supporting evidence will be of no interest to me. -- Hoary 02:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Controversy section

I cut the 'Criticism and controversy section'. Here's why:

In 1957 he was quoted as saying, "The only thing black people can do for me is shine my shoes and buy my records."

Snopes call it false, citing Presley: "I never said anything like that, and people who know me know I wouldn't have said it."

Many artists, including Chuck D, Eminem and Marlon Brando have accused Presley of stealing black music.

No direct quotes, somewhat questionable for an encyclopedia, and quite frankly, is Marlon Brando's opinion entirely relevant? Sure, I loved him in The Godfather, but...

Furthermore, his open support for President Richard Nixon at the height of the Vietnam War, together with his attempt to join J. Edgar Hoover's FBI at the height of its campaign against political dissent, have sparked allegations[citation needed] that Presley was just as right-wing and narrow-minded as many of his critics in the 1950s.

Who alleged it? When?

In 1970 he asked Nixon to ban the Beatles from America, denouncing them to the President as "very anti-American" and "drug addicts". Paul McCartney recorded in "The Beatles Anthology" how ironic it was that Presley was himself a drug addict who would die less than seven years later from the long-term effects of his addictions. Ringo Starr said he found the whole experience very sad, and claimed the only real threat was to Presley's career.

With some refactoring, this actually might fit into the article.

Most fans try to downplay these facts, insisting that Presley's actions were influenced by his excessive use of prescription drugs.

No source can support "what most fans" try to do. Even "some fans" is hard to back up.

Deltabeignet 04:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Its been cut a number of times for these same reasons, but unfortunately someone on an AOL IP keeps putting it back.--Count Chocula 05:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, Count, perhaps it's not the verifiability of these claims that concerns Mr/Ms AOL; rather, it's their truthiness. -- Hoary 07:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Some clarifications

I'm not familiar with the sources the anonymous editor may have used, but I also did some research which may help to clarify the dispute. On page 17 of his book, The Golden Age Is in Us: Journeys and Encounters, 1987-1994, reputed author Alexander Cockburn says,

Tom [Schmidt] told me something I'd not known, that Elvis said back in the late fifties, when asked about his views on a certain situation: "I've only two uses for niggers – they can buy my records and they can shine my shoes." Tom was driving through the South at the time and found a lot of black people without much use for Presley.

What's more important, here is Michael T. Bertrand, Race, Rock, and Elvis (University of Illinois Press, 2000):

There are several reasons why no subject associated with Presley causes greater controversy and conflict than that of race. He was, after all, a white performer whose financial success rested upon the songs and styles of black artists historically excluded from the popular music marketplace. Second, he hailed from the former slave-holding and segregated South. Third, he belonged to a white working class traditionally antagonistic to its African American counterpart. Fourth, upon achieving affluence, he purchased an antebellum-style mansion in Memphis that to many recalled the Old South as represented in Gone with the Wind. Fifth, he associated with racially conservative politicians such as George Wallace and Richard Nixon. Finally, he presumably uttered a racial slur on at least one public occasion during his career. (p.26)

As the bearer of too many painful images and memories, Presley has become a symbol of all that was oppressive to the black experience in the Western Hemisphere. (p.27)

Many have almost systematically insisted that Presley, "looking the part of a hillbilly racist," generated nothing but distrust within the black community. A black southerner in the late 1980s captured that sentiment: "To talk to Presley about blacks was like talking to Adolph Hitler about the Jews." One journalist wrote upon the singer's death that African Americans refused to participate in the numerous eulogies dedicated to him. (p.200)

It was claimed that Presley had either made his racist comment in Boston or on Edward R. Murrow's Person to Person. (p.221) The author adds on p.222:

A southern background combined with a performing style largely associated with African Americans had let to "bitter criticism by those who feel he stole a good thing," as Tan [magazine] surmised. So, too, did Jet.

However, Bertrand also asserts that the racial aspersion was fabricated and

appeared nothing more than "the natural result of [Presley's] success, coupled with his Mississippi birthplace. ... The incident initiated the downward slide of Presley's status within the African American community.

The author further says that "the offending statement passed into fact."

