Talk:Elvis Presley/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 34

Vocal style and range

Meh, I found the "accepted" version of this subject inadaquately conveying Elvis' extraordinary vocal prowess and abilities, which are a huge part of his timeless legend and his success, so I added a few things which I feel improved it, but they were apparently rejected for the last inadaquate version. I knew it was a waste of time. Elvis will only adaquately be represented in the minds of those who actually know him and his music and his voice. Wiki won't do so and anyone reading it will be led astray. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.52.237 (talk) 14:54, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Did you notice the edit summary provided by the editor who reviewed your pending change? The reviewer noted some of the problems with your edit. Those are important principles to remember when considering adding content to any Wikipedia article, let alone a Featured Article. Another thing to bear in mind is our need to keep a tight reign on the size of this article, which already pushes the boundaries of acceptable size for a Wikipedia article. It must summarize Presley's entire life and career, so it's inappropriate to include much detail in the topical sections. I think it's possible one or two of those quotes could be worked into the narrative effectively, if references can be provided and it's done with care not to bloat the section. But of course other editors may disagree with me, feeling it says enough already. PL290 (talk) 15:52, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the IP only real fans can add POV statements and think its ok :) Moxy (talk) 16:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, POV statements, that's all. I added a few more pieces from quotes right here at the Wikipedia quote section about his vocal ability, and a comment or two of my own that I thought would more accurately convey the extent of his ability. But somehow the "racial issues" area of Elvis' page merits far more text here than his vocal talents (something important) do. Gotcha. I submit that some of the "reviewers and editors" making this page are not fully competent about Elvis and his career. Nothing about the several documented statements from people who actually worked with him in the studio regarding how he "arranged and produced" much of his (non-movie) music throughout his career either. Naw, that ain't important either. Can't find room for that tripe here. How about I add something about fried peanut butter and banana sandwiches? Will that stay here? "Featured article" eh? God help Elvis' actual "musical" legacy if left to Wikipedia, which unfortunately is where most people who don't know about him now look first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.15.170 (talk) 03:53, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi, whoever you are. If you want to improve this article, you'll need to post suggested edits on these talk pages for discussion with others - those people who have worked their asses off over (in some cases) years to drag this article from its sorry state to being a featured article. You make some points initially in your post that are very worthy of discussion, but then you go off on a regrettable sarcastic tangent, as if established editors are really only interested in crap like his dietary preferences. For the record, "something about fried peanut and banana sandwiches" wouldn't stay in the article, mainly because us 'old timers' have got more in common with you and your wishes than you seem to realize. It's these commonalities that enable editors to work together to improve the article, but no one person is likely to be happy with the entire contents because we all have to make compromises. I've had whole heaps of stuff deleted, changed, prodded and poked, and I'm still sore. There's no point in being sore when you make undiscussed, unilateral changes and they get reverted. Also, Wikipedia isn't the only web source of material on Presley and if anyone with half a brain wanted to find out about Presley, plenty of dedicated sites come up when you google the subject - and I'm quite sure that some of them will offer a take on Presley life - even his musical achievements and abilities - that you and I both prefer. But hey, this is Wikipedia, and the point is all these different sources tell a collective picture. What single source can ever be ideal? So let's sit down and share a peace pipe, agree that no one wants "tripe" in the article and let's discuss how the article might be improved. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 11:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

My apologies to you and other editors who are doing a good job here. I admit Elvis' page is a lot better than it used to be. I used to refuse to even enter it because it was so horrible and full of lies and unproven slanderous BS. It's a lot better now and looks like a decent page now, but I personally am not fully happy with how Elvis' musical legacy is portrayed, but as Elvis once sang, that's all right. I was ticked when my edits under "vocal style and range" were removed because if there is going to be an "edit" button to click into and edit something, then it's removed, what's the point of it? If there has to be a meeting at the round table first to discuss edits, good. It should be that way and especially with an icon like EP, but they should remove the edit buttons in that case. They give people the wrong idea and waste their time in the end when what they add is removed. I made the edits that were removed and I then suggested another edit here about Elvis arranging and producing much of his work himself, excluding much of the 60's "movie" songs which he detested, and that's something else that should absolutely be included by any reasonable measure, as it is documented by several people. I have some commentary about it myself in various books and such by various people who were with him, including studio engineers and musicians. I have seen others, and there are even some quotes here at Wiki about it. The "co-writer" of Heartbreak Hotel said he didn't recognize the song after Elvis was finished with it. Elvis totally rearranged it in the studio and even changed a few lyrics there, and the writer said Elvis deserved the credit that he got.

This was common throughout Elvis' career. Steve Sholes was listed as producer at RCA for the first half of EP's RCA career, but was mainly an A&R man and the extent of his job in the studio was mainly bringing in tunes he thought Elvis would like, and seeing to it that Elvis had what Elvis wanted in the studio. Much was the same later with Felton Jarvis. At the end of the day, he carried out what Elvis wanted, exactly how Elvis wanted it. Elvis ran the show, his was the last word from top to bottom in the studio. Vocals, arrangements, instrumentation, mixes, everything, and it's been well documented. Chips Moman produced his '69 Memphis sessions for the most part, but Elvis had some disagreements with him. He let Chips mainly have his way because he had agreed to it prior. There are accounts of Elvis going ballistic upon hearing a new song of his on the radio or when he heard the released record and it not sounding like he left it in the studio because it was tinkered with after. I feel this all should be included in his musical legacy. It's decades overdue. Peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.61.119 (talk) 06:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

These are good points you make, but it's still too early to start making contributions because, as was said by someone 3 paragraphs above,"you'll need to post suggested edits on these talk pages for discussion with others - those people who have worked their asses off over ... years to drag this article from its sorry state to being a featured article". There's a couple of article guardians who try to maintain ownership of this article, and they don't permit outsiders to make contributions. Thus, while admittedly slightly improved of its earlier frantic obsessions, this article is still stuck in a sorry state with little hope of improvement for a long time to come. The guardians still confuse Featured Article status with a good, useful encyclopedic article. For example, new contributions are deleted because they increase the length of the article, thereby jeopardizing the FA status of the article. And there continues to be a perverse obsession with topics like "Racial Issues", "Sex Symbol", and the sad details of how he died. Although the article maintains FA status by the skin of its teeth, it's based on lead, length, citations, & structure, not quality of content. Be patient. Santamoly (talk) 16:07, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Santamoly: You have repeatedly demonstrated that you are, in fact, uninterested in the quality of this article and incapable of contributing productively to its maintenance and improvement. Your baseless complaints about it and attacks on other contributors reveal nothing other than your own sorry state.

IP: I've had some time to take a close look at the edit you made that was reverted. It was clearly made in good faith, with the intent to improve the article, but there were several problems with it, which it would be helpful for you to recognize. Let's go over it, bit by bit:

• "Elvis Presley possessed an extraordinarily versatile voice and vocal range with amazing melodic tone and vocal control, which allowed him to excel in many different musical styles and genres and cover a vast musical landscape."

• This sentence is filled with puffery, hyped-up language inappropriate in most contexts to an encyclopedia article on any subject: "extraordinarily", "amazing", "vast". His ability to perform in "many different musical styles and genres" has been described in detail in the immediately preceding subsection, Genres—the phrase here adds nothing to the reader's understanding. The phrase "cover a vast musical landscape" is further redundant and vacuous.

• "Placido Domingo stated in 1994, 'His was the one voice I wish to have had, of all those emanating from singers in the popular music field.'"

• This is a strong quote, and a pertinent one, given the scholars' comparison of Presley's voice to operatic ones. It is worthy of inclusion, but it cannot be included without proper citation. That means direct, specific citation to a high-quality source. Please see our policy on verifiability, and recognize that sourcing standards for Featured Articles such as this are even higher than the norm.

• "Presley was the most commercially successful singer of rock and roll, but he also had great success with ballads and love songs, country, gospel, blues, R&B, pop, folk, and even semi-operatic and jazz standards."

• More redundancy. The breadth of genres in which he was successful is already made very clear in the article. I believe as well that "great success" in "folk" and "jazz standards" is a stretch. If you can properly source that, providing examples of his "great success" in those two genres, it might constitute a worthy addition to Genres, where they are currently not mentioned.

• "His voice, which developed into many voices as his career progressed, had a unique tonality and an extraordinarily unusual center of gravity, leading to his ability to tackle a range of songs and melodies which would be nearly impossible for most other popular singers to achieve."

• More puffery: "unique", "extraordinarily" (twice in four sentences!), "nearly impossible [for others]". Please understand, if you were writing your own critique of Presley, you would certainly be free to write this way. But, again, this kind of language and tone is not appropriate to an encyclopedia article. "As his career progressed" is superfluous verbiage—"which developed" does the job. (To improve your recognition of this prose problem, and improve your skills in this area, you might want to take a look at User:Tony1/Redundancy exercises: removing fluff from your writing.) There is still more redundancy with "range of songs and melodies" and much of the sentence does little more than rephrase and repeat the content of the following quote.

• "Columbia University music professor Gregory Sandows wrote, "'I suppose you'd had to call him a lyric baritone, although with exceptional high notes and unexpectedly rich low ones. But what is more important about Elvis Presley is not his vocal range, nor how high or low it extends, but where its center of gravity is. By that measure, Elvis was all at once a tenor, a baritone and a bass, the most unusual voice I've ever heard.'"

• Again, this quote is strong and pertinent. Again, it has no citation. Again, it needs to be cited to a high-quality source (you do understand that Wikiquote, however informative, is not considered a high-quality source for reference purposes, yes?). It also overlaps a bit with the existing Pleasants quote, so other editors may reasonably feel that it doesn't add enough of substance given its length. That is something to hash out here on Talk and reach a consensus about.

• [Extending existing Pleasants quote]: "Moreover, he has not been confined to one type of vocal production. In ballads and country songs he belts out full-voiced high G's and A's that an opera baritone might envy. He is a naturally assimilative stylist with a multiplicity of voices - in fact, Elvis' is an extraordinary voice, or many voices."

• The first sentence adds nothing to the reader's understanding. The second sentence is arguably useful. The content of the third sentence already appears in paraphrase at the subsection's conclusion, and is thus completely redundant. I'll note that in one edit, you actually aimed to add some form of the word "extraordinary" three times (this last one, in a quote). I warrant most contributors to this article think Presley is pretty extraordinary, but they understand that an encyclopedia article is not the place to gush about it.

To sum up: There was valuable material in your edit: the Domingo quote, definitely; the Sandows quote and part of the Pleasants quote, possibly. But none of that material (except the debatable addition to the Pleasants quote) could be accepted, because none of it was properly cited. Most of the rest of your edit was characterized by puffery and redundancy and was rightly reverted on substantive grounds. Once you become more experienced and skilled in meeting our sourcing and prose standards, I'm sure you'll be able to contribute productively to this Featured Article.—DCGeist (talk) 20:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, DCGeist. The only parts of all you display here that I wrote myself are the first example that you deem "puffery", and a stray word or two here or there. Probably 85 or 90% of what you mention above was taken from quotes here at Wiki that I used, not my words. If I wrote the entire section myself, there wouldn't be "redundancy" or "overlaps", but I knew I couldn't do that, so I just added a few pieces to further convey what I still think was lacking and remains lacking. If what I wrote myself is "puffery", so be it. I'd also like to see the "arranging and producing" aspect of EP's career addressed, but maybe that's irrelevant for a musical artist, or just Elvis, I don't know. It's been ignored in the article and right here. So be it. You can't please everyone. I don't represent Elvis. I'm not an Elvis Wikipedia watchdog. I don't have the time or desire to make repeated suggestions and hope one sees the light of day, or that it's even discussed. Elvis' page is a lot better than it was, at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.156.54.2 (talk) 03:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

If you have well-sourced information about Presley's control of arrangements and production on his non-soundtrack recordings, I think that could make a very valuable contribution to the article. What do you have?—DocKino (talk) 04:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

IP person, what you see above is an excellent example of the guard-dogs trying to assert ownership of this article. If they can't force contributors out by reverting edits, they resort to gratuitous insults. You're correct: Elvis' widely recognized arranging skills are not recognized here (along with many other important aspects of his life like his military accomplishments, his various airplanes, the importance of gospel music in his life, and his car collection), but also there's a whole lot of depraved rubbish that's maintained in place by the owners of the article, and that really brings down the quality of the content as some have rightly observed. The people guarding this article have never been to an Elvis concert, and have never seen any of his movies. Who in their right mind will try to edit an article that's owned by a crowd like this? Santamoly (talk) 01:16, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

In point of fact, what the IP person sees above is an excellent example of how article talk pages are used to improve the article:

• Step 1: a specific suggestion is made.
• Step 2: other editors respond, adding their own thoughts about the suggestion and, if they think it's a good idea, about what needs to be done to take it forward.

You should try it yourself sometime.

PL290 (talk) 06:29, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

@Santamoly. If I am one of those despicable guardians/guard-dogs you have identified, I'd like to know how you can justify the claim that "The people guarding this article have never been to an Elvis concert, and have never seen any of his movies". If I said I'd seen all of his films, would you believe me? Unfortunately, it is true; Tickle Me and Harem Holiday nearly lost me the will to live. But you see, it was all in the name of research and, as an artist who specializes in celebrity icons, Presley's looks and movement are a magnet to me. I've also been keen enough to fly from England to visit Graceland, the Sun Studios, and I've literally "touched the hem of his garment", namely his '68 Comeback leather suit. I am also a singer and have studied his vocal techniques - particularly his breath control to put over tender emotions in his 60's ballads. I am nothing special; other significant contributors have probably done way more than me to show a regard and respect for Presley, in spite of his faults. I rather think that such editors have more in common with you than you think. I recommend PL290's 2-step suggestion above and look forward to you making reasonable, considered contributions to these talk pages. I also agree with another of those pesky guard-dog types (Hi, Doc!), that well-sourced information about Presley's control of arrangements and production would be an excellent and well-deserved addition to this article. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 13:57, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

I have various quotes from various sources regarding EP's arranging and producing, from well-regarded books and from for example the big information booklets that come with the various EP boxed sets I have. Various quotes and statements from various people who worked with Elvis directly in the studio. Musicians, engineers, et. Back in those days and especially with early rock music, the "producer" credit was usually just given to the record label's A&R man et, as with Sholes at RCA. This continued in that fashion with Elvis and RCA through his career, because Elvis was old school in that sense and he never gave a crap about details like that. You didn't really hear much about who "produced" something in rock music until the 60's when it began with the Beatles and the other 60's bands listing who the actual producers were. Elvis was never concerned with who got that credit with his work, but from the several various accounts I have read from people I would call very reliable because they were right there with Elvis for years, Elvis was completely in charge in the studio. I don't know how I would relay these comments and quotes here to Wiki other than writing them and where they are from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.3.242.73 (talk) 07:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Well that sounds promising. I was hoping you'd actually name the sources here in Talk--could you do that, please? I mean literally providing the titles of the books, just so we can be assured that they meet our high-quality sourcing standards. That would be very helpful in ensuring the ground is secure for your additions. A couple of observations:

• This matter doesn't fit under any of our topical sections, so it would go under "History". We don't need a lot. I think two mentions, tops, each of a sentence or two would be appropriate: early in his career in to establish the point; late in his career to reaffirm it.
• I noted in one of your earlier contributions to this thread you said the following: "I was ticked when my edits under 'vocal style and range' were removed because if there is going to be an 'edit' button to click into and edit something, then it's removed, what's the point of it?... [T]hey should remove the edit buttons in that case. They give people the wrong idea and waste their time in the end when what they add is removed." I really hope you've gotten over that attitude. This is a Featured Article, which means a lot of work has already gone into it. Any additions have to meet very high standards of prose quality, of appropriate focus and emphasis, and of sourcing quality. As DCGeist detailed, your initial contribution did not meet those standards. That's nothing to be peeved about. Everyone here has learned, has developed their skills through similar experience. Please note again the advisory right under the "Save page" button: "If you do not want your writing to be edited...at will, then do not submit it here." Of course, "edited" includes "deleted" when that is appropriate. Trust me, the more comfortable you become with that fundamental ethic, the more effective your contributions here will be. DocKino (talk) 08:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Controlling contributions in this way doesn't do anything for quality. It's creates a situation where people with something of value won't contribute because, as the previous IP contributor pointedly puts it,"They give people the wrong idea and waste their time in the end when what they add is removed." The gatekeepers don't own this article, but they're acting as if they do. They say things like,"I think two mentions, tops, each of a sentence or two would be appropriate." They try to take an editor's sources and hijack them as their own ("[provide] the titles of the books, just so we can be assured that they meet our high-quality sourcing standards.") The result, inevitably, is a very low quality "FA" article. Technically it's FA (word-count, references, etc) , but the encyclopedic content is weak because of the severely limited scope of the article. We outsiders aren't going to write anything because we know our efforts will be deleted and disparaged by others who fully believe that the present fixed state of the article is far more important than what someone else is trying to contribute. Santamoly (talk) 03:24, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Everyone interested in maintaining and improving the quality of this article deeply appreciates your pledge not to write anything for it. Now buzz off so the focus can return to productive work. The so-called gatekeepers have managed to make this one of the best music biography articles on the web, and to keep it that way, despite the incessant whining, POV pushing, trivia wallowing ("his various airplanes"?! "his car collection"?!), and general caviling of useless time-and-effort wasters such as yourself, Santamoly.

What we have is an inexperienced contributor interested—unlike yourself—in making a positive contribution to this article. Does the contributor understand our verifiability standards? Bringing the sources to Talk first is a good way of making sure s/he does. Does the contributor understand our size limitations and requirements for the maintenance of focus and suitable emphasis? Suggesting benchmarks for length and location is a good way of making sure s/he does.—DCGeist (talk) 03:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay. I Love elvis and this video [1] shows his vocal range as D2-C#5. Let us add it to the article. AttilaBrady (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

LOL Moxy (talk) 05:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I think it would help most contributors, especially sincere ones and newbies, if suggested edits weren't mocked or dismissed without a modicum of polite explanation. Ta very much. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 06:16, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Dame the Elvis police got me. Moxy (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I was impressed by the Placido Domingo quote, as well. So I spent quite a bit of time digging around for a good source for it. I couldn't find anything even remotely close to our standards. I'm afraid it may be apocryphal. DocKino (talk) 23:01, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

A bit more on this: Our brethren at Wikiquote claim Placido said this "in an interview given to 'Hola' Magazine (Spanish version), as published in June of 1994." Still, no decent English-language source has ever published the supposed translation, and a search of Hola.com (whose search mechanism does seem half-broken) turns up nothing on the Spanish-language side. We remain a far way from verifying this quote, though I'd love to use it if we could. DocKino (talk) 02:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Would anything in this article or relating to it be of any use? I'm thinking of Dame Kiri's opinion as a substitute for Domingo, though it hardly constitutes a scintillating quote, the sentiment is the same [2] Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 03:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Zoning issues?

In the section about his burial, what does this mean: "After zoning issues were addressed"? Can you either explain in the text or provide a link please? As it stands, I have no idea what it means. It might be because I'm from the UK: it might be clear to Americans but the phrase is not universally understood, which is not an ideal situation in an international encyclopaedia. Thanks. 86.140.128.91 (talk) 14:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's to do with laws pertaining to use of land. I don't actually think that information is essential to the article; it just means that certain formalities were necessary for the reburial, but that hardly needs stating. Linking to Zoning or Zoning in the United States would be overkill, imo. I'm inclined to trim the sentence, unless someone objects. PL290 (talk) 16:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

More simply, it likely has to do with getting a zoning code variance to allow someone to be buried in their yard, a practice generally prohibited in the United States.JascalX (talk) 03:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Infobox image

Hey folks - I see the infobox image on this article change alott and would like to help generate a lasting consensus as to what it should be. It seems customary (and of the most encyclopedic value) to depict a persons face as clearly as possible in the infobox because those are the features humans can most readily identify and using a full body shot may provide alott of information not useful in identifying the subject and by decreasing the resolution of facial features wider shots are less informative; I would suggest this[3] or this[4] image from the commons for that reason. I would suggest using the 1970 image because its copyright status is much clearer; the jailhouse rock images, while being public domain in the US are still copyright in nations that dont apply the shorter term rule - this includes Canada which is one of the larger countries that make use of the English speaking version of Wikipedia. Id be happy to hear everyones opinion. Solid State Survivor (talk) 18:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

There has been a lasting consensus. (There have been two substitutions for the photo in this past week—one a willfully disruptive joke, the other an undiscussed change by an inexperienced editor.) You want to change that consensus. Fair enough, but please be clear on what you're asking for here.

I disagree, and believe we should stick with the current image. While giving a clear look at the singer's face, our present infobox image gives much more information than either of the two headshots you propose. As the article details, Presley was both famous and infamous for his dancing in the 1950s—it was almost as central to his persona as was his singing. An image that can give the reader some sense of his physical performance style in addition to a fine look at his face is extremely valuable.

As for your argument about the image's copyright status, that cuts both ways. We at Wikipedia, with our Florida-based servers, are happy to make widely accessible this superb public domain image to readers in countries whose restrictive copyright laws might well have cheated them of its informational value and aesthetic pleasure if we chose not to feature it. DocKino (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

As DocKino says, it was discussed before and this pic has stood for a while; I'm still quite happy with it—I think it's the best of the options we have. The dog one is indeed silly, and the 1970 one is a rather jaded Elvis—yet still, as it were, seven years out of date compared to the most up-to-date picture there could theoretically be. The second one you suggest looks to be just a crop from the one we're using. Don't forget users can click on the image to see it bigger if they want. PL290 (talk) 20:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Heritage

For many years, it was said that this Presley line descended from David Pressley, who was of Anglo-Irish origin; however, in recent years, this has come under increasing scrutiny and doubt. More evidence now seems to weight that Elvis is actually of German descent from Johannes Valentin Pressler / Preslar (1669-1742) and Anna Christina Frantse / Frantz (1674 - ) This family came to New York in 1709.

According to Donald W. Presley and Edward C. Dunn, both distant relatives of the King, a direct link can be made from Elvis back to a certain Johann Valentin Pressler, a German winegrower who emigrated to America in 1710. Pressler came from a village in southern Palatinate called Niederhochstadt. Niederhochstadt became Hochstadt sometime during the 250 years after Johann Pressler left it, but there are still many Presslers there, among them a winegrower like Johann Valentin. Johann Valentin first settled in New York and later moved his family to the South. The name was Anglicized during the Civil War by a Pressler serving in the Confederate Army, Presley and Dunn report in a forthcoming book on the Presley family.

It is interesting to note that if indeed he is descended from Johannes Valentin Pressler, then he would also be related to former President Jimmy Carter, as Johannes would be their common ancestor.

• Elvis Presley of German descent
• Elvis Presley's German heritage
• Elvis Presley Family Tree

For some reason, every time I add information about the true heritage of Elvis presley, this is deleted. Is it not "politically correct" to proclaim Elvis GERMAN? Or are there other reasons? I'm willing to learn, please conclude! --Hyperboreer 20:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperboreer (talk • contribs)

None of the three websites to which you link qualifies as a high-quality source—in other words, none of them can be cited in support of any material you might want to add to the text...and you can't add anything to the text without proper citation. Please see our WP:Verifiability policy. In addition, none of the three websites meets our standards for external links. Please see our content guideline concerning WP:External links. Furthermore, your series of repeated attempts to insert these links in the article violates our policy on WP:Edit warring, for which you can be blocked. You would be wise to stop now.—DCGeist (talk) 00:12, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, DCGeist ("Geist" meaning intellectual spirit ... I hope ...), I understand your criticism and I will consider your suggestions. I regret the fact, that you think the website "German Heritage" is not sufficient, because it is definitely high-quality! Elvis Presley is of dominant German descent - that is a fact. Where exactly is the problem of proclaiming this? In the article French Norman Jewish and so on are noted, there is NO proof of this, but there IS proof of Elvis' German heritage. Do you have a problem with the terminus "German"??? You seem to know what you are doing by Wikipedia, why don't you just clarify the facts and change the article to it's factual version? I would be grateful - and I am sure the users of Wikipedia would be also! --Hyperboreer 12:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

• Elvis of German descent
• Elvis' German heritage
• More on Elvis
• Please visit German-American Heritage Museum in Washington D.C. and learn more about Elvis' German ancestory

So you want to mention that Elvis had ancestors that immigrated in 1710? Not sure if this is relevant at all, 1710 is way to far back to think that its an influence on his life...I would also note that the references you have provide state that he has Scottish, English, Native American, German, Jewish and South African descent. So what we see is you trying to highlight hes German ancestry without care of the rest of his family tree. Can you honestly say you think that his German ancestry (from 1710) is worth mentioning in an article that starts in 1935...I would say that hes Christian and Jewish heritage is what was the biggest influence on his life as mentioned in your references above. So should we talk about hes ONE German ancestor from 300 years ago or should we simply can him an American as it is now? Moxy (talk) 14:13, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

German blood is German blood, no matter WHEN this was given, if Elvis were Jewish (which he is definitely not!!!), then no one would consider deleting HERITAGE, even if it was 2000 years ago, his Jewish descent would be HIGHLIGHTED! Elvis Presley comes from the big and influentual Pressler Family of Germany, he carries a German Surname, this should be noted - not more, not less. He is a German-American, where exactly is the problem??? I thought free-thinking Americans have overcome barbaric anti-German ressentments?! --Hyperboreer 21:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperboreer (talk • contribs)

Every human beeing has 16 great-great-grandmothers and -fathers, two of them, the Jewish and Cherokee great-great-grand-mothers are the most important of them, no doubt about that, because it is something special, to have that ancestry besides the "European mix". Ancestry concerning the surname is maybe not that important but it could be mentioned additionally. Still, I think Mr. Geist is right to doubt the reliability of the sources. Und Herr Hyperboreer, immer cool bleiben, irgendwann kommt ein seriöses Buch oder ähnliches über Elvis und dann wissen wir's besser. There will be a reliable book or an other respectable source about Elvis in future and then we'll know better. Till then there could be an additional remark like: Elvis surname was regarded as Anglo-Irish in the past. Recent sources in the net suggest that his name is an anglicized form of the German surname Pressler.--213.162.94.131 (talk) 08:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Auto archiving

Anyone else think that auto achiving is killing threads? I think there could be useful additions made regarding Presley's voice and how he managed his own studio sessions, but I haven't had time to dig too deeply into possible sources - and now it's all been archived out of view. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 03:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

So pleased that you have brought this up Rikstar,as I remember a comment made about Presley's voice and studio sessions on the talk page not so long ago and thinking to myself that I would like to delve more into this topic,but alas the time. But I find this very interesting and worthing of alot more investigation,with some good reliable sources and trust me there out there,just need a couple of weeks to do it just right. I say this because I love all sorts of music,whether it be for example: John Lennon,Jim Morrison,U2,Bob Dylan,Joe Cocker just to name a few. They all at one time or another,haven spoken about the same thing and that was Presley's ability to interpretate the music he recorded the way he did,be it Gospel or Blues etc. The above would know,they weren't to bad themselves. Thanks for bringing this worthy topic up. I'll await to see what others think also. Cheers!--Jaye9 (talk) 10:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

In some ways it's a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. Which is preferable? The one you're not currently confronted with, typically. On this particular talk page in the past we've seen a lot of harm come from old threads building up with more and more incoherent additions, producing a vicious circle in which newcomers are less and less likely to be willing and able to read and understand the whole thread before commenting. The auto-archiving (though there may admittedly be other factors) appears to have transformed that situation. Ultimately, of course, it's up to us to use whatever archiving approach works best for this page. Don't forget that if a thread has received no comments for a week, editors can always ping it with a quick "still thinking about this" post. That will keep it from being archived yet, and potentially stimulate interest from others. But if that idea's not appealing, we could try different auto-archive parameters, such as how long a thread should remain untouched before archiving, or what minimum number of threads to keep on the page regardless of age. If it turns bad again, we can always go back to how it is now. My own slight preference is to keep it as it is, but currently that puts me in a minority; let's hear some other voices too. PL290 (talk) 12:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Auto-archiving has been fixed. Now an archive time of 21 days (inactivity before archiving). And, minumum threads of 4. --Kslotte (talk) 07:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

These configs will put almost all threads into archives with quite a rapid phase. It is talk page censorship in my opinion. Take also into consideration users that are not regulary visiting this talk page. Also, there is clear consensus that {{aan|type=content}} should not be used (read the edit summary by the bot). --Kslotte (talk) 11:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Elvis name popularity over the years in US

There is an interesting article about celebrity baby names, that discuss also the popularity of the name "Elvis" over the years. It is amazing to see how the milestones in Elvis life influenced the name popularity (in US) over the last 70 years.

http://www.my-practical-baby-guide.com/celebrity_baby_names.html

Enjoy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amitbronstein (talk • contribs) 21:47, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Article length

I just want to suggest reducing the length of this article - I really don't see why it has to be so long and, quite frankly, rather daunting to read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.3.145.66 (talk) 11:15, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Vernon Presley's prison sentence

Where should I discuss Vernon Presley's prison sentence?

• This source: Cheseborough, Steve, Blues Traveling: The Holy Sites of Delta Blues. University Press of Mississippi, 2004. 96. ISBN 1578066506, 9781578066506.</ref>

... talks about how Elvis and his mother often rode the Greyhound to see Vernon, who was thrown in prison for check forging. It also said young Elvis complained, stating that he missed his father WhisperToMe (talk) 07:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Because the article must cover Presley's entire life and career, and is already pushing the boundaries of size for a Wikipedia article, it underwent a heavy pruning in January 2010, discussed and agonized over on this talk page for some weeks, to reduce it to an acceptable size. It was necessary to trim certain things which, while somewhat interesting, were, in those circumstances, at too low a level of detail to justify their inclusion. I would judge the example raised here to fall into that category (and in fact, detail surrounding the check forgery was among content already pruned, for this reason). PL290 (talk) 10:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I see.

Would it be possible to give Vernon his own article?

WhisperToMe (talk) 17:21, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I suspect not (though see what you think from the notability guideline, which determines this). However, Personal relationships of Elvis Presley has, for example, a Devotion to his mother section, so that article is potentially somewhere to elaborate on his childhood experiences. As another alternative, I imagine Early life of Elvis Presley might be a viable article. You can use the Toolserver GREP to see a list of all the current articles with "Elvis" in the title. PL290 (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright - I'll think about which sub-article(s) would be the best for establishing his fathers incarceration. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:49, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Why rumour racism?

It sickens me that this Wikipedia-page pays attention to the rumour that Elvis was racist. It's a RUMOUR and not a fact, and Wikipedia is about facts. The rumour is nonsense and not important.IGG8998 —Preceding undated comment added 21:06, 12 September 2010 (UTC).

It isn't a rumor; it's an opinion published by two reliable sources. Unless you can provide an opposing opinion, from a reliable source on the matter, I suggest you just abandon this, because nothing is going to change otherwise.— Dædαlus ^Contribs 22:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It's been discussed at length all before,as to why it is important to mention this in the main article on Elvis Presley. If you don't believe it should be included,then ask yourself this questions. Why is it then,that well respected Elvis Presley biographer Peter Guralnich deemed it necessary to write a whole article,about this very subject?--Jaye9 (talk) 00:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

It's worse than a rumor. It's trashy second-hand gossip. There's been ample sources refuting this nasty piece of gossip, but the sleaze-mongers at the helm have opted to stay with the gossip, thereby perpetuating the low quality of what should be a high-quality article. It's on a par with the obsession with Elvis' last moments on the toilet just before he died. As every lawyer knows, it's impossible to prove that someone is NOT a racist, and this depraved nonsense will continue to have legs (regardless of it being total rubbish) as long as this article supports it. Santamoly (talk) 07:04, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Your description of the article's content is both exhaustingly intemperate and wildly inaccurate. The article makes clear that Presley was not, in fact, a racist. The article in no way "stays with the gossip"; it addresses a significant belief about Presley that has been widespread and plainly refutes it. Finally, you are evidently much more obsessed with "Elvis' last moments on the toilet" than the article itself is.—DCGeist (talk) 18:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

You might be unaware of the brouhaha a few months back when a truly obsessed editor drove the other editors to distraction with that issue, i.e about "the King died on the throne" and all that. As regards the racism story, if the article basically reports and then refutes the rumor, that might be better than being silent on the matter and letting people wonder. (The idea of Elvis being racist is absurd, but there's no accounting for the ideas of rumor-mongers.) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:22, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

The issue which could be addressed is the rather misleading section title "Racial issues." The mere existence of the section may lead some to conclude "smoke = fire." Is there a way to deprecate the possibility that someone will actually believe this stuff? And the rap quote at the end is promotional for the singer - but is not directly relevant to the human Elvis. This is not a BLP, and all sorts of stuff are "fair game" but I rather think "fair game" is a poor excuse in an encyclopedia which does not wish to perpetuate falsity. Collect (talk) 20:40, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

How about a more to-the-point section header, such as "false rumors"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

You may have a point about the section title, since issues can sometimes connote only the negative problems rather than the more general matters the section in fact covers; though right now I'm exhausted and can only come up with Respect from blacks and accusations from whites. PL290 (talk) 21:15, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

And hard to kill

"So why didn't the remor die? Why did it continue to find common acceptance up to,and past,the point that Chuck D of Public Enemy would declare in 1990,"Elvis was a hero to most... Straight-up racist that sucker was,simple and plain.

Chuck D has long since respudiated that view for a more nuanced one,but the unassailable logic behind its common acceptance within the black community rests quite simply on the social inequities that have persisted to this day,the fact that we live in a society that is no more perfectly democratic today that it was 50 years ago". Source: part of article by Peter Guralnick featured in the New York Times

What does intrigue with this rumor that has attached itself to someone like Presley and not Jerry Lee Lewis for example,is somewhat of a mystery. Not taking anything away from Lewis at all,he is one of the greats. But wasn't there a famous quote made by Lewis back in the 50's,during a concert where he set his piano alight and had stated to Chuck Berry,"follow that nigger". Elvis never publicly said anything like that. Why is it then,that certain rappers,went after Presley and not Lewis. Interesting!--Jaye9 (talk) 07:26, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

There is some evidence that the "shoe shine" story may be true

It has been claimed that Elvis never said such things against black people. But are these claims true? Gilbert B. Rodman, Elvis after Elvis: The Posthumous Career of a Living Legend (1996) writes (p.36):

Chicago Reader music critic Bill Wyman reports hearing a variant of the "shoe shine" story (one in which Elvis said something along the lines of "I wouldn't even let niggers shine my shoes") from an African-American woman who first heard the tale around 1956...

According to Dan Heilman

Marcus points out that Guralnick apparently "wasted six weeks trying to track this statement down and find out if he could make a chain going back to Elvis, and he wasn't able to."

But Greil Marcus also says,

It's very possible [Elvis] could have said that. But there doesn't seem to be any evidence at all that he did. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who believe it. Believe me, Vernon Reid [of Living Colour] has heard that story. Spike Lee has heard that story. Chuck D [of Public Enemy] has heard that story. I don't criticize them for believing it, because that's a big thing. That's a big rock to get over.

See Rodman, p. 37. However, there is indeed some evidence that Elvis actually said it. According to Alanna Nash, Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations from the Memphis Mafia (1995), p.257, there was a black waiter from Chattanooga who heard the words.

His name was Willie, and he said he was standing about three people away from Elvis at the Patton Hotel in the fifties, and he overheard Elvis say, "All a nigger can do for me is buy my records and shine my shoes."