For as one black Tennessean declared when queried about Presley in the mid-1980s, so, too, have others believed: "You know what he said? All I want from blacks is for them to buy my records and shine my shoes. That's in the record." (p.222)

In addition, Bertrand cites Robert Kaiser who

wrote in 1970, "It was Elvis who first dared give the people a music that hit them where they lived, deep in their emotions, yes, even below their belts. Other singers had been doing this for generations, but they were black." According to Hank Ballard, the rhythm and blues artist who first recorded "The Twist," which Chubby Checker popularized, "In white society, the movement of the butt, the shaking of the leg, all that was considered obscene. Now here's this white boy that grinding and rolling his belly and shaking that notorious leg. I hadn't even seen the black dudes doing that." (p.223)

However, in his peer-reviewed study, Bertrand also documents black enthusiasm for Elvis and cites the racially mixed audiences that flocked to the new music at a time when adults expected separate performances for black and white audiences. But the quotes I have given above clearly show that the Controversy section should not be deleted. Onefortyone 20:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

This time I have to agree with much of what you say, 141. And thank you for using your time well. (Isn't this issue more interesting and significant than that of who Presley porked?) The way our tight-lipped friend Mr/Ms Not-Logged-In keeps adding this half-baked section is pretty stupid, but I'm no fonder of the indignant mass deletions (more on which below). However, since the article now seems to be a battleground between those who seem to want to accuse Presley of almost everything imaginable and those who seem unwilling to think for a moment that any unwelcome allegation might have something to it, and since my additions of {{citeneeded}} are routinely mass-deleted, there seems little point in my hanging around. I'll hope that one side or other gets bored (or banned). -- Hoary 06:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Certainly this issue is also important and should not be suppressed, though I am less interested in racist politics. Perhaps some other experts can rewrite the section and add some facts. Onefortyone 13:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I cut some of the unsourced text (sorry about the {{citeneeded}}s!) and gave a reference for the last {{citeneeded}}. I don't really object to a lot of the content as much as I object to the lack of references; personally, I never liked Elvis much. The thing about Elvis trying to get the Beatles banned, for example, is fine with some quotes and page numbers. Deltabeignet 06:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

According to the contemporaneous memo by Egil "Bud" Krogh, deputy counsel to the President, Nixon had a conversation with Elvis about the matter. On page 420 of his book, Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley, Peter Guralnick writes,

The Beatles, Elvis said, as if he were tentatively trying out a new tack, had been a focal point for anti-Americanism. They had come to this country, made their money, then gone back to England where they fomented anti-American feeling. "The President," Krogh's memo continued, "nodded in agreement and expressed some surprise." ... Presley indicated to the President in a very emotional manner that he was "on your side." Presley kept repeating that he wanted to be helpful, that he wanted to restore some respect for the flag, which was being lost.

The singer "also mentioned that he is studying Communist brainwashing..." On page 426, Guralnick adds,

Presley indicated that he is of the opinion that the Beatles laid the groundwork for many of the problems we are having with young people by their filthy unkempt appearances and suggestive music while entertaining in this country during the early and middle 1960's. He advised that the Smothers Brothers, Jane Fonda, and other persons in the entertainment industry of their ilk have a lot to answer for in the hereafter for the way they have poisoned young minds by disparaging the United States in their public statements and unsavory activities. Onefortyone 18:02, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Yep. Elvis was a far right nutcase. ... comment added at 04:38, 7 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65

Hello, AOL user. I note that you're a frequent contributor of such insights to this talk page. Can you not learn either (a) to make them more persuasive (with evidence) or (b) to sign them? -- Hoary 05:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Mass deletions

If you're going to delete a wodge from this or any article:

1. Explain yourself in the discussion page
2. Be candid and informative in the edit summary
3. Clear up any mess after yourself (please see the end of the footnotes)

Thank you. -- Hoary 06:55, 29 April 2006 (UTC) (Footnote problem fixed Hoary 07:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC))

Citations

Can we get some more tags added to this article? There's still a few paragraphs that are readable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.247.17.218 (talk • contribs)

New image

Elvis in 1957

This image was recently uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and appears to be free of copyright. It looks like a good candidate for the top image to me (we should use free images at the top where availiable). Arniep 22:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Do we really need another pictoral reminder of Presley's awful movies? ... comment added at 22:51, 17 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Since the article doesn't have a single pictorial reminder of Presley's awful movies, I think adding this would be a good idea, yes. If the page is judged too heavy (in bytes), one could drop one of the Presley-with-bimbo photos, or the uninteresting CD cover. -- Hoary 06:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Suicide

The article should explain that Presley overdosed on ten different drugs because he was going blind from glaucoma and feared he had bone cancer, plus the 10,000 drugs he had taken in 1977 alone had damaged his brain. It's a shame the autopsy report will not be published for some years to come. ... comment added at 22:51, 17 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