Even the boys from the Memphis Mafia

heard Elvis use the term 'nigger' maybe once or twice, but never directly to anybody. And as a rule, he didn’t use it. You also have to consider the times. When his daughter was little, we were talking about this one time and he said he'd be damned if Lisa Marie married a black man.

I also did some further research. Michael T. Bertrand, Race, Rock, and Elvis (University of Illinois Press, 2000) writes:

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.

Although 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" and further says that "the offending statement passed into fact," the author seems to be unaware of the witness Alanna Nash has cited. I think the paragraph must be rewritten because there is some evidence that the "shoe shine" story may be true, even if Elvis later denied it. Onefortyone (talk) 00:05, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, you know the deal: the basis for inclusion in Wikipedia is not some evidence that makes an editor think something may be true, but verifiability. Same as for the ancestry: whatever the reliable sources say, we say here. PL290 (talk) 09:18, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

As you said above, "whatever the reliable sources say, we say here." According to a reliable source, Alanna Nash, Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations from the Memphis Mafia (1995), p.257, there was a black waiter from Chattanooga named Willie who said "he was standing about three people away from Elvis at the Patton Hotel in the fifties, and he overheard Elvis say, 'All a nigger can do for me is buy my records and shine my shoes.' " This is a clear statement. As authors who believe that this story isn't true are already cited in the article, this source should also be mentioned, especially in view of the fact that the testimony of a witness is presented by Nash and some of the other sources claim that there is no witness. Furthermore, according to Elvis expert, Greil Marcus, there are a lot of people who believe the story: Vernon Reid [of Living Colour] has heard that story. Spike Lee has heard that story. Chuck D [of Public Enemy] has heard that story. Wikipedia reports what the sources say, the reader may decide. Onefortyone (talk) 17:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

PL290,what you stated above is so very true and you explained this so clearly, with so very few words,you have a gift. I on the other hand, tend to ramble on abit to get my point across,that's just me I'm afraid. So please,could you just bear with me,while I point out to and others about an interesring article I found about rumors and how they can stick to an entertainer and be quite distructive in there on way. This particular rumor I believe was the reason why Elvis couldn't go to Mexico for his Movie "Fun In Acupulco",because of death threats.

"May 1959: While Elvis Presley's popularity in the U.S. was arguabley at it's all time peak,Mexico was in the midst of a huge anti-Elvis backlash.

Tijuana tabliods called him a racist and homosexual,after the singer reportedly told gossip columnist Federrico de Leon "I'd rather kiss three black girls than a mexican".-(part)

"The book "Refried Elvis: The Rise of the Mexian Counterculture" (Berkeley: University of California Press,c1999)claims the original Elvis quote was fabricated. According to author Eric Zalov,"Herbe Pompeyo of Polygram Records in Mexico City claims that a high up Mexican political figure wanted to contract Presley for a private party,for which he sent the performer a blank check to fill in as he wanted. Presley,according to the story,returned the check,so the politico extremely offended,invented the storyline about Elvis not liking Mexian women."

My point I'm trying to make here,is what starts these rumors in the first place and if the above be any indication to this fact, then it clearing is an insight,that these rumors have nothing to do with the subject at hand.--Jaye9 (talk) 12:39, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

According to Rodman, Chicago Reader music critic Bill Wyman reports hearing a variant of the "shoe shine" story (one in which Elvis said something along the lines of "I wouldn't even let niggers shine my shoes") from an African-American woman who first heard the tale around 1956. So the story seems to be from the mid-50s, not from 1959. However, it is interesting that in 1959 Mexico was in the midst of a huge anti-Elvis backlash and that the singer reportedly told gossip columnist Federrico de Leon, "I'd rather kiss three black girls than a mexican". This may also be mentioned in the article, as it supports the view that Elvis occasionally made racist statements. Onefortyone (talk) 17:33, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

141,I truly believe that your distainment for this entertainer is causing you to be somewhat rigid in the way that you interpret information you read and thus put forward.

My reasons as to why I think it is important to include Racial issures into the Elvis article,is for the mere fact that this rumor,which was started back in the 50's,is still prevalent to this day. Maybe it is naive of me to suggest this,but while ever we have Racial isssues,it is my belief that this rumor will stay.

In saying that,there is still no evidence to suggest Elvis ever saying these tings,quite the opposite actually.

There is no denying that Elvis had a huge advantage over his fellow black artists,simply because he was white,the times and where he was from.

Saw a terrific DVD a little while back,where they were interviewing Little Richard and what he was saying,made more sence and was far more interesting then these tabliod rumors and hearsay. In the interview he mentioned,like Elvis,was signed up with RCA and had to have his parents sign the contract,due to his age. But the difference was RCA had another label called Camden. RCA label,being for the white artists and the Camden label for the black artists. After signing he soon discovered that he would only receive 1/2 cent for each record sold. This did not happen to the white artist on the RCA label. That's how it was set up at the time.

In typical Little Richard style,he went on to say,that Elvis loved and respected that style of music and he believed was greatly responsible for breaking down the Racial barriers that were prevelant at the time,with an added I love Elvis and I met Elvis etc etc. But the same was not said about Pat Boone's recording of his two songs. "I hate him for what he did and how he interpretated my songs,with no grunt." What he was saying,is that Pat Boone played it safe,Elvis did not and with that,he made an interesting point,when he said,that white kids had his record hidden away in their bedrooms and Pat Boone's record was on their dutches,clearly to be seen.

The point I'm making 141,is I've never been one to embellish rumors and hearsay. I have always preferred information that is interesting and I can learn from.

I tell you what,you find me any black artists or be that individual that (this is the important bit)that met him,believed him to be a racist. I tell you right now,you won't.--Jaye9 (talk) 02:49, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I would like to say one last thing about this rather complex subject if I may and then I'm going to drop it. Firstly,I re-read the Racial issues in the Presley main article,I don't quite undertand why some people would have a problem with how it's been written,or it's content. I don't know which editore were responsible in putting that piece together. All I can say it is Class A in my opinion.

However I would just like to finish off by saying one last thing though. In the article it mentions the Chuck D lyrics about Elvis in his 1989 song "Fight The Power". But it turns out his feelings for Presley are a little more complicated than the song suggest.

"As a mucialogist-and I consider myself one,there was always a great deal of respect for Elvis,especially during his Sun Session. As a black people,we all knew that". Source: Chuck D speaks on Elvis'Legagy ET 08.12.2002

The unfortunate thing about Chuck D's powerful lyrics is that he was probably working off of this "urban legend" himself (he's too great of a musicalogist to believe it today,being at a more muture age)and only served to confirm the legend for a young audience that simply didn't know better (nor paticularly cared to---the "myth" makes more sense).--Jaye9 (talk) 06:48, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Sammy Davis Jr. (have in mind Sammy boycotted racist people):""The only thing I want to know is, 'Was Elvis my friend?', 'Did I enjoy him as a performer?', 'Did he give the world of entertainment something?' - and the answer is YES on all accounts." James Brown:"I was not only fan, he was my Soul-brother." You see? Sammy Davis Jr. and James Brown, two black people, were among Elvis' friends. And here is a quote from Elvis himself: "No one can sing Rock 'n' Roll like coloured people. Let's face it. I can't sing like Fats Domino can. I know that." This quote shows that he respected blacks. He also said that Fats Domino was the real King Of Rock 'n' Roll. IGG8998 —Preceding undated comment added 18:59, 27 October 2010 (UTC).

Edit request from Lefty77, 7 October 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Category entry: American Baritones on the Elvis Presley page should be removed. Replace with American Tenors or just removed.

Elvis Presley was a tenor that could sing a high B. I can give references if needed. Thanks.

Lefty77 (talk) 19:33, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Not done: Elvis has been described as both a baritone and a tenor. This has been discussed in the past on this talk page. Use the archive search bar to see the previous discussions regarding this matter. Thanks, Stickee (talk) 22:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

The cutting of Elvis's hair.

I was about ten years old living in Las Vegas, Nevada when I saw Elvis on the first Ed Sullivan show appearance. The next day at school everyone was talking about Elvis all the kids and even the teachers. We kids knew he was the symbol of something new under the sun A Natural youth undiluted and unspoiled. Elvis was our symbol of glorious wild freedom. He was sexy and uninhibited and we got the message. Then he got drafted and they cut his hair off. When we saw that we realized our Samson was defeated. We knew it in our bones. The Elvis after that was but a shadow of the champion he had been and his career after the army is the proof we were right. Let me see you verify that in your encyclopedia for it is the truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.8.209 (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Ain't gonna happen. You can't demand that verification of merely personal observations should form an encyclopedic article. But people can read the existing article and make up their own minds about the course Presley's career took — and whether that pesky barber had anything to do with it. If you do agree with John Lennon that Presley "died" when he got called up, don't forget to ignore awkward facts, like he had his biggest chart album, had his highest grossing movie and had all his Grammy award-winning achievements — all after his hair hit the floor. And the '68 special was hardly his worst TV/live performance... :) Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 19:51, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Jewish ancestry

This has been discussed before - but most of the discussion seems to have been about relevance, not accuracy. Having looked at references on this, the only source for the claim that Presley's matrilineal great-great-grandmother, Nancy Burdine, was Jewish - was Oscar Tackitt, a third cousin of Elvis who is quoted in Elaine Dundy's book (cited in the article). It also appears that Oscar Tackitt is the only source for the existence of this Nancy Burdine in the first place, and that there is no genealogical evidence that she ever existed (much less that she was Jewish). The Tackett Family Association studies the Tackett/Tackitt genealogy and is run by Jim W. Tickett - on one of the Association's guestbook pages, Tackett states: "one researcher has given an unsubstantiated claim that Abner had a wife named NANCY [or Sarah] BURDINE - and this undocumented claim has made its way into the also otherwise erroneous lineages found in the LDS, Ancestry & Family Tree Maker files. Although we have evidence for two wives for Abner H. Tackitt, there is no evidence that such a person as NANCY J. BURDINE ever existed, and there is some doubt that MARTHA TACKETT was a blood dau. of ABNER H. TACKITT. " (Jim Tackitt also makes a similar statement here). So, it appears that this whole story has grown from one unverified claim into a whole internet phenomenon, juding by the number of Google hits. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The article prefaces the information with, "According to family accounts ...". As you have noted, that accurately reflects the known reliable sources on the matter. Basing the article on anything else would constitute original research. PL290 (talk) 12:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

It's not original research because I'm not advocating for anything to actually be included in the article, only excluded from it. I think this information would have been interesting had it been true, and I would have wanted it to be included - but since it's almost certainly not true, what's the point of keeping it? All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 17:38, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

"According to family accounts, one of Gladys's great-grandmothers was Jewish" does not specify that that great-grandmother was in the direct maternal line that would make Gladys Jewish or a paternal line that would not pass on Jewishness. The whole "Elvis is Jewish" issue seems like trivia that does not belong in an article of this quality. One thing I do think should be removed is category:American people of Jewish descent as the most that could be said is that there is only 1 chance in 4 that Elvis is of Jewish descent - it is not a certainty. 67.41.79.158 (talk) 01:55, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

You make a good point that category:American people of Jewish descent is inappropriate. I've removed it. PL290 (talk) 08:34, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Aha! This explains the sequined yarmulke he always wore. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:23, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

So, can I remove that part of the text about him being of Jewish ancestry? Like I said, if it was true and verified, I would be all for it being in the article (as I recall, I once even commented on this page in support of it staying in the text). But since genealogical evidence points to it being false, I don't see the point of keeping the story alive. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:28, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Zap it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:32, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. I believe we should keep it. The notion that Presley was part-Jewish comes up frequently in popular discourse--the cursory and properly sourced way we deal with it here is appropriate. Take it out, and we're bound to have people regularly putting in weakly sourced and broader claims that he was Jewish. If we completely ignore the topic, we haven't done our job. DocKino (talk) 23:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

But there are a lot of random false claims about a number of people - it doesn't necessarily mean they should somehow be addressed in their Wikipedia article. In fact, many such false claims die out over time if they're not repeated in places like Wikipedia. This particular aspect of Presley seems minor enough that it doesn't warrant a mention (especially since the mention isn't really quite accurate; "family accounts" implies to me that it was widely believed among Presley's close family that they are part Jewish - yet there's no evidence this was the case; Oscar Tackett was just a third cousin, and based on things I've read about him, he wasn't exactly a reliable source). All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 07:55, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The American Jewish Desk Reference (1999) by the American Jewish Historical Society is the first all-encompassing reference to Jewish life in the United States, from 1654 to the present. This authoritative reference of nearly 900 entries covers all aspects of America's lively and influential Jewish culture. It says on p. 128, "Shortly before he became the King of Rock and Roll, a teenaged Elvis Presley was the Shabbos goy for his upstairs neighbor, the local rabbi in the Jewish section of Memphis, Tennessee." Onefortyone (talk) 23:36, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The question concerns only his distant ancestry (one of his mother's great-grandmothers) so his own beliefs and practices don't come into play here. The arguments presented here against the family accounts remain original research (though of course if a credible source were to call the family accounts into question, a mention, attributed to the originator of such a view, would be appropriate). And we have no reason to doubt the phrase family accounts unless, again, a credible source is cited that tells us some of the family disputed Tackett's account. I remain of the opinion that the current presentation—"According to family accounts, one of Gladys's great-grandmothers was Jewish", does the required job well. Also, as now additionally noted, if we remove the information, the addition of less satisfactory alternatives is likely to become a regular phenomenon. For all these reasons, I believe it should remain as it is, although "According to a cousin" would be okay too. PL290 (talk) 09:13, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Oscar Tackett wasn't a cousin, he was a third cousin. This isn't exactly a close family member, is it? And he was the only person ever to make this claim, or to assert the existence of a Nancy Burdine as Elvis' ancestor. Research by the Tackett Family Association (see above) disputes that Nancy Burdine was Martha Tackett's mother or that Elvis' great-great-grandfather was ever married to anyone named "Burdine". I'd say genealogical research is more reliable than a third cousin. And again, there's no obligation to mention this in the article at all - why do so when it doesn't look like it was true? All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 18:26, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

So, was he circumcised or not?--andreasegde (talk) 23:53, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

They say not,and in saying that,does in no way prove that he was Jewish,more to do with the times.--Jaye9 (talk) 00:40, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Why Catagory American Crooners?

Elvis was not a crooner. He was a rocker. When you talk about crooners, You talk about Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Bobby Darin etc. Not Elvis. IGG8998 —Preceding undated comment added 21:42, 18 November 2010 (UTC).

Are you lonesome tonight? I need somebody to lean on. Love me tonight. Love me. DocKino (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Recent changes for new album

I don't agree with the structural change to the article. Suggest keeping just one section (1977—present) and adding a mention of the new album between the last two existing paras of that. PL290 (talk) 11:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Agree completely. It obviously disrupts the structure of the article to give this one posthumous album its own subsection--it warrants a sentence, two at most. DocKino (talk) 14:16, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I've taken care of something that sounds to me like a horror. One sentence, two citations. DocKino (talk) 14:48, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

1.5 Billion is a bloated number

Someone needs to source that number in the lead (though it seems completely impossible, so it should probably be removed). 24.151.148.78 (talk) 02:00, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}} Childhood in Tupelo

Elvis Presley was born on January 8, 1935, in Tupelo, Mississippi, toVernon Elvis and Gladys Love Presley. In the two-room shotgun housebuilt by his father in readiness for the birth, Jesse Garon Presley, his identical twin brother, was delivered 35 minutes before him, stillborn. Please change "identicial" (There is no way to know for sure if identical or fraternal twins. No documentation of one or two birth sacs.)

As an only child, Presley became close to both parents and formed an unusually tight bond with his mother. Please change - The family attended an Assembly of God church where he found his initial musical inspiration.[5] (He also had musical inspiration at home. His family was musical on both sides. His parents sang at home as many families of the time did for entertainment and his father had a good voice. His uncles made money performing for local dances)

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives

Aliciadean (talk) 20:11, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Presley's ancestry was primarily a Western European mix—Scots-Irish, Please edit - (add German) with some French Norman; one of Gladys's great-great-grandmotherswas Cherokee. According to family accounts, one of Gladys's great- grandmothers was Jewish.

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives

Aliciadean (talk) 20:12, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Entering a new school, Milam, for sixth grade in September 1946, Presley was regarded as a loner. Thefollowing year, he began bringing his guitar in on a daily basis. He would play and sing during lunchtime, andwas often teased as a "trashy" kid who played hillbilly music. The family was by then living "in" - please change from "in" to "near" (near but not in--wasn't done in the those days.) a largely African American neighborhood.

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives Aliciadean (talk) 20:14, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

First recordings (1953–55) Sam Phillips and Sun Records

To find related topics in a list, see Elvis Presley's Sun recordings.

In August 1953, Presley walked into the offices of Sun Records. He aimed to pay for a few minutes of studiotime to record a two-sided acetate disc: "My Happiness" and "That's When Your Heartaches Begin". He wouldlater claim he intended the record as a gift for his mother, or was merely interested in what he "sounded like", though there was a much cheaper, amateur record-making service at a nearby general store. Biographer PeterGuralnick argues that he chose Sun in the hope of being discovered. Asked by receptionist Marion Keiskerwhat kind of singer he was, Presley responded, "I sing all kinds." When she pressed him on whom he soundedlike, he repeatedly answered, "I don't sound like nobody." After he recorded, Sun boss Sam Phillips askedKeisker to note down the young man's name, which she did along with her own commentary: "Good balladsinger. Hold."[38] Presley cut a second acetate in January 1954—"I'll Never Stand In Your Way" and "ItWouldn't Be the Same Without You"—but again nothing came of it.[39]

Not long after, he failed an audition for a local vocal quartet, the Songfellows. He explained to his father, "They told me I couldn't sing."[40] Songfellow Jim Hamill later claimed that he was turned down because hedid not demonstrate an ear for harmony at the time.[41] In April, Presley began working for the Crown Electric company as a --CHANGE--(add delivery truck driver--To help squelch the myth that Elvis drove an 18-wheeler.)

truck driver.

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives

Aliciadean (talk) 20:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Texas, and Texarkana, Arkansas.[59]

By early 1955, Presley's regular Hayride appearances, constant touring, and well-received record releases hadmade him a substantial regional star, from Tennessee to West Texas. In January, Neal signed a formalmanagement contract with Presley and brought the singer to the attention of Colonel Tom Parker, whom heconsidered the best promoter in the music business. Parker—Dutch-born, though he claimed to be from WestVirginia—had acquired an honorary colonel's commission from country singer turned Louisiana governorJimmie Davis. Having successfully managed top country star Eddy Arnold, he was now working with the newnumber one country singer, Hank Snow. Parker booked Presley on Snow's February tour.[60][61] When the tour reached Odessa, Texas, a 19-year-old Roy Orbison saw Presley for the first time: "His energy wasincredible, his instinct was just amazing. ... I just didn't know what to make of it. There was just no reference point in the culture to compare it."[26] Presley made his television debut on "March 3" on the KSLA-TV -- CHANGE --(The March 5 not 3 "Louisiana Hayride" was broadcast locally in Shreveport.) broadcast of Louisiana Hayride.

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives Aliciadean (talk) 20:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

At the Country Disc Jockey Convention in early November, Presley was voted the year's most promising maleartist.[69] Several record companies had by now shown interest in signing him. After three major labels madeoffers of up to $25,000, Parker and Phillips struck a deal with RCA Victor on November 21 to acquirePresley's Sun contract for an unprecedented $40,000.[70]b - Please CHANGE "$40,000 to -($35,000 for the contract and $5,000 "bonus" to pay Elvis back royalties owed by Sun. You explain this in the notes, but most students won't look that far and will use the $40,000 figure erroneously.) Presley, at 20, was still a minor, so his father signed the contract.

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland - Archives

Aliciadean (talk) 20:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Parker arranged with the owners of Hill and Range Publishing, Jean and Julian Aberbach, tocreate two entities, Elvis Presley Music and Gladys Music, to handle all of the new material recorded by Presley. Songwriters were obliged to forego one third of their customary royalties in exchange for having himperform their compositions.[72]c By December, RCA had begun to heavily promote its new singer, and beforemonth's end had reissued many of his Sun recordings.[73] Please change "reissued many of his Sun recordings" to "Re-released all five of his Sun singles."

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives

Aliciadean (talk) 20:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

On January 10, 1956, Presley made his first recordings for RCA inNashville.[76] Extending the singer's by now customary backup ofMoore, Black, and Fontana, RCA enlisted pianist Floyd Cramer,

guitarist Chet Atkins, and three background singers, including GordonStoker of the popular Jordanaires quartet, to fill out the sound.[77] The session produced the moody, unusual "Heartbreak Hotel", released as asingle on January 27.[76] Parker finally brought Presley to nationaltelevision, booking him on CBS's Stage Show for six appearances overtwo months. The program, produced in New York, was hosted on

alternate weeks by big band leaders and brothers Tommy and JimmyDorsey. After his first appearance, on January 28, Presley stayed intown to record at RCA's New York studio. The sessions yielded eightsongs, including a cover of Carl Perkins' rockabilly anthem "BlueSuede Shoes". In February, Presley's "I Forgot to Remember toForget", a Sun recording initially released the previous August, reachedthe top of the Billboard country chart.[78] Neal's contract was terminated and, on March 2, PLEASE CHANGE "March 2" to "March 26" (Parker formally became his exclusive manager on March 26.) Parker became Presley's manager.[79]

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives Aliciadean (talk) 20:22, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Milton Berle Show and "Hound Dog"

Presley made the first of two appearances on NBC's Milton Berle Show on April 3. His performance, on the deck of the USS Hancock in San Diego, prompted cheers and screams from an audience of sailors and their dates.[82] A few days later, a flight taking Presley and his band to Nashville for a recording session left allthree badly shaken when an engine died and the plane almost went down over Arkansas.[83] Twelve weeks after its original release, "Heartbreak Hotel" became Presley's first number one pop hit. In late April, Presleybegan a two-week residency at the New Frontier Hotel and Casino on the Las Vegas Strip. The shows werepoorly received by the conservative, middle-aged hotel guests—"like a jug of corn liquor at a champagneparty", wrote a critic for Newsweek.[84] Amid his Vegas tenure, Presley, who had serious acting ambitions, signed a seven-year PLEASE CHANGE "seven-year contract" to "seven picture contract--actually one picture with options for six more" contract with Paramount Pictures.[5] He began a tour of the Midwest in mid-May, taking in 15 cities in as many days.

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives Aliciadean (talk) 20:25, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Aliciadean, 27 December 2010

{{edit semi-protected}}

Allen's show with Presley had, for the first time, beaten CBS's The Ed Sullivan Show in the ratings. Sullivan, despite his June pronouncement, booked the singer for three appearances for an unprecedented $50,000.[101] The first, on September 9, 1956, was seen by approximately 60 million viewers—a record 82.6 percent of thetelevision audience.[102] Actor Charles Laughton hosted the show, filling in while Sullivan recuperated from a car accident.[93] Presley appeared in two segments that night from CBS Television City in Hollywood. According to Elvis legend, Presley was shot only from the waist up. Watching clips of the Allen and Berle shows with his producer, Sullivan had opined that Presley "got some kind of device hanging down below thecrotch of his pants–so when he moves his legs back and forth you can see the outline of his cock. ... I think it'sa Coke bottle. ... We just can't have this on a Sunday night. This is a family show!"[103] Change quote. (If you feel it necessary to quote this, can you at least note that it wasn't true.)

Resource - Elvis Presley Enterprises / Graceland Archives Aliciadean (talk) 20:26, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit requests from Aliciadean

Hi Aliciadean,

I've closed your above edit requests because, as you've noticed, your account has become autoconfirmed and you are now able to edit this article directly. Please edit as you see fit, but be aware that whenever you change cited content, you should also update the citation to match. You might consider providing the exact urls you've used for some of your recent changes on this page if you're not sure how to do that yourself (this article uses an more complex citation system than most).

Cheers, Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 13:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Tupelo-Gainesville Tornado Outbreak

Someone needs to add info on the Tupelo-Gainesville Outbreak, as Elvis' hometown was devastated by the main tornado, known as the Tupelo-Gainesville Tornado.

This info is already on the page for the tornado. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.39.92 (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

German

He had German ancestors from the Palatinate: http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/biography/elvis_presley_family_history.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.9.190.53 (talk) 16:40, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

This link is an fake biography. By the way, Presley is a Scotish Name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.183.180.175 (talk) 00:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of which, and to continue the previous discussion, can we remove the "Jewish" part now? See also this rebuke of it (under "List number two", #34 - Blue Christmas). All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 19:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I included both possibilities, with an additional source, and the whole sentence was removed with the edit summary: "rm material which is not even of marginal relevance in a biography." Obviously, I think it is of relevant interest. Other biographers address the question. It is only one sentence long. Bus stop (talk) 16:59, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The German angle is obviously very poorly sourced and is a non-starter. I've looked over the new source provided on the Jewish question and there are two issues to consider:

(1) Is the online article by Nate Bloom (who "writes a weekly column on Jewish celebrities, broadly defined, that appears in the Atlanta Jewish Times, the Cleveland Jewish News, the American Israelite of Cincinnati, the Detroit Jewish News, and the New Jersey Jewish Standard") debunking the "family account [that] one of Gladys's great-grandmothers was Jewish" (as reported in the Dundy biography) to be considered a high-quality source?

(2) If it is, should the "family account" and the (added) rebuttal be in the article's primary text, or relegated to a footnote? DocKino (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Hutley58, 8 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} This article has Elvis Presleys' middle name spelled wrong. his middle name is Aron with 1 "a" not two. The traditional spelling is with 2 "a"s but, if you do your homework you will find elvis' is with 1 "a". Hutley58 (talk) 23:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

 Not done This issue is addressed in detail in footnote [a], so there's no need to change it. Rodhullandemu 00:02, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Jewish ancestry?

[5] indicates this is an ongoing issue. Current discussions about labelling people according to ancestry or religion have generally resulted in an understanding that reliable sources stating facts are required as a minimum, and that self-idenitification would also be a valid way to label a person as to ancestry or religion. At this point, the sourcing used does not meet the standards now being used. [6] shows the requirement for reliable sourcing for such claims goes back to 2006 at least. [7] regarding labelling sans strong sourcing, [8] (recent BLP discussion which does not apply directly to a BDP), ad nauseam. In short - to make any claim about "possible Jewish ancestry" without an exceedingly good source is contrary to the new BLP standards (which I admit is not BDP, but is a sensible standard). Find a good source, and that is great. Without a good source, the claim fails. Collect (talk) 11:36, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Meanwhile I changed the claim to what is in the source given - including that "Sidney" and "Jerome" are "Jewish names." Collect (talk) 11:50, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I would prefer you revert to the specific claim made - as the term "family member" is not understood to be as far off as "third cousin" by most readers. Best practice is to use the terms found in the source. Collect (talk) 17:59, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're misunderstanding the policy. Dundy's book, published by the University Press of Mississippi, clearly meets our standards for WP:Verifiability and the language of the article has properly reflected the lack of definitiveness on the matter. The edit added a slew of names that do little to serve the reader in the context of this article ("Oscar Tackett", "Nancy", "Martha", "Sidney", "Jerome"), with Martha, in particular, completely unexplained (not that there is space or need for such explanation, because the name itself serves little purpose here). The change has been reverted, though I have copyedited the existing phrase to reflect that Dundy references one "family account", rather than multiple ones.

(ec) While "best practice" is far from always "to use the terms found in the source"--paraphrasing is often to be preferred for brevity, focus, and flow--in this case I've come to agree. While it makes the construction of the sentence unavoidably clunky, it clarifies that we don't have evidence that this belief in a Jewish heritage was present in Elvis's childhood household. I've restored "third cousin".

I will repeat the questions I raised in the thread at the top of this page, here in this thread whose title is more to the point:

(1) Is the online article by Nate Bloom (who "writes a weekly column on Jewish celebrities, broadly defined, that appears in the Atlanta Jewish Times, the Cleveland Jewish News, the American Israelite of Cincinnati, the Detroit Jewish News, and the New Jersey Jewish Standard") debunking the third cousin's account that "one of Gladys's great-grandmothers was Jewish" to be considered a high-quality source?

(2) If it is, should the third cousin's account and the (added) rebuttal be in the article's primary text, or relegated to a footnote? DocKino (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I would say put it in a footnote if you must. But it's pointless to put it in the article, because there's no genealogical evidence for it whatsoever (in fact, there's strong genealogical evidence against it). When it comes to distant ancestry, there's no better source than genealogy. Hearsay is often wrong. And keep in mind that I previously wrote in on this talk page (around 2007, I think) in support of its inclusion. That was before I actually checked the sources. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 03:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I've moved it down to a footnote and added a reference to Bloom's debunking of the story. I do believe strongly that we do need to address it at least in this manner. If we don't, someone will certainly come along--as has happened in the past--add the information about Presley's "Jewish background", and almost surely do so poorly. I'm satisfied that the footnote is the proper way to deal with the matter. DocKino (talk) 13:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 159.33.10.92, 13 January 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Elvis Presley's middle name was Aron, not Aaron. The second a should be deleted.

159.33.10.92 (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

 Not done This issue is already addressed in footnote [a]. Rodhullandemu 18:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Parents' lifespans

I added this relevant biographical info, which is standard when known. It has been removed on the basis of it being irrelevant. Without it, there is very little in the article about his father, who existed for all of Presley's life. Without the lifespans, the reader wouldn't have a clue when the father died. The reader would think: "What happened to his father? Did he die before or after Presley? Is he still alive, in his nineties? Jim Michael (talk) 03:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The parents' ages at birth have been added today, but there is still very little in the article about the father. According to Find a Grave, he administered Presley's estate. He was very relevant to Presley's life, being Presley's only surviving parent from 1958 until his death. As Presley was divorced, his father would have been responsible for arranging his funeral, as he was his closest living adult family member. This site is the first place that a high proportion of people go to find out biographical details of notable people. The question 'what happened to Presley's father?' is still unanswered in this bio. Hence I believe the lifespans should be in the Childhood in Tupelo subsection. Jim Michael (talk) 19:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Playboy jet

How many of the 1970s-era tours did Presley charter Big Bunny, the Playboy jet which was all black except for a white Playboy logo on the tail? Touring sound engineer Bruce Jackson talked in awe about the luxury of this method of travel, and Jerry Schilling in his Elvis book says the Big Bunny charter was mid-1973. Were there any other Elvis charters of the Playboy plane? Binksternet (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

No room? Article split?

DocKino took out a bit of technical discussion regarding 1960 recording dates, with the edit summary "technical discussion was not really informative, and we don't have the room here to expand on it". "Not informative" can be remedied with expansion, but if this article has no room left for improvement, why is it not fully protected?

There is some good information about Elvis's recording and touring career in the sources used for the articles about Bruce Jackson and Bill Porter. Is it time for an article split, with technical details allowed expansion? Binksternet (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

The article certainly has room for improvement. You made the valuable correction that the Elvis Is Back! sessions were in Nashville, not Memphis. And I agree with mentioning "Stuck on You", which allows us to indicate that he immediately returned to the top of the charts after his return from the Army. But I don't see that mentioning one of his many chief engineers would be of much interest to most readers, and "using a different vocal microphone and different recording methods" honestly says nothing at all (as I believe you recognize).

I don't see any call whatsoever for a split here. However, you might consider launching a new article, something like Elvis Presley recording history or the sort that focus on technical discussion for those who are interested. DocKino (talk) 09:49, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps that article, or Elvis Presley concert tours. Hmmm... Binksternet (talk) 10:03, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Rockumentary link

I propose that we link to this audio documentary in the external links section:

• Elvis Presley/Archive 28 interviewed on the Pop Chronicles (1969)

On pages such as Perry Como and Frank Sinatra there is a "Listen" subsection in the external links, so perhaps we should add that as well.

Note: The Pop Chronicles has an Elvis interview from the 1950s,[9] but for the 1960s, they had David Lander (Squiggy) "dramatically reproduce" some more recent quotations. DougHill (talk) 20:10, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

As there were no objections, I added it. The Perry Como and Frank Sinatra pages have both "watch" and "listen" subsections. If we have a good video link, perhaps we should add both subsections. DougHill (talk) 01:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Lisa marie presley

I think the article should mention her more than once, and should say that she also had a music career. I think thats common for articles here. (this is also missing for Arlo guthrie in the woody guthrie artile. maybe its just such common knowledge people forgot to include it).(mercurywodrose)76.245.46.57 (talk) 02:22, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from UteSonja, 12 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Presley's ancestry was primarily a Western European mix—Scots-Irish, with some French Norman, and a German paternal ancestor from the German Palatines group. Ref: Tim McGraw on NBC. Who do you think you are? Tim McGraw researches his father's ancestry and discovers a link to descendants who were among the U.S.'s first settlers and a connection to George Washington and discovers that his paternal great great... grandfather came on the same ship at the same time to the States as Elvis Presley's great great... grandfather from Germany.

UteSonja (talk) 18:59, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

 Not done.. We would need to see this references (and use it as the source) - as of now i cant find any mention of this. We would also have to be careful if we cant find this anywhere but one place. Moxy (talk) 19:28, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

According to a conference paper presented at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (April 2009, published 2010), "the best evidence has it that the name is derived from one Johann Valentine Pressler, a winegrower from the Palatinate village of Niederhochstadt who came to New York in 1710." See [10] This is certainly a reliable source, isn't it? Onefortyone (talk) 21:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Tfaironpirate, 14, February 2011

In the section on Racial Issues I think it is worth adding the source of the quote "The only thing Negroes can do for me is buy my records and shine my shoes." which, according to Micheal T. Bertrand in his book Race, Rock & Elvis in Sepia Magazine, which was in turn quoting an interview with an anonymous interviewee/"person on the street". The section of the book mentioning this is quoted here on snopes: http://snopes.com/music/artists/presley1.asp. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tfaironpirate (talk • contribs) 18:43, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Why? This so-called quote is not true —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.208.155.109 (talk) 12:56, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Elvis' Airplanes

From Archive #28: "How many of the 1970s-era tours did Presley charter Big Bunny, the Playboy jet which was all black except for a white Playboy logo on the tail? Touring sound engineer Bruce Jackson talked in awe about the luxury of this method of travel, and Jerry Schilling in his Elvis book says the Big Bunny charter was mid-1973. Were there any other Elvis charters of the Playboy plane?" Binksternet (talk) 00:52, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Elvis enjoyed Big Bunny so much that he bought his own fleet of personal airliners, a Convair 880 named "Lisa Marie", two (2) Lockheed Jetstars, and a Dassault Falcon. He really enjoyed traveling in his airplanes. When the suggestion was made to include something on his airplanes, DCGeist (03:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)) suggested this was "trivia wallowing". So the topic was left alone - who would contribute in the face of such gratuitous commentary? Any effort to contribute would be reverted. So nothing more was heard about his airplanes. Santamoly (talk) 06:29, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

If anyone wants to read about Presley's planes, the jewellery and costumes he commissioned, the exact shade of his real hair, his favorite fried chicken and sandwich recipes, the games he liked to play, the name of the company that installed the water feature in The Jungle Room, the name of his manicurist, etc, etc, you can glean something of the enormous impact these had on his life and career by looking some place else, me thinks. ;) Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 22:30, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

The above comment illustrates the ownership attitude WP:OWN that has caused this article to be such a low quality result. What more can anyone say? Santamoly (talk) 08:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Expressing an opinion about what should be, or shouldn't be, in the article is hardly evidence of 'ownership'. If you want to say anything, then say why you think the things you want to include should be included. It's a pity you have a tendency to make disparaging comments about the article and its contributors without making any constructive efforts to justify any changes you'd like to see. If you couldn't glean the point I was making - that some stuff is just too trivial or insignificant to include - what more can anyone say? And why do you keep insisting the article is low quality when it's a Featured article? Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 23:45, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Style for "African American"

The article was promoted to FA status on February 23, 2010. At that time there were twelve--count them, twelve--instances of the phrase "African American" used as an adjective. Every single one of those instances was unhyphenated, as they have remained until the recent, baseless, and increasingly disruptive efforts to alter this well-established, entirely proper, and up-to-date style.