This is stunning stuff, Mr/Ms IP! "10,000 drugs" -- not, say, 9,825 or 10,226. Did Presley perhaps have a goal of reaching this nice round number? It's only a shame that the autopsy report will not be published for some years to come for those people who have a tabloidy interest in celebrity expiry. I don't care how Presley died and for a moment I thought that publication would be good as it would shut people up. But no -- after all, if the autopsy report were published tomorrow, it wouldn't silence people enthralled by the image (true or entire fiction) of Presley defecating his way to eternity: if they were proved right, they'd go on and on about it; if they weren't, they'd cry whitewash. So, Mr/Ms IP, lacking the autopsy report, where do your factoids come from? National Enquirer, perhaps? Marlon Brando? Eminem? -- Hoary 06:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it's all factual and from the Internet Movie Database: "In 1977 alone, his personal physician Dr George Constantine Nichopoulos (usually referred to as "Dr Nick") had prescribed 10,000 hits of amphetamines, barbiturates, narcotics, tranquilizers, sleeping pills, laxatives, and hormones for Presley." ... comment added at 17:06, 30 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Well, IP, I see a difference between "10,000 drugs" and "10,000 hits". Also, this is from an unsigned trivia list. Do you really believe that unsigned trivia lists at IMDb are reliable sources for information about what went on between a dead celeb and his doctor? -- Hoary 04:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you really think an online encyclopedia which anybody can edit is any more reliable? ... comment added at 20:09, 31 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Is it more reliable? That depends on the article. Do I think that you have any interest in making this article more reliable? No I don't. Hoary 08:14, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, I'm interested in seeing the truth told about Presley's sordid life and vastly overrated career. The very concept of an encyclopedia anybody can edit is stupid. ... comment added at 16:18, 1 June 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Second biggest selling solo artist

Presley is actually the second biggest selling recording artist in history, after Michael Jackson, and the article should be corrected thus. The official Elvis website makes it clear they can only account for half a billion record sales worldwide, and it is believed that Crosby too may still be ahead of Presley. ... comment added by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Mr/Ms IP, you might find this interesting. And what's the problem with "~~~~"? Can't locate it on the keyboard? -- Hoary 02:19, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Further, Mr/Ms IP, here is the relevant part of the article after it had been "corrected" by you: Presley remains the second best-selling solo artist in popular music history, after his son-in-law [[Michael Jackson]], according to the RIAA.<ref>RIAA, [http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/010804.asp Elvis Presley Now Best Selling Solo Artist In U.S. History] (January 8, 2004).</ref> As you might guess from the title of that reference, it does not say what you say it says. (Indeed, it doesn't even mention Jackson.) Frankly, I don't care whether "best-selling solo artist" was the king of big collars or the king of nose-jobs. I'm perfectly willing to be persuaded that it was the latter: please present convincing evidence in an intelligent way. -- Hoary 02:30, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

So, Mr/Ms IP, you now take the trouble to delete the reference when editing the page. You changed from an article saying one thing with (possibly inadequate or faulty) evidence to one saying something else with no evidence. How about providing some evidence? Incidentally, Presley fans (among whom I am not numbered) are likely to look askance at whatever evidence you do provide, so it would be wise to argue your point on this talk page. And remember, signing ("~~~~") is really easy. -- Hoary 10:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Presley's music, which he stole from black culture, sounds so unbelievably dated. Most teenagers have no idea who he was and would just laugh at his pathetic ruined career. Michael's music on the other hnad sounds like it was recorded yesterday. He has sold infinitely more records than Fat Man, and will launch an enormous comeback album at the end of 2007. ... contributed at 21:50, 22 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Interesting that you should say that, Mr/Ms IP. I too would have imagined that lots of teenagers wouldn't have any idea of who he was. But interestingly we read in this edit that Most black teenagers in America hate Presley because he was an evil racist who stole black music. The author of that comment? Why, that tireless contributor to this talk page 195.93.21.65! In order to hate him, wouldn't they have to know who he was? -- Hoary 05:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Presley is not the biggest selling solo artist

That spurious claim needs to be removed from the introduction, because both Michael Jackson and Bing Crosby have sold far more records, and that can be easily proven. Michael is the biggest selling solo artist in history, and Christmas continues to bring Bing ahead of Presley every year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.67 (talk • contribs) 11:02, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Please provide the evidence and I'm sure that someone will be happy to make the change! --ElKevbo 16:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Fine. How about this:

category ---- Elvis Presley ----- Bing Crosby

weeks at #1 --------75 ----------------173

1. top 30 hits -------85 ---------------- 383

1. number 1 hits -----18 ---------------- 41

consecutive weeks at the #1 position ---16 (1956) --------- 23 (1944)

most songs in top 30 in one year -------10 (1956) --------- 27 (1939)

total points --------- 33,415 ------------125,899

acted in movies -----31 (no awards) ---- 60 (5 Academy Awards)