As I previously suggested in an edit summary, I encourage everyone to check the prevailing style in current, high-quality sources. Simply do a Google Books search on the string "African American" or the string "African-American". On the search results page, click on "21st century" in the left-hand column, and just look at the results.

The answer is clear: there is no compelling reason to alter the existing style, and efforts to do so are in violation of both the spirit and letter of our Manual of Style, on the grounds of internal consistency, stability of articles, and follow the sources. DocKino (talk) 20:31, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

When used as an adjective, "African-American" is hyphenated, and consensus here seems to support that. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Your claim is entirely baseless. I have provided evidence of the consensus that it is not hyphenated (it reached Featured Article status that way and remained so undisturbed for over a year); I have provided evidence that article stability directs you to leave it unhyphenated (see preceding); and I have provided evidence that high-quality sources support this style. You have done nothing but emit hot air out of some orifice or another. DocKino (talk) 20:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

There was no discussion of the hyphen during the February 2010 FA, or during any of the previous GA or FA assessments. Until now there was never a discussion of the hyphen on this talk page. Historically, the users taking a significant part here have included Onefortyone and Steve Pastor, both editors using the hyphen in the adjective form and the space in the noun form. There was never a conscious consensus, only a mixed history. At the moment, consensus appears to have been formed for the hyphenated form of the compound adjective.

The hyphen you added back to "musical-comedies" baffles me. Your other argument, that "African American music" (no hyphen) can be found in high quality sources is one I acknowledge as true. (There are, of course, other high quality sources using the hyphen.) However, the hyphen you put in between musical and comedies is not found elsewhere. Binksternet (talk) 21:09, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Also: if we followed WP:STABLE then we should note that the first time the word "African" appeared in the article was in the hyphenated form of "African-American performers", on July 12, 2005, from the editor NoahB. That construction stayed in place for more than two years. Binksternet (talk) 21:16, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I've reverted my error on "musical comedies." I simply misread the diff.

Yes, there was no discussion of the style of "African American" during the two long-running FACs that led to the FA in February 2010--and you should presume that was because not a single person thought there was any reason to raise an issue with proper, up-to-date, and consistently applied style. You think no one was conscious that there were twelve instances of "African American" as an adjective in the article--every single one of them unhyphenated--including two in the heavily trafficked lead section? That's incredible! The plain truth is that when something ain't broken, there's no need to waste time jawing about it. Common sense, eh? The long-running stability of the style, disrupted only recently, is further evidence that this good and proper style enjoyed consensus support.

Speaking of stability, you've offered a very odd interpretation of it. The article as a whole was far from stable in 2005-7, and you are comparing one usage of "African American" in a low-quality article to a dozen consistently styled usages in a Featured Article. If you really cared about stability, you would recognize that the article is now at a far different stage in its evolution and you would never pursue this sort of change for which there is no "substantial reason", to quote the relevant section of the guideline.

Furthermore, please do not misstate my position. It goes well beyond the claim that the unhyphenated style "can be found" in high-quality sources. I have directed you to compelling evidence that it is the prevailing style in "current English usage", again to quote the relevant section of our Manual of Style.

Finally, astonishingly, neither you nor Joe has yet to offer a single reason for altering the well-established, stable, and proper style of the article that goes one iota past personal preference. Remarkable. DocKino (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Your notional FA consensus falls down in the face of the reviewers' and nominators' mistake in "musical-comedies", which was in the article at FA nomination and was still in the article when it was listed. That mistake tells me nobody gave the issue any serious thought or they would have found that error. I must conclude that no consensus was achieved, consciously or not. Binksternet (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

An erroneous hyphen in the single instance of "musical-comedies" was overlooked? My God...it was! But surely you're not arguing that's in any way relevant to twelve consistently styled usages of "African American" (thirteen, if we include the appearance in noun form), including two in the lead. You couldn't be that silly.

And--guess we shouldn't be shocked at this point--still not one single reason outside of personal preference for altering the well-established, stable, and proper style of this article. This becomes increasingly incredible. DocKino (talk) 06:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Prevailing style?

Is "African American music" (no hyphen) the prevailing style in our highest-quality English sources? In my experience there is no prevailing style: both the hyphenated and non- versions are used in the best English sources. Here are some that use the hyphen:

• "Presidential Proclamation – African-American Music Appreciation Month", President Barack Obama, May 28, 2010
• Music and the racial imagination, University of Chicago Press, 2000
• Reading pop: approaches to textual analysis in popular music, Oxford University Press US, 2000
• Ethnomusicology: historical and regional studies, W. W. Norton & Company, 1993
• Southern African-American Music Collection, USC Music Library
• Southern music/American music, University Press of Kentucky, 2003
• Racial and ethnic directions in American music, College Music Society, Committee on the Status of Minorities in the Profession, 1982
• Riffs & choruses: a new jazz anthology, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2001
• African-American concert dance: the Harlem Renaissance and beyond, University of Illinois Press, 2001
• Women and music, Indiana University Press, 2001
• Music of the Civil War era, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2004
• Church and worship music: an annotated bibliography of contemporary scholarship: a research and information guide, CRC Press, 2005
• Reflections on American music: the twentieth century and the new millennium, College Music Society, Pendragon Press, 2000
• A Companion to African-American Philosophy, Wiley-Blackwell, 2006
• Encyclopedia of African-American politics, Infobase Publishing, 2003
• The North American folk music revival: nation and identity in the United States and Canada, 1945–1980, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2007
• Music, Education, and Multiculturalism: Foundations and Principles, Oxford University Press US, 2004
• Continuum encyclopedia of popular music of the world, Continuum International Publishing Group, 2003
• Race and ideology: language, symbolism, and popular culture, Wayne State University Press, 1999
• CliffsAP English Language and Composition, John Wiley and Sons, 2006
• Interpreting popular music, University of California Press, 2000
• Perspectives on American music since 1950, Taylor & Francis, 1999
• California soul: music of African Americans in the West, University of California Press, 1998
• Choral music in nineteenth-century America: a guide to the sources, Scarecrow Press, 1999
• A tribute to Woody Guthrie & Leadbelly: teacher's guide, R&L Education, 1990
• "The Sounds of Blackness", from Upon these shores: themes in the African-American experience, 1600 to the present. Psychology Press, 2000
• Sourcebook for research in music, Indiana University Press, 2005
• Images: iconography of music in African-American culture, 1770s-1920s, Taylor & Francis, 2000
• The Harvard guide to African-American history, by Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham. Harvard University Press, 2001
• Choral music: a research and information guide, Psychology Press, 2002
• African-American music: an evolution from Africa to America, University of Miami, 2003
• African-American music: a directory serving the Greater Cleveland area, John Carroll University, 1990
• African-American music: songs of pride, perseverance and progression, Wright State University, 1998
• African-American Music, VDM Publishing House Ltd., 2010
• African-American Music: Gospel, Jazz, Blues, Rap and Everything in Between, Taft Johnson Books, 2010
• Teaching music with a multicultural approach, Music Educators National Conference, 1991
• "African-American Sheet Music, 1850–1920", from the Library of Congress, the collections of Brown University
• "An Unlikely African-American Music Historian", from NPR's All Things Considered
• The Crisis magazine, 1991
• Vibe magazine, 1995

(I threw a few magazine and web sources in there for popular perspective.)

Some books use both constructions:

• All music guide to classical music: the definitive guide to classical music, Hal Leonard Corporation, 2005
• The African diaspora: a musical perspective, Psychology Press, 2003
• Encyclopedia of American gospel music, Psychology Press, 2005
• A turbulent voyage: readings in African American studies, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000

I did not show the sources which do not use the hyphen: there are certainly many high quality ones. All I intended to do with this list is to puncture the premise that there is a prevailing English style for no hyphen between African and American. There is not. Binksternet (talk) 17:22, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Not a tough call, folks

If this article did not have a stable or consistent style, a reasonable case could be made for either "African American" or "African-American." But it obviously DOES have a stable and consistent style, which is "African American," and as DocKino has said, it violates both the letter and the spirit of the MOS to change it. It is especially annoying to see Joefromrandb, ignoring the sense of this discussion, change one instance according to his whim, thereby subverting both the stability and the consistency of the article. Time to drop this and move on to something more productive.—DCGeist (talk) 18:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

You're quite wrong. Not according to my whim. According to proper English usage that has been well-documented on this page. You are quite correct in your second point. Time (for me, at least) to move on. Joefromrandb (talk) 18:24, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

No, sir, I am not wrong. You are. We have determined that either African American or African-American is a proper style. As it happens, African American is the style consistently used in this article. Now let us turn to your behavior.

African American appears 13 times in this article, every time without a hyphen. You changed one instance—on a whim. We could also observe that African American appears twice in the lede's second paragraph, each time without a hyphen. Again, you changed one instance—on a whim.—DCGeist (talk) 06:39, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

I stand by both my edits to the article, and my comments here. Fin. Joefromrandb (talk) 08:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

We'd actually have quite a good discussion going on here about the use of hyphens if it wasn't for the descent into intemperate language and name-calling. If anyone's got a good case, please let it be made without recourse to personal attacks. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 15:10, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Elvis was Jewish???

Long-winded debate rendered pointless by contributor refusing to accept WP:RS policy

His great great grandmother was Jewish, according to Jewish law it is passed down maternally in Orthodox Judaism therefore it should be stated.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC) Elvis was aware of this.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 16:54, 25 April 2011 (UTC) The sources you brought are not scholarly books. There is no certainty of Presley's being a Jew. Binksternet (talk) 17:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC) It has been well documented that he had Jewish ancestry.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 21:42, 25 April 2011 (UTC) http://www.abebooks.com/Schmelvis-Search-Elvis-Presleys-Jewish-Roots/1487897785/bd--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 21:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC) Therefore I should be able to add it, that is a reliable source and a scholared source.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 21:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC) http://www.amazon.co.uk/Schmelvis-Search-Elvis-Presleys-Jewish/dp/155022462X--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 21:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC) The claim is dubious. It is already adequately covered in a footnote. Your links are dysfunctional. There is no evidence that Elvis or his mother believed they were Jewish. And your understanding of Jewish law is weak—for Elvis to have been Jewish, his mother would have had to be Jewish, meaning her mother would have had to be Jewish, and her mother would have had to be Jewish, AND her mother would have had to be Jewish. Even if it were granted that one of Gladys's great-grandmothers was Jewish (and we can't grant that), that would establish only that that woman's children were also Jewish according to religious law, and no evidence has ever been presented that the link between Gladys and that generation was entirely maternal. It could just as easily have been Jewish great-grandmother > Jewish grandfather > non-Jewish father > non-Jewish Gladys.—DCGeist (talk) 00:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Sure, Elvis was Jewish. That accounts for all the Christian gospel songs he sang. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:45, 26 April 2011 (UTC) His great-great grandmother was Jewish it is passed down maternally, then his grandmother would have been Jewish, then his mother, then Elvis himself, Elvis was well aware of his Jewish heritage. Elvis was well aware of his Jewish ancestry, as a child was instructed not to advertise the fact because "people didn't like Jews" according to his parents. Yet, Elvis, who lived in an apartment below a Jewish rabbi, would often visit. The widow of the rabbi talks about Elvis. She recalls how, Elvis would visit their house on Saturday in order to turn on lights and do things they weren't allowed to do. Elvis carried a yarmulke in his pocket. He was fascinated by Jewish music. As an adult, she remembers how Elvis donated to several Jewish organizations. Lots and lots of pictures him wearing the Star of David. --GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 10:34, 26 April 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_depictions_of_Elvis_Presley Although he did not practice the religion, Elvis was halachically Jewish, because of his mother's Jewish heritage (her mother had been Jewish, as had her grandmother, her great-grandmother, etc.). He was known to wear both a cross and a Star of David around his neck, explaining that he "wouldn't want to be kept out of Heaven on a technicality."--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 10:36, 26 April 2011 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_American_entertainers#Music Elvis Presley's great-great-grandmother was Jewish. Elvis personally had a Star of David carved into his mother's grave. He also learned the Hebrew alphabet, donated to Jewish charities, had a Rabbi as his spiritual teacher, and he routinely wore a Chai necklace (meaning “Life/Living” in Hebrew) in order to celebrate his Jewish heritage. Elvis was Jewish by law and did have a great-great grandmother who was Jewish and it was maternally down the line, he was Jewish and was well aware of it, it should be re-added it is part of Elvis and has been proven and on other wikipedia pages is also mentioned. Many people have discussed this I have even seen it up before but somebody keeps removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeordieWikiEditor (talk • contribs) 10:39, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Probably because it's about as "relevant" as Barack Obama being Irish. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:16, 26 April 2011 (UTC) I just checked find-a-grave. Ain't no star of David "carved into" his mother's grave. It has a Christian cross just above her name, as with his father's and also his own. Besides which, the letters are raised, not "carved into".[11] I note that there is one Jew prominently featured there, though. Among the pictures you'll see a big-honkin' statue of Jesus. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC) In looking at ancestry.com, his maternal line appears to be Smith - Mansell - Tackett - Burdine. Nothing obviously Jewish there, but that doesn't prove anything either way. Some sources seem to think that the Burdine was Jewish. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:56, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Another point: Geordie keeps talking about Orthodox Jewish law. First, Jewish "law" has no legal standing in America, and is better regarded as Jewish "custom" or "tradition". Second, she married a gentile, which no practicing Orthodox Jew would do. In any case, Elvis' family was predominantly Christian. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC) I'm not on about his religious side I know he was Christian but a Jew is a Jew and it is a race and a religion, you can be Jewish without practicing any religion or another religion besides Judaism so your argument is flawed. Obama being Irish... no it is well sourced and many upon many people know of this, why is he in other wikipedia pages about him being Jewish then don't avoid it. http://www.amazon.com/Elvis-Gladys-Southern-Icons-Elaine/dp/1578066344/sr=8-1/qid=1159378028/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-5892715-7426557?ie=UTF8&s=books http://www.amazon.com/Schmelvis-Search-Presleys-Jewish-Roots/dp/155022462X/sr=1-1/qid=1159378134/ref=pd_bbs_1/102-5892715-7426557?ie=UTF8&s=books Is sourced.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 17:19, 26 April 2011 (UTC) He was at most one-sixteenth Jewish heritage, and the claim about his great-grandmother being Jewish seems to be in doubt in any case. You seem to be equating Jewishness with race. Jewishness is not a race. Supposing his great-grandmother was a practicing Christian, then the family stopped being Jewish, and maternal line is irrelevant maybe unless Elvis wanted to claim to be Jewish - which he didn't. He was 100 percent Christian. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:27, 26 April 2011 (UTC) You are wrong. Jewish is both a race and a religion, the word Jew derives from Judea not Judaism, Judaism is the way of life for Jews but plenty of Jews practice other religions but still are Jewish look at Karl Marx for example, you can't stop being Jewish, you can be born Jewish so you will forever be Jewish. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F Also you just admitted he had Jewish heritage which he did have, why is he under Jewish Americans the culture as Jewish? BECAUSE HE WAS JEWISH.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 22:24, 26 April 2011 (UTC) There is no such thing as a Jewish "race". That's a bogus, Nazi argument. I'm fractionally Irish. Am I Irish-American? Maybe. Am I Irish? No. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:40, 26 April 2011 (UTC) Some sources According to Jewish law, user GeordieWikiEditor seems to be right. Here are some reliable sources: "Elvis' confusion and secrecy about Judaism came from his upbringing. When he was quite young Gladys told him that her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell, was Jewish." See Larry Geller, If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story (1989), p. 69-70. There can be no doubt that Martha’s mother "Nancy was Jewish. ... Again, names often tell a story and two of Martha's brothers were given Jewish names, Sidney and Jerome." See Elaine Dundy, Elvis and Gladys (2004), p.21. "Geller claims in his book [If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story] that Gladys told Elvis she had Jewish ancestors, starting with her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell. Which is pretty close to what Elaine Dundy says in her book." See Alanna Nash, Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations from the Memphis Mafia (1995), p.2-3. It should further be noted that the American Jewish Desk Reference (1999) by the American Jewish Historical Society is the first all-encompassing reference to Jewish life in the United States, from 1654 to the present. This authoritative reference of nearly 900 entries covers all aspects of America's lively and influential Jewish culture. It says on p. 128, "Shortly before he became the King of Rock and Roll, a teenaged Elvis Presley was the Shabbos goy for his upstairs neighbor, the local rabbi in the Jewish section of Memphis, Tennessee." This strongly suggests that Elvis himself was well aware of his Jewish heritage. Onefortyone (talk) 23:52, 26 April 2011 (UTC) And his being a shabbos goy is a good indication that he himself was not considered to be Jewish. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I don't think so. It only shows that he was not considered to be an Orthodox Jew, as his father was Christian. Only his mother seems to have been Jewish. Onefortyone (talk) 00:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I rather take Bugs's viewpoint: if the rabbi considered Presley a goy worthy of doing tasks disallowed for Jews on the Sabbath, the rabbi had pretty much accepted that Presley was not at all Jewish. It seems to me if the rabbi considered him a significant fraction Jewish, he would have chosen some other kid to do the disallowed work. Binksternet (talk) 01:06, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Thanks, Bugs, though you can be sure the troll knows. And, as usual, the troll has deliberately and maliciously represented a source. His claim that based on Dundy "there can be no doubt that Martha's mother 'Nancy was Jewish'" is blatantly false, as he well knows. Dundy notes that a third cousin of Elvis's claimed that a great-grandmother of Gladys's was Jewish. That leaves considerable room for doubt. As the troll is very familiar with this article, he also well knows that the cousin's claim has been directly debunked by syndicated columnist Nate Bloom. I know the troll would love to drag us into a back and forth about this, but it's not happening, at least on my end. This is the first and last time that I will directly address the troll's comments in this thread. Henceforth, his lies and willful misrepresentations will be ignored and, as always, any attempt he makes to mess with the article will be swiftly reverted. Goodbye, troll. DocKino (talk) 00:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Don't call me a troll, DocKino. Elaine Dundy writes that Martha "was the daughter of Abner and Nancy J. Burdine Tackett and ... Nancy is of particular interest to us. According to Elvis' third cousin Oscar Tackett (who shared the same ancestors, Abner and Nancy), Nancy was Jewish." (Elvis and Gladys, p.21). This does not sound as if Dundy leaves considerable room for doubt, as you falsely claim. Onefortyone (talk) 01:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Good plan. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Having kids named Sidney and Jerome is, of course, solid proof of Jewishness, although I'm sure that would come as a surprise to Sidney Poitier and Jerome Bettis, for example. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Let's start again at the beginning: "His great great grandmother was Jewish, according to Jewish law it is passed down maternally in Orthodox Judaism therefore it should be stated". Wrong. Just wrong. Wikipedia isn't governed by Jewish law. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Nor was Elvis, nor his parents, grandparents, etc. Looking at Who is a Jew?, and IF the unproven rumors about his great-great-grandmother happen to be true, THEN Elvis could be considered a Jew by birth, but only by Orthodox Judaism. Other branches of Judaism disagree with that premise. Some of the posters here might be forgetting what the matrilineal thing is about. As a Jew once told me, "You know who the mother is, but you don't necessarily know who the father is." That was before DNA testing came along, but that's the core concept anyway. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC) That is the point, really. If orthodox Jews wish to assert that by their laws, Elvis was Jewish, that is their right. It doesn't make it so by Wikipedia standards however. It cannot be, unless it is recognised by the non-'orthodox-Jewish' and the 'non-Jewish'. This is basic stuff, and implicit in WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and almost everything the project has ever said about verifiability. 01:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC) The definition of who is a Jew varies according to whether it is being considered by Jews based on normative religious statutes, self-identification, or by non-Jews for other reasons. Jewish identity can include characteristics of an ethnicity, a religion, and citizenship. If one of the parents is not Jewish, the rule is that the child takes the status of the mother. Indeed, Orthodox and Conservative communities do not recognize the Jewishness of a person if only the father is Jewish. Accordingly, if the mother is Jewish, so is her child. Reform rabbis in North America have set standards by which a person with one Jewish parent is considered a Jew if there have been "appropriate and timely public and formal acts of identification with the Jewish faith and people," such as a Jewish naming ceremony (remember that Elvis's parents named their son Elvis Aaron Presley). However, Orthodox Judaism considers a person born of a Jewish mother to be Jewish, even if they convert to another religion. According to the sources I have given above, it seems as if Gladys was well aware of her Jewish heritage. To my mind, it may be mentioned in the article. Onefortyone (talk) 02:10, 27 April 2011 (UTC) None of which has the slightest relevance, since Wikipedia is not governed by any form of Jewish law, tradition, or anything similar. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:19, 27 April 2011 (UTC) However, Elvis's personal development may have been governed by some form of Jewish tradition, and this certainly would have considerable relevance for the singer's biography. Onefortyone (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC) If you can provide reliable sources that demonstrate this, then maybe it would - though take note of WP:OR - you will have to find sources that themselves state this, rather than 'evidence' you find yourself. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Why are you calling people trolls for putting point across? Also being Jewish is both a race and a religion, think back to all the expelling of Jews in different countries and the extermination of Jews in Nazi regime if it was solidly just a religion how would anybody know who is and who isn't a Jew? Because IT IS an ethnicity and can be argued a "race" depending on what you describe as a "Jew", you stated you have Irish heritage in you, then yes you are Irish-American you can't doubt that, unless you are Cherokee or whatever other tribes are Native Americans you ain't really American. Back to Elvis, it has been well documented and that is sources how can you deny it? Why do you not like the fact Elvis was a Jew? Also why do you keep AVOIDING my argument, why is he on other wikipedia pages stating he is Jewish? 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_depictions_of_Elvis_Presley 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_American_entertainers That totally contradicts you, so why ain't he removed of either of them? Plenty upon plenty of sources state Elvis was Jewish and being Jewish is maternally passed down the line, his mother WAS Jewish therefore Elvis himself WAS Jewish and he was well aware of this, are you upset that he was Jewish or something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeordieWikiEditor (talk • contribs) 10:19, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Jewishness is not a race. That's Nazi propaganda. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Here we are. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC) No, it actually was Nazi propaganda. They kept talking about the "Jewish race". I had thought that notion was dead. Silly me. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC) "...being Jewish is maternally passed down the line". No it isn't. This is a belief held by (some) people of the Jewish faith. If Elvis was a believer in the Jewish faith, this might well be relevant, but since there is no evidence that he was, it is utterly irrelevant. And yes, 'Jewish' is not a race. Thanks for pointing out the Wikipedia articles that claim that Elvis was Jewish - since they were unsourced, I've deleted both references. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:31, 27 April 2011 (UTC) It is not Nazi propaganda it is true that Jews are both a race and a religion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48937817.html http://www.khazaria.com/genetics/abstracts.html Many upon many things back it up, and no it doesn't matter what Elvis considered himself religious wise ethnically he was Jewish, a Jew is a Jew. Wow well done you can remove them but it doesn't answer why was it even there in the first place? Why is they many sources stating he was Jewish? Please define a source in your opinion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeordieWikiEditor (talk • contribs) 14:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I have asked some actual Jewish editors to come here and weigh in on this discussion. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:41, 27 April 2011 (UTC) As Andy says, it should only be in the article if reliable sources support it. As an editor who is not of the Jewish faith, but who's heritage is a quarter Jewish (not too shabby!), I will attest that the Jews are indeed a race of people. I'm sure you meant well Bugs, but I have to say that your comment that it is "Nazi propaganda" is quite hurtful. Joefromrandb (talk) 15:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Really? What are their distinctive genetic characteristics, i.e. what is the "Jew gene"? And if I decide to convert to Judaism, do I then become a member of this "race"? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC) This is not the place for this discussion. Debating this here will not improve this article. I'd be happy to continue the discussion on my talk page, or yours, should you be interested. Joefromrandb (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC) This is the place, and it will improve the article (or at least keep junk out of the article). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:01, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I'm all for "keeping the junk out". But debating what constitutes Jewishness here will not improve the article. As multiple editors have noted, the only way to include that here would be if reliable sources back it up. They do not appear to. Inserting information based on a definition of Jewishness that was decided by Wikipedia editors would be original research. Joefromrandb (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Precisely. We have a couple of characters here who insist on labeling Elvis as part of some non-existent Jewish "race", and applying OR to conclude that Elvis is Jewish. As you say, that's bogus. Even if true, they have not provided any valid sourcing. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:42, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I understand your point. And Muboshgu also makes a good one about Jewishness being an ethnicity as opposed to a race. I'd still prefer you to redact the "Nazi propaganda" comments. The efforts to include Elvis' alleged Jewishness in this article are misguided, but appear to be in good faith. Saying that someone is perpetuating "Nazi propaganda" is a very serious charge. Joefromrandb (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC) They need to redact the obsolete, offensive nonsense about Jewishness being a "race". Once they've done that, get back to me. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:52, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I think reliable sources are what matter. I don't see any reliable sources saying that Elvis Presley was Jewish, but if I've overlooked such a source please bring it to my attention. "Judaism 101" says: "A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism. It is important to note that being a Jew has nothing to do with what you believe or what you do." In my opinion that is a fairly standard definition. (A minority opinion would include children of Jewish fathers as being Jewish.) But for our purposes we need verifiable sources. Concerning Elvis Presley being Jewish such sources seem to be lacking. Bus stop (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Bus Stop, your opinion is totally irrelevant. Wikipedia is not bound by Jewish law, tradition or beliefs. You are however right about needing reliable sources. These would need to show that Elvis considered himself Jewish, by ethnicity and/or by faith. Any other 'definition' would constitute a misrepresentation of a the rules of a particular belief system as 'factual', which would be utterly contrary to Wikipedia policy. This is all that needs to be said on the matter, and any attempt to argue otherwise on this talk page will only constitute trolling, as policy changes cannot be decided here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:45, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Jew weighing in here, brought in by Baseball Bugs... Judaism is not a "race", it can be considered an ethnicity. My race is Caucasian. As far as what to make of Elvis' Jewish ancestry, which I was not aware of until Bugs brought it up to me, I'm not sure how much to make of it. To me, religion is mostly about how you identify, not this silly rule about which parent passes it down. IIRC, Catholicism (or is it Christianity as a whole?) passes it down through the paternal line, so a kid with a Jewish mother and Christian (or Catholic) father is kinda stuck there in terms of which wins out, by that argument. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:13, 27 April 2011 (UTC) That's a fair point. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC) They's a difference being a religious Jew and being a racial Jew. Anybody can be a Jew if converted to Judaism but you can also be of Jewish heritage, Jew derives from Judea not Judaism. It doesn't matter if Elvis considered himself Jewish or not he was well aware of his Jewish ancestry. Do you think he considered himself German or Scottish even though he had that in his heritage? No he just considered himself American, do you think Karl Marx considered himself Jewish? No he was a self-hating Jew, once a Jew always a Jew this is a fact. They is reliable sources further up stating and proving that Elvis was Jewish, his middle name is also kind of making it even more obvious.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 19:44, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Your personal views about what actually defines a Jew are as irrelevant as your claims that anyone here would "not like" Presley to be Jewish are baseless and mean-spirited. But what's most important is that your final claim is completely false. Not one single reliable source has been provided "proving that Elvis was Jewish." The strongest evidence--weak as it is--in a reliable source is Dundy's report that a third cousin of Presley's claimed that one of their great-great-grandmothers was Jewish. As detailed in the existing note, syndicated columnist Nate Bloom--who researched the matter more thoroughly than Dundy--rather conclusively debunked the cousin's claim. The other work you adduce, Goldstein and Wallace's Schmelvis, is a humor book. If you actually believe that it "proves" Elvis was Jewish, or even comes close, give us the page(s) and quote the evidence, which you have never bothered to do. DocKino (talk) 20:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Your only source, DocKino, seems to be Nate Bloom. Has this Jewish columnist written a book on Elvis? No, he hasn’t. He has only given his personal opinion on a website that helps and provides resources for couples with one Jewish partner and one non-Jewish partner. Is this really a reliable source according to Wikipedia standards? I don't think so. Be that as it may, on this webpage dealing with "The Jews Who Wrote Christmas Songs" (see [12]) we can read: Presley was not Jewish. Yes, some sources repeat a tall tale that Presley's third cousin told 20 years ago to a Jewish biographer of Presley. This cousin said that he and Presley shared a very remote Jewish maternal ancestor (a woman who lived in the early to mid 1800's) This biographer did no further checking on this cousin's story. She just reported it as "fact." A detailed check of available records shows that this maternal ancestor was not Jewish. Presley and his parents did share a two-family house in Memphis, Tenn. with a poor Orthodox rabbi and his family in the early '50s. I spoke to the daughter of this rabbi. Her mother, the rabbi's wife, and Presley's mother, Gladys, were close friends. Gladys, her mother told her, never said a word about any Jewish ancestor. Her mother said that if Gladys had any knowledge of any Jewish ancestor, the mother was sure Gladys wouldn't have hesitated to mention it. Presley worked for the rabbi's family, doing tasks Jews were not permitted to do on the Jewish Sabbath. He did this for free. The rabbi, in turn, did things like lend Presley his record player and arrange for a summer camp trip for Presley. When Presley hit it big, he made a major donation to the rabbi's religious school. As I often tell people, the true story of the lovely relations between this rabbi's family and the Presley family is a more important and meaningful story than a story about Presley having a remote Jewish maternal ancestor. So much for this rather weak personal opinion. Bloom's only argument is his claim that a detailed check of available records (which records?) shows that Elvis's maternal ancestor was not Jewish and that he spoke to the daughter of the rabbi who allegedly said that her mother told her that Gladys never said a word about any Jewish ancestor. Interestingly, Bloom didn't know the rabbi's family name, and he didn't even know the other source which explicitly states that Gladys told Elvis that her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell, was Jewish. Furthermore, the friendship with the rabbi and his family and Elvis's major donation to the rabbi's religious school strongly suggest that there might have been some deeper Jewish connections. Onefortyone (talk) 22:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Why did he wear the Star of David? Why is books out in the big wide world telling everyone he was Jewish? How can I give you the quotes in pages from a book I don't own?--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 22:11, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Exactly what are these "books...telling everyone he was Jewish?" Does even Dundy, for instance, say "Elvis Presley was Jewish"? I don't believe she does, but if you do, give us the page and the quote. How do you explain the fact that the two-volume biography by Peter Guralnick--widely recognized as the most thoroughly researched, authoritative treatment of his life--makes not the slightest suggestion that Presley was Jewish? Indeed, it's difficult to quote a book you don't own. Why are you even referring to a book you don't own, have never even looked at, and don't even recognize is a humor book? DocKino (talk) 22:20, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Geordie was already proven wrong about the gravestone of his mother supposedly having the star of David. "Elvis wore the Star of David"? Where's the evidence for that claim? I'm starting to think that he's making this stuff up. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:23, 27 April 2011 (UTC) You guys need another reliable source? Here is Glen Jeansonne, David Luhrssen, Dan Sokolovic, Elvis Presley, Reluctant Rebel: His Life and Our Times (2011), p.31: Elvis's identification with the Jews continued once he became a star. When the Jewish Community Center was built in Memphis during the 1960s, he donated money for its construction. He had a Star of David engraved onto Gladys's tombstone, and often wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace. Onefortyone (talk) 22:34, 27 April 2011 (UTC) As I pointed out earlier,[13] there is no Star of David on Gladys' tomb. Since he got that dead wrong, I assume the rest of his so-called information is unreliable also. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC) This is your personal opinion. Which source explicitly states that there is no Star of David on Gladys' tomb? The photographs didn't show all parts of the tombstone. Onefortyone (talk) 22:50, 27 April 2011 (UTC) His mother's tomb, like his own, is topped with a Christian symbol, a cross. That stands to reason, as the family was Christian. Regarding the "Aaron" business, I have relatives named Aaron, and they are all Christian. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:54, 27 April 2011 (UTC) And as I also pointed out earlier, the tomb has raised lettering. There's nothing "carved into" it. It's plainly obvious that the author of that book has never seen it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:55, 27 April 2011 (UTC) This is again your personal opinion. The source says otherwise and this is what counts on Wikipedia. Onefortyone (talk) 23:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC) The source is dead wrong, therefore it's unreliable and cannot be used. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Believe it or not, the source isn't wrong, as ElvisFan1981 has shown below. Onefortyone (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Looking through Google Images of Elvis, I don't see any that have a Hebrew symbol around his neck. If y'all can find even one, I'd like to see it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:48, 27 April 2011 (UTC) For one of several of Elvis's Star of David watches, see [14]. Onefortyone (talk) 22:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Just so that all those concerned have the full facts for this discussion regarding Gladys' grave and the Star of David; the grave at Graceland is not her original grave, as of course it was moved there with Elvis' in late 1977. Her original grave did indeed have a Star of David, and the grave was designed by Elvis himself with knowledge of his mother's Jewish roots in mind. Apparently Gladys made Elvis very aware of their Jewish roots from a very young age in his life. A quick google search shows clearly her original grave and the Star of David. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 23:03, 27 April 2011 (UTC) How many Jews do you know that have a Christian cross on their graves? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I am not saying that anyone is or isn't Jewish, I am just pointing out that her original grave did indeed have a Star of David on it; I think it's important for everyone to have the full facts within this discussion. The reasons for both symbols are, I assume, because Elvis and his family were primarily Christian, but Gladys and Elvis did have, or could have had, Jewish roots through the maternal line. The main point is that Elvis, albeit at some very basic level, was aware of his families Jewish heritage in some form. There are also images of him wearing the Star of David on stage, perhaps for his "technicality" argument, though, to be fair. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 23:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the clarification. Although we may have disagreed in several points in the past, I like your contributions, as in most cases they are reliably sourced. Onefortyone (talk) 23:24, 27 April 2011 (UTC) I've asked our Jewish contributor to give his thoughts on what having both a 6-pointed star and a cross on one's headstone would signify. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC) AndyTheGrump—in reference to your post here, you say "You are however right about needing reliable sources. These would need to show that Elvis considered himself Jewish…" Do you find support in Wikipedia policy for the idea that we would "need to show that Elvis considered himself Jewish," or are these just your personal feelings? If you find support for that in policy would you please point such policy out? Bus stop (talk) 23:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC) It did indeed have a a Star of David on the grave, he was aware of his Jewish heritage, what is the problem? Also how can I quote something from a book (i.e a page from a book) when I don't own it?--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC) You mean you had never even looked at Schmelvis when you claimed that it "proved" Elvis was Jewish? That's very irresponsible of you. Please don't mention or link us to Schmelvis again. DocKino (talk) 01:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Also clearly it isn't a coincidence that he was on 2 other Wikipedia sites stating he was Jewish?--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC) There are all sorts of poorly sourced or entirely unsourced rumors represented on low-quality Wikipedia pages. This is a high-quality Wikipedia article, with much higher standards. Instead of repeatedly referring us to low-quality sources that--coincidentally!--support your personal perspective, please read our policy on WP:Verifiability, particularly the section on reliable sources. If you had done that by now, you might have spared us the useless, time-wasting discussion of Schmelvis and other Wikipedia pages. DocKino (talk) 01:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Checking around, there are some pictures of him wearing a chai around his neck in 1977. This may have more merit than I had originally thought. Joefromrandb (talk) 00:43, 28 April 2011 (UTC) I have asked User:Malik Shabazz-a Jewish editor and an administrator I respect-if he would be willing to comment here. Joefromrandb (talk) 00:53, 28 April 2011 (UTC) There is a difference between 'being aware of having Jewish heritage' (though this hasn't actually been demonstrated yet), and 'being Jewish'. In any case, none of this is relevant, as we can only include statements on ethnicity, faith etc when provided with reliable sources - we cannot base this on our interpretation of photographs, as this would be original research - or more accurately guesswork. As for the content of other Wikipedia pages, firstly, they were unsourced (and hence, removed), and secondly, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source for itself - this is common sense, as well as policy. Can I suggest that those wishing to contribute to the article look for evidence, read our policy on sources if they haven't already, and then come back if they have something of relevance? This is not a forum for general discussion about Elvis. Contributions not directly relevant to the article content are off-topic, and may be deleted. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:01, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Here are my thoughts: 1) Elvis didn't consider himself a Jew, so I'd be very surprised if a reliable source could be found that says he was Jewish. 2) If Elvis had a direct maternal ancestor who was Jewish, he might be considered Jewish under Jewish law. But Wikipedia is not a rabbinical court, so Jewish law has no relevance here. 3) Consider WP:UNDUE. How relevant to his biography is Presley's possible Jewish ancestry—assuming support for such ancestry can be found in reliable sources? I think the way this is being handled—in a content note—is probably appropriate. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 05:03, 28 April 2011 (UTC) It doesn't matter if he considered himself Jewish he knew he had Jewish ancestry these pictures and family records do not lie it is even on the elvispresley website itself. About his other ethnicties Scottish/German when you read the references... it is a book? Please tell me how that is a reliable source. David Cameron is Jewish but doesn't define himself as Jewish, difference? NONE.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 09:48, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Brad Hirschfield,Author,radio and TV talk show host,and President of CLAL - The National Jewish Centres for Learning and Leadership. Listed as one of the nations 50 most influential rabbis in Newsweek,had this to say back in January 8,2010. "Elvis Presley would have turned 75 today,and people are still asking if he was Jewish. Well perhaps he was,at least according to Jewish law,if not in his own mind. According to some Elvis historians,his mother's maternal grandmother was Jewish - a woman named Nancy (others say, Martha) Tachett. Of course,Elvis never thought of himself as Jewish. At least there is no evidence that he did. From the standpoint of halakka (Jewish law),the answer is by all means. In fact according to the Talmud,one remains Jewish even if they choose to convert to another tradition. Jewishness is a forever kind of thing. Of course the implications of that law are potentially two - fold: on the one hand,nothing a person does can dissolve there connection to the Jewish people. Once you are in,you are in forever. On the other hand, it suggest that Jewishness can operate independently of any idiology or pratice,in which case one might be considered a member of the Jewish people even if they don't meet the test according to how some Jews interpret Jewish law. Elvis' Jewishness,like his music,reprisents a fluid blending of cultures and communities. I can't help but wonder how good it might be for Jews and Judaism if we were as good at applying that process to faith and community as Elvis was to music..." In clossing I would also like to mention also something Elvis himself mentions with humor,when asked why he wore a cross,the Hebrew letter chai,and a star of David around his neck. "I don't want to miss out on heaven due to a technicality," he said.--Jaye9 (talk) 11:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Exactly, these people who are saying you need a reliable source to prove he was a Jew well why would they be plenty of books and historians who have stated his mothers grandmother was Jewish? Elvis didn't consider himself a Jew by religion he was a devoted Christian but this about his ethnic Jewish ancestry, even Jews admit Jews are both a ethnicity/race and a religion yet people further up state it's only a religion so really their don't even know what a "Jew" is themselves, it does not matter if Elvis thought of himself religiously as Jewish (following Judaism) once a Jew always a Jew lots of Jews practice other religions or no religion but still remain Jewish. You say you have not even bothered to quote us on the Schmelvis book on which page(s) but if I've not got the book how can I? A whole website "http://www.elvispresleynews.com/JewishElvis.html" which even before Jewish is elvispresleynews states his Jewishness, so many people who look up to Elvis know he had Jewish ancestry and so did he himself, the pictures here - http://www.debbieschlussel.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/elvischai21.jpg You go on about books not being reliable sources, his "Scottish and German" ancestry are book referenced, please tell me how this is any different? Remember this is not about personal opinions this is about facts.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 11:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Another book - http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=IYbOeqSWVhUC&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21&dq=elvis+and+gladys+jewish&source=bl&ots=7plM04vHyD&sig=EGfvH_vQs1h0zheRI9965N5sQN0&hl=en&ei=H1a5TYVGzrGFB-C-iIoP&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CGUQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=elvis%20and%20gladys%20jewish&f=false Quote "According to Elvis' third cousin Oscar Tackett (who shared the same ancestors, Abner and Nancy), Nancy was Jewish" Another, http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/biography/elvis_presley_family_history.shtml Quote "White Mansell married Martha Tackett, a neighbour in Saltillo. Of note is the religion, Jewish, of Martha's mother, Nancy Tackett. It was unusual to find a Jewish settler in Mississippi during this time." Family tree - http://www.elvispresleynews.com/images/ElvisFamilyTree.jpg--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 12:01, 28 April 2011 (UTC) More again - http://www.urigeller.com/Elvis/07/Elvis07.htm Quote "Elvis Presley had confided to his close friend and spiritual advisor, Larry Geller, that he was Jewish. His great grandmother Martha Tackett was Jewish and Jewish law follows the mother's geneaology which makes Elvis Jewish. His mother Gladys did not disclose the fact to Vernon Presley as the South was very anti-semitic in those days. However, she wanted Elvis to go to a school that had mainly Jewish children, wanting him to mix with Jews and hopefully get a better education as she knew Jews were very concerned about education for their children. Many of Elvis' school friends were Jewish and remained friends when he became famous, such as George Klein, Marty Lacker and Alan Fortas. Elvis put a 'Star of David' on his mother's grave. When Elvis and Glady's bodies were removed from their original place of burial at Forest Hills Cemeteries in Memphis to Graceland Vernon removed the Star of David from Glady's grave. It was believed Elvis' body would be kidnapped from his original resting place so he and his mother's graves were moved secretly one night. Could it have been a commercial decision so they could charge fans to visit Graceland and view Elvis' grave I wonder? Elvis often wore a "Chai" on his neck, the Jewish symbol for "Life" and when asked why he wore a Chai and a Cross he answered, "I do not want to miss getting into heaven on a technicality". Elaine Dundy uncovered Elvis' Jewish lineage in her research for her book, "Elvis and Gladys". Elvis owned several watches with the Star of David as well as items of jewellery."--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 12:03, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Can somebody tell me why I'm getting a message saying "last change" final warning? I've NOT edited the Wikipedia page of Elvis since being warned, I am simply discussing and putting my point across on here not on the main page.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 14:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Presley was interested in spiritual matters and read a great deal, and talked to a diverse bunch of people, about his 'quest' for the meaning of life. He was interested in many religions, the occult, mysticism and the paranormal. He also wore an ankh symbol, as well crosses, chais, etc. (according to Linda Thompson). May be he thought he was descended from Rameses II... Someone, probably with a vested interest, once tried to argue he was about to convert to Mormonism just before he died. I grew bored ages ago about whether Presley was of German, Irish, Inuit, or Venusian descent, as any 'facts' regarding these matters have little bearing on his career and achievements, and this article is necessarily limited in what it can cover. We need reference to the places the family worshipped, where he learnt to sing or hear musicians, what religious music he listened on radio, etc, etc. This is the real relevant stuff, and we have it in the article. Scrap if you like about his Jewishness but if anything concrete is decided (is anyone going to mention whether he was circumcised?), please bury it really deep, in a footnote. Rikstar409 20:50, 28 April 2011 (UTC) I think we're close to wrapping this up. Aside from citing, for the umpteenth time, Dundy--whose information is already addressed in a footnote--Geordie has ignored my advice to educate himself on our WP:Verifiability policy and dumped another slew of "sources" that clearly fall below our standards. He also seems very confused about books--how to properly cite them and how to, you know, read them. Oh well. DocKino (talk) 21:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC) How can I tell you which page in a book it says he was Jewish when I do not own the book? You are still ignoring me, the Scottish and German origin is book referenced, tell me how the book is a "reliable source"--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 11:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Read Wikipedia:Citing sources. If you haven't got access to a book, you shouldn't be citing it as a source. You don't need to own it, but you do need to have read it. Haven't you got access to a library? As for what is considered a reliable source, see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I'd also point out that we have a source (Nate Bloom - see note in article) who has done research into the question on Elvis's 'Jewishness', and described it as a "tall tale". On that basis, we cannot possibly state that Elvis was Jewish, but only that he was claimed to be, and that this has been contested. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC) How has he done research into it? I see no sources disproving that he wasn't Jewish? Secondly, I provided a link to a book which states he was Jewish and furthermore he himself knew he had Jewish ancestry and why do you think his middle name is Aaron? It kind of makes sense.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 17:25, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Working backwards: "It kind of makes sense" is not the sort of "reasoning" that has any place in an encyclopedia. We deal in facts here. Lots of devout Christians give their children Old Testament names. It appears you hadn't noticed, but Christians consider the Hebrew Scriptures part of their Holy Bible, thus the name "Old Testament." Think about it. You might see the light. You state "he himself knew he had Jewish ancestry" as if it is a fact. It is not. It is precisely the point of contention. Even the strongest source for the case that he had some Jewish ancestry--Dundy--never states that he knew he had Jewish ancestry. You yourself have never provided one single reliable source stating that Presley "knew" he had "Jewish ancestry." This remains no more than your personal article of faith. You make the usual beginner's error of demanding sources that prove a negative ("I see no sources disproving that he wasn't Jewish?"). But in fact, we do have syndicated columnist Nate Bloom, who qualifies as a reliable source, directly debunking the claim that appears in Dundy. And, if you are truly interested in Elvis, you should read the authoritative biography by Peter Guralnick, who reports no evidence that Presley was Jewish or aware of any Jewish ancestry. He does describe a young Elvis's employment as a Shabbos goy, which we've tried to explain to you means he was a gentile, not a Jew. And--guess what!--Guralnick himself is Jewish!! Hard to believe he'd try to bury Presley's Jewishness if it were a fact. Guess what, Geordie, it probably ain't a fact at all. "Has he done research into it"? You seem to be referring to Bloom (another Jew!) here. Yes, Bloom attests, with convincing detail, that he has done research into the question. That's exactly why we cite him. Finally--or firstly--you keep repeating yourself over...and over...and over...and you become less, not more, convincing with each repetition. If you have nothing new and substantive to add, it's time for you to move on to a different subject. DocKino (talk) 18:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC) GeordieWikiEditor, you have been given links to the appropriate Wikipedia policy regarding sourcing, citation etc. You have been told that you cannot use your own 'research' (actually, just guesswork) in the article. Nothing you have provided is of any relevance according to the standards required. In consequence, unless you can provide properly cited references from reliable sources as defined by Wikipedia, there is nothing further to be said on this topic, and I suggest you consider the subject closed. This is not a forum for general debate about Elvis, and I'd ask you not to continue posting comments which are of no relevance. Note that such comments may be deleted as off-topic. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:22, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Why would a website dedicated to Elvis make it up? http://www.elvispresleynews.com/JewishElvis.html Why would so many books say he was Jewish not just speculated but discovered it and was just told not to mention it?--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 21:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