The ONLY thing Elvis fans can use is the fact that Elvis was awarded 51 gold or platinum records for recording sales, as compared to only 23 for Bing. However, the RCA did not begin certifying gold records until 1958. Who knows how many hundreds of unofficial gold and platinum records Bing would therefore qualify for? Bing was only available on 78s, yet he consistently sold far more than Presley when people had considerably less money to spend. "White Christmas" was the biggest selling single for 55 years, from 1942 until 1997. He was the first recipient of the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award, and was the biggest selling recording artist in history until the early 1980s, when Michael Jackson began to take over. More information can be found at http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/mus.htm. Bing Crosby, during the 1930s and 1940s, was more popular than Elvis Presley, the Beatles and Michael Jackson COMBINED.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.65 (talk • contribs)

While poorly edited, that page is quite interesting. -- Hoary 11:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Mistake in intro

The introduction claims Presley is the biggest selling solo artist. This is in fact a complete falsehood, as both Bing Crosby and Michael Jackson have sold far more records worldwide. The spurious claim about Presley's sales needs to be removed immediately. (195.93.21.67 07:09, 4 June 2006 (UTC))

The claims in the page mentioned above are interesting. But they don't mention Jackson. -- Hoary 11:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Elvis's sexual ambivalence

There should be a paragraph on Elvis's sexual ambivalence in the article, as it is subject of several peer-reviewed studies.

• On page 553 of their book, Substance Abuse: A Comprehensive Textbook (2004), Joyce H. Lowinson, Pedro Ruiz, Robert B. Millman and John G. Langrod mention the "idealization of Elvis as an androgynous culture hero."
• On p.229 of her study, Listening To The Sirens: Musical Technologies of Queer Identity from Homer to Hedwig (University of California Press, 2005), Judith Ann Peraino says, "Beginning with the mascara and pompadours of Little Richard and Elvis Presley in the 1950s, rock musicians have long presented themselves as conundrums of race and gender for adolescent contemplation."
• According to Reina Lewis and Peter Horne (eds.), Outlooks: Lesbian and Gay Sexualities and Visual Cultures (Routledge, 1996), "prints of Elvis Presley appeared to speak directly to the gay community". (p.20)
• When talking about the "antagonism of males to females' idols" and stars such as Rudolph Valentino and "Johnnie Ray (who also had homosexual connections)", Darden Asbury Pyron, in his book Liberace: An American Boy (University of Chicago Press, 2001), adds that Elvis Presley "possessed a certain early reputation as a sissy." (p.448)

There are many more academic studies of this kind. Onefortyone 22:43, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

It's lucky Presley overdosed in 1977, otherwise he would have died of AIDS along with his friend Liberace. Then there would be no fascination with the dead racist loser. ... contributed at 04:09, 25 May 2006 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

Mr/Ms IP, I think we all know by now that you believe that Presley was a racist (for which you provide no proof) who "stole" black music (for which you provide no proof) and that he sold fewer records than Michael Jackson (for which you provide no proof) and that he died while on the john (for which, etc.), took some staggeringly large and round number of drugs, and was in every conceivable way utterly disgusting. Thank you. We got the message. Now please either (a) go away, or (b) say something that's both intelligent (yes, I'm open to evidence that, for example, Jackson sold more records than Presley) and signed ("~~~~"). -- Hoary 07:20, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

There are numerous anecdotes which prove Presley's racism. Stealing black music was in itself racist. It's well known that Michael Jackson and Bing Crosby have sold far more records than Presley. Btw, Elvis died from a drug overdose on the can weighing 260 lbs!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.65 (talk • contribs)

A section where User:195.93.21.65 (contributions) can moan about Presley

Loser and James Dean wannabe

The article should mention how Presley was obsessed with James Dean, would watch "Rebel Without a Cause" over and over, and that it was his Dean obsession that caused him to make 31 stupid movies which only proved he couldn't act at all. ... contributed at 12:08, 28 May 2006 by 195.93.21.65, a frequent contributor to this talk page who has been repeatedly and politely asked to sign his or her contributions with "~~~~"

List of controversial subjects

Heh, saw this article on the list of controversial subjects, and wanted to make an offer to be a neutral party here when appropriate. I have never edited this article, nor do I care to. I don't care whether Elvis is gay or straight, Fat Elvis or Skinny Elvis, obsessed or not obsessed with James Dean. I just don't care. For that reason, I can be neutral about whether Wikipedia rules are being applied appropriately here. Why am I interested -- because I DO edit on controverisal 9/11 conspiracy theory articles, and know that a neutral would be useful there, but seldom seen. Call it my offer to be a good Wikipedian. Cheers. Morton devonshire 02:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Splendid! Stick around. -- Hoary 03:45, 2 June 2006 (UTC)