There is much evidence that Elvis had deep Jewish family roots

Elvis's personal development must have been governed by some form of Jewish tradition, and this certainly would have considerable relevance for the singer's biography. Let’s stick close to the reliable sources, i.e. the material that has been published in books on Elvis:

"Elvis' confusion and secrecy about Judaism came from his upbringing. When he was quite young Gladys told him that her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell, was Jewish." See Larry Geller, If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story (1989), p. 69-70.

Martha "was the daughter of Abner and Nancy J. Burdine Tackett and ... Nancy is of particular interest to us. According to Elvis' third cousin Oscar Tackett (who shared the same ancestors, Abner and Nancy), Nancy was Jewish. ... Again, names often tell a story and two of Martha's brothers were given Jewish names, Sidney and Jerome." See Elaine Dundy, Elvis and Gladys (2004), p.21.

"Geller claims in his book [If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story] that Gladys told Elvis she had Jewish ancestors, starting with her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell. Which is pretty close to what Elaine Dundy says in her book." See Alanna Nash, Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations from the Memphis Mafia (1995), p.2-3.

"Elvis's identification with the Jews continued once he became a star. When the Jewish Community Center was built in Memphis during the 1960s, he donated money for its construction. He had a Star of David engraved onto Gladys's tombstone, and often wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace." See Glen Jeansonne, David Luhrssen, Dan Sokolovic, Elvis Presley, Reluctant Rebel: His Life and Our Times (2011), p.31.

As ElvisFan1981 has pointed out, there are images of Elvis wearing the Star of David on stage. Gladys's original grave did indeed have a Star of David, and the grave was designed by Elvis himself with knowledge of his mother's Jewish roots in mind. Furthermore, there are several Star of David watches which Elvis designed with Marty Lacker and had manufactured by Harry Levitch Jewelers of Memphis. For one of these watches, see [15]. All this suggests that Elvis was deeply influenced by some form of Jewish tradition. The only person explicitly claiming that Presley was not Jewish is Jewish columnist Nate Bloom on a webpage entitled "The Jews Who Wrote Christmas Songs". See [16]. Bloom's only argument is his claim that a detailed check of available records (which records?) shows that Elvis's maternal ancestor was not Jewish and that he spoke to the daughter of the rabbi who allegedly said that her mother told her that Gladys never said a word about any Jewish ancestor. Interestingly, Bloom doesn't know the family name of the said rabbi, and he doesn't even know Larry Geller’s statement that Gladys told Elvis that her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell, was Jewish. This means that Bloom's remarks are poorly sourced. To conclude: Bloom’s personal opinion published on an obscure webpage isn’t a reliable source according to Wikipedia standards, whereas the other books cited above are reliable sources. Onefortyone (talk) 02:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm pleased that you have chosen to continue the debate here, Onefortyone, rather than attempting to yet again insert this claim into peripheral articles - the debate clearly needs to be resolved here.

With regard to the sources you cite, I'd start by pointing out that Wikipedia does not need to accept the definition of 'Jewishness' as defined by certain followers of that faith. Even if it could be proven that he was 'Jewish' on the matrilineal line, that would not necessarily be acceptable per Wikipedia policy. Regarding the 'Star of David' etc, this falls under WP:OR, and is thus irrelevant. As for the merits of Bloom's research, I'll not comment, beyond pointing out that Bloom seems to have at least done some, rather than trawling for 'proof' in all sorts of obscure places. If you have evidence from reliable sources that Nate Bloom was wrong, let us have it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I have not yet seen that Bloom's remarks on the said, rather obscure webpage have been earnestly discussed by Elvis biographers. Onefortyone (talk) 02:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

True. But then our remarks on this obscure webpage haven't been either. So your WP:OR is of no consequence. Either find a reliable souce that states that Elvis was Jewish, and explains why, or drop the argument. AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is an additional source: "On a gold chain around his neck, Elvis wore a gold Star of David and a crucifix." See Susan Doll, Elvis for Dummies (2009). This means that he was well aware both of his Jewish and Christian roots. Onefortyone (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

That's original research on your part. Maybe he just liked the way they looked. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

This is your personal opinion. What about the other sources I have provided? Onefortyone (talk) 03:06, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm saying that wearing jewelry that is typically connected with a religion is not evidence that they are part of that religion. To claim they are, is original research. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

According to Glen Jeansonne, David Luhrssen and Dan Sokolovic, "Elvis's identification with the Jews continued once he became a star. ... He had a Star of David engraved onto Gladys's tombstone, and often wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace." See above. This is not original research. Onefortyone (talk) 03:12, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Regardless of other concerns, "identification with the Jews" doesn't make you Jewish - it makes you sympathetic to the situation of Jews (cosider the difference between 'with' and 'as') - and yes, that is original research, in any case. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Here is another reliable source:

"The King of Rock 'n' Roll officially qualifies as a Member of the Tribe. Technically speaking, Elvis was a Yid. … The King actually knew about his Jewish roots, but his parents reportedly suggested he hide them."

See Lisa Alcalay Klug, Cool Jew: The Ultimate Guide for Every Member of the Tribe (2008), p.14. This is not original research. Onefortyone (talk) 03:28, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

"Technically speaking, Elvis was a Yid". Charming. But Does 'technically speaking' mean that Elvis was Jewish, or that some people like to claim he was? What his parent's 'reportedly' said is hardly evidence either... That isn't original research, but it isn't evidence, either. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

The source clearly says, "The King of Rock 'n' Roll officially qualifies as a Member of the Tribe." The Wikipedia article should simply cite what the sources say, and let the reader decide. Or do you have problems with the fact that Elvis had Jewish roots? Onefortyone (talk) 03:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Their trying to claim Elvis as one of their own don't make it so. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. The 'tribe' are in no position to reliably assert who is or isn't a member - in case you hadn't noticed, there is no universal definition of 'Jewishness', even amongst those who claim to be Jews. If Elvis considered himself Jewish, then maybe it deserves mention in his biography. If others consider him to be Jewish, it is of little relevance. The article is about Elvis, not about ethnicity, theology, or any other abstraction. It is quite possible that Elvis had some Jewish ancestry - statistically speaking, most people with European ancestors probably do, never mind anywhere else. To state that he was Jewish requires more preciseness - what does this mean? AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Reliable sources determine the content of an article. If reliable sources support that Elvis Presley identified with Jews, that would be something that could find its way into an article.

The exact wording would obviously be important here, as the sources that have been presented here do not indicate anything like a serious commitment to or understanding of Judaism or Jews. Wording would have to accurately reflect the sparse notion that reliable sources reflect.

It doesn't seem that reliable sources say that Presley was Jewish, so that could not be said. His Christian orientation could be noted in the same sentence or in adjoining sentences.

The article doesn't have to be completely mute on Presley's interest in Jews and Jewish symbols. Reliable sources apparently comment on this, establishing for our purposes that there were dalliances with Jewish identity on the part of Presley, though it does not seem that reliable sources would support a statement that he was Jewish.

Obviously we would want to steer clear of jumping to conclusions (original research) that symbols worn as jewelry establish Jewish identity. I think that would require support in wording from reliable sources. Bus stop (talk) 04:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I think a few people have a problem with the fact that Elvis had Jewish ancestry and he was well aware of it that is not original search it is confirmed documented sources that are in books and all sorts. It doesn't matter if he practiced Christianity he was still Jewish and you need to accept that, it is well worth pursuing this because it is a must it is what made Elvis who he was and by adding it into the article provides another part of his ancestry.

All of them sources a person provided earlier on would be counted as reliable sources - check the Scottish and German origins of Elvis the references are books, why is this any different? It is not and I honestly don't know why I was final warned when my edit was clearly backed up and even more now someone has even found more reliable sources. It does not matter YOUR opinion of who is a Jew and who is not, we go by Judaism and the ethnic side of things and by both definitions he would have been considered a Jew/Jewish.--GeordieWikiEditor (talk) 22:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

(ec)No he would not. Even if the source were reliable (which it is not), it would not show that Elvis was a Jew. Under Jewish religious law, a Jew is someone whose mother was a Jew, or who has undergone a conversion. Not someone whose great great grandmother may, according to one source, have been a Jew. That interpretation would be even more flexible even than Israel's Law of Return, which for the purpose of immigration accords automatic citizenship to a Jew, or the child or grandchild of a Jew. Elvis was quite simply not a Jew. Full stop. Nor, for that matter, are many of the others to whom you repeatedly ascribe a Jewish identity. Why this obsession with labelling people as Jews? RolandR (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Unless you can provide evidence from sources that meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliability which unequivocally state that Elvis was Jewish, and explain the grounds on which they base this, this discussion is closed. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:40, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Andy are you just acting ignorant here?

"Elvis' confusion and secrecy about Judaism came from his upbringing. When he was quite young Gladys told him that her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell, was Jewish." See Larry Geller, If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story (1989), p. 69-70. Martha "was the daughter of Abner and Nancy J. Burdine Tackett and ... Nancy is of particular interest to us. According to Elvis' third cousin Oscar Tackett (who shared the same ancestors, Abner and Nancy), Nancy was Jewish. ... Again, names often tell a story and two of Martha's brothers were given Jewish names, Sidney and Jerome." See Elaine Dundy, Elvis and Gladys (2004), p.21. "Geller claims in his book [If I Can Dream: Elvis' Own Story] that Gladys told Elvis she had Jewish ancestors, starting with her maternal grandmother, Martha Tackett Mansell. Which is pretty close to what Elaine Dundy says in her book." See Alanna Nash, Elvis Aaron Presley: Revelations from the Memphis Mafia (1995), p.2-3. "Elvis's identification with the Jews continued once he became a star. When the Jewish Community Center was built in Memphis during the 1960s, he donated money for its construction. He had a Star of David engraved onto Gladys's tombstone, and often wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace." See Glen Jeansonne, David Luhrssen, Dan Sokolovic, Elvis Presley, Reluctant Rebel: His Life and Our Times (2011), p.31.

Is perfectly reliable sources and enough evidence to face the fact he was Jewish.--Jimmyson88 (talk) 00:42, 2 May 2011 (UTC) - Comments by blocked sockpuppet of User:GeordieWikiEditor struck out. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:45, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not. It doesn't say he was Jewish. It says an ancestor was Jewish. "identification with" is not the same as "indentified as". Yworo (talk) 02:59, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Compromise

What about this version:

Although he did not practice the religion, Elvis seems to have had some halachically Jewish family roots, because of his grandmother's Jewish heritage. He was known to wear both a cross and a Star of David around his neck, explaining that he "wouldn't want to be kept out of Heaven on a technicality." He also wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace. Elvis's identification with the Jews seems to have continued throughout his life. He had the Star of David engraved onto his mother's tombstone, and when the Jewish Community Center was built in Memphis during the 1960s, he donated money for its construction.

This version explicitly says that Elvis did not practice the Jewish religion, but it mentions his identification with the Jews. I think this information should not be omitted. Onefortyone (talk) 00:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Way to troll it, good buddy! Sounds like the perfect foundation for a new, crucial article: Elvis Presley (SEEMS to Have Had Some) Jewishness. Don't you dare omit that article from Wikipedia. DocKino (talk) 07:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

A clearer example of WP:SYN could hardly be found. To who does it 'seem', according to the evidence presented that Elvis had some Jewish roots? Why - OneFortyOne of course! In any case, we don't fill the article with every minor speculative detail about what 'seems' to be (possibly) true, even if sourced. Troll elsewhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:20, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

What about this version:

Although he did not practice the Jewish religion, some friends and biographers say that Elvis had not only Christian but also Jewish family roots, because of his maternal grandmother's Jewish heritage. He was known to wear both a cross and a Star of David around his neck, explaining that he "wouldn't want to be kept out of Heaven on a technicality." He also wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace. According to Glen Jeansonne, David Luhrssen and Dan Sokolovic, "Elvis's identification with the Jews" continued throughout his life. He had the Star of David engraved onto his mother's tombstone, and when the Jewish Community Center was built in Memphis during the 1960s, he donated money for its construction.

All this is well sourced and not an example of WP:SYN. Wikipedia cites what the sources say, the reader is well informed about the topic. Onefortyone (talk) 00:52, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

It is still probably synthesis (read WP:SYN: "If one reliable source says A, and another reliable source says B, do not join A and B together to imply a conclusion C that is not mentioned by either of the sources"), but in any case, it is all speculative. Unless you can find evidence that Elvis's 'Jewish' connections have been meaningfully discussed in mainstream sources, I cannot see any point in including this. The fact of the matter is that if we wanted to include everything that has been speculated about in relation to Elvis, we could probably quadruple the size of the present article within a week or two. This article isn't intended to cover every possible aspect of Elvis's life, but rather the ones which one would expect to find in a mainstream encyclopaedia - which excludes minor 'maybe' issues that have hardly been commented on. Ultimately, there are only two 'factual' questions involved: did Elvis have any Jewish ancestry, and if he did, did this affect his life in any meaningful way. In both cases, the only answer anyone can possibly give is 'maybe' - not exactly Earth-shattering information. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:14, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I do not understand your argument. Elvis's 'Jewish' connections have been meaningfully discussed in a recent Elvis biography. It says, "Elvis's identification with the Jews continued once he became a star. When the Jewish Community Center was built in Memphis during the 1960s, he donated money for its construction. He had a Star of David engraved onto Gladys's tombstone, and often wore a Chai, the Jewish symbol for life, on a necklace." See Glen Jeansonne, David Luhrssen, Dan Sokolovic, Elvis Presley, Reluctant Rebel: His Life and Our Times (2011), p.31. Mainstream sources by Elaine Dundy and Alanna Nash mention his Jewish family roots. These are the facts. Onefortyone (talk) 01:33, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand why 141 doesn't seem to understand, or chooses not to comment on, the following: "The fact of the matter is that if we wanted to include everything that has been speculated about in relation to Elvis, we could probably quadruple the size of the present article within a week or two. This article isn't intended to cover every possible aspect of Elvis's life, but rather the ones which one would expect to find in a mainstream encyclopaedia - which excludes minor 'maybe' issues that have hardly been commented on." It is not unknown for 141 to ignore salient points in arguments against him - one of the reasons that accusations of trolling have been made against him. The fact is Presley 'identified with' a great many religions, spiritual beliefs, philosophies (like those behind his beloved karate), etc., and you could write a whole article on it all. But you can't cherry pick bits of it when they will not really tell the full extent of his interests. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 05:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Systemloc, 10 July 2011

The page is missing dates, and, in many cases, dates do not have the years. For example, the first Milton Berle appearance is listed as "April 3". It should also have the year, 1956. The July 17 date of his first appearance, at the Bon Air club, should include the year, 1954, as well.

Systemloc (talk) 14:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. FREYWA 08:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Are not the dates already referenced in the article and citations listed? Systemloc is simply asking for the dates of some events to be clarified. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 20:39, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

things people may not know about elvis

some people say elvis had an unusual scent but his wife disagreed. elvis liked lima beans he rode horses in his free time he ate bananas every tuesday elvis was a horrible student he had a hairy wrist he didnt like facial hair he he liked walnuts he twitched he didnt know how to ride a bike — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.6.3 (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I lost my father in March this year and I miss him terribly. I read your comments tonight and I think to myself, your what my Uncle would call as being a non event dear!--Jaye9 (talk) 14:00, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Elvis's claimed illigitimate daughter Deborah Presley

the courts had judged that there was merit to the claim that Deborah Presley Brando was the illegitimate daughter of Elvis. http://preslaw.blogspot.com/2009/11/another-temp-post.html 99.51.144.55 (talk) 20:19, 19 July 2011 (UTC) http://elvisdecoded.blogspot.com/2007/06/wanted-elvis-and-my-mothers-marriage.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.144.55 (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not base articles on the content of blogs. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

So sorry, is the following considered a blog or public records...

Extended content

Court of Appeals of Tennessee, Western Section, at Jackson. Deborah Delaine PRESLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joseph A. HANKS, Priscilla B. Presley and National Bank of Commerce, co-executors of the Estate of Elvis A. Presley, Deceased, Defendants-Appellees. 782 S.W.2d 482 July 20, 1989. Application for Permission to Appeal Denied by Supreme Court Nov. 6, 1989. CRAWFORD, Judge. This is a will construction case. On February 18, 1988, appellant, Deborah Delaine Presley, acting pro se, filed a petition in the probate court entitled "Petition To Determine Heirship And For Share Of Estate Under Will Heretofore Admitted To Probate." In essence, the petition alleges that petitioner is the illegitimate daughter of the testator, Elvis A. Presley, and pursuant to the terms and provisions of his Last Will and Testament, she, as his daughter, is entitled to a share of the estate. The Answer of the co-executors, Joseph A. Hanks, Priscilla B. Presley and National Bank of Commerce, filed September 23, 1988, denies the material allegations of the complaint and joins issue thereon. The Answer specifically avers that the decedent's will expressly excludes petitioner as a beneficiary. On the same date, the co-executors also filed a motion for summary judgment asserting that the express language of Elvis Presley's will manifests his intent "that only those children born in lawful wedlock to Mr. Presley are entitled to inherit from and through him, and that Lisa Marie Presley" is the only such child. The motion for summary judgment was supported by the affidavit of Priscilla B. Presley and D. Beecher Smith, II. The Presley affidavit asserts that Elvis Presley was married only once in his lifetime and that was to the affiant. The affidavit further states that the daughter of the affiant and Elvis Presley, Lisa Marie Presley, is the only child born to Elvis Presley during a lawful marriage. Smith's affidavit states that pursuant to Elvis Presley's instructions, he prepared the Last Will and Testament in question. Affiant further states that Mr. Presley had previously successfully defended a paternity suit in California and was cognizant of the need to specify in his will those he wanted to take thereunder. Appellant's affidavit, filed November 7, 1988 in response to the motion for summary judgment and supporting affidavits, states that she received a late notice of the filing of the summary judgment motion, and then on November 3, 1988, received a letter from the estate's attorney notifying her of the time for a hearing on the motion for summary judgment. She further avers in her affidavit that she has been unsuccessful in obtaining an attorney to represent her, and that she needs additional time before the hearing on the motion for summary judgment in order to obtain an attorney. Appellant also filed affidavits from her mother, Barbara Jean Young, and from Gene Smith, purportedly Elvis Presley's first cousin. These affidavits, in general, establish the relationship between appellant's mother and Elvis Presley in support of appellant's claim that Mr. Presley was her father. The memorandum opinion of the probate judge filed November 29, 1988 recites that it is premised on "the sworn petition of Deborah Delaine Presley; Estate's Motion for Summary Judgment, Answer and Memorandum in Support thereof; argument of Counsel for the Estate and argument of Petitioner, who was not represented by Counsel; and the entire record in this Cause." Basically, the probate judge found that appellant failed to establish that she was the daughter of Elvis Presley, and further construed the Presley will to exclude illegitimate children as beneficiaries. The memorandum opinion was incorporated in the order entered November 29, 1988, which granted summary judgment and dismissed appellant's petition. On December 29, 1988, appellant, through counsel, filed a "Motion to Reconsider Order Granting Summary Judgment." A hearing was held on this motion December 30, 1988, and an order was entered the same date denying the motion, resulting in this appeal. Appellant presents six issues for review which we will now consider. Issues I, II and III will be considered together. These issues, as set forth by appellant in her brief, are as follows: I. Whether the court erred in failing to set aside the summary judgment granted to the estate against the petitioner, Deborah Delaine Presley, in order to allow the petitioner to have legal counsel represent her? II. Whether the court's memorandum opinion and order granting summary judgment to the estate was overly broad and encompassed issues not presented to the court by the estate's motion for summary judgment? III. Whether the court's finding that it was legally impossible for appellant to claim any interest in the testator's estate due to the fact that appellant could not be legitimated was clearly erroneous? Appellant asserts that the probate judge should have continued the hearing on the motion for summary judgment to allow her to obtain counsel. The record does not reflect when the hearing on the motion was held, but the record does reflect that appellant filed her petition on February 18, 1988, the motion for summary judgment was filed September 23, 1988, and the order granting summary judgment was entered November 29, 1988. There is no absolute right to counsel in a civil trial. Barish v. Metropolitan Gov't., 627 S.W.2d 953 (Tenn.App.1981). The trial court has broad discretion in the grant or denial of a continuance and the trial judge's decision will not be set aside unless there is a clear showing of abuse. Barish, supra. From the record before us, we can find no such clear showing of abuse. However, as a practical matter, it appears that appellant's real complaint regarding these issues is the scope of the probate judge's findings in his memorandum opinion. Appellant's counsel argued in the motion to reconsider, and argues in this court that the probate judge's finding that appellant is not the daughter of Elvis Presley was not an issue to be decided on the motion for summary judgment. We agree with appellant's counsel. The motion for summary judgment, as well as the memorandum in support of the motion for summary judgment, explicitly established that the only question presented by the motion for summary judgment "is whether Elvis Presley's Will makes provision for inheritance by an individual who contends she is the illegitimate daughter of Mr. Presley." Furthermore, the affidavits supporting the motion for summary judgment did not in any way dispute appellant's claim in her petition that she was Mr. Presley's illegitimate daughter. Appellees' entire thrust on their motion for summary judgment was that a proper construction of the will reveals that an illegitimate child is not a beneficiary. The probate judge stated in his memorandum opinion: When a motion for summary judgment is made, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations of her pleading, but her response, by affidavits or otherwise, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If she does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against her. (emphasis in original). We disagree with the probate judge's statement of the law. The controlling authority, Rule 56.05, Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, states as follows: 56.05. Form of Affidavits--Further Testimony--Defense Requited.-- Supporting and opposing affidavits shall be made on personal knowledge, shall set forth such facts as would be admissible in evidence, and shall show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to the matters stated therein. Sworn or certified copies of all papers or parts thereof referred to in an affidavit shall be attached thereto or served therewith. The court may permit affidavits to be supplemented or opposed by depositions, answers to interrogatories, or further affidavits. When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him. (emphasis added). As previously noted, the motion for summary judgment filed by the co-executors of the Presley estate was not supported by any sworn proof concerning the parentage of appellant. Accordingly, appellant was under no obligation to set forth any specific facts in response thereto "showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." The record is clear that appellees, for the purpose of the summary judgment motion only, conceded that appellant is the testator's illegitimate daughter. We also note that there is nothing in the appellees' supporting affidavits which would require appellant to set forth any specific fact concerning her ability to be declared the legitimate child of Elvis Presley. Therefore, the finding of the probate judge that appellant is not the daughter of Elvis Presley, and the finding of the probate judge that it is legally impossible for appellant to be determined a legitimate child of Elvis Presley should be vacated, and the order modified accordingly. The next issue for review which encompasses appellant's Issues IV and V is whether the probate judge erred in his construction of the decedent's will. The dispute in this case involves Item IV of Elvis Presley's will which is as follows: ITEM IV Residuary Trust After payment of all debts, expenses and taxes as directed under ITEM I hereof, I give, devise, and bequeath all the rest, residue, and remainder of my estate, including all lapsed legacies and devises, and any property over which I have a power of appointment, to my Trustee, hereinafter named, in trust for the following purposes: (a) The Trustee is directed to take, hold, manage, invest and reinvest the corpus of the trust and to collect the income therefrom in accordance with the rights, powers, duties, authority and discretion hereinafter set forth. The Trustee is directed to pay all the expenses, taxes and costs incurred in the management of the trust estate out of the income thereof. (b) After payment of all expenses, taxes and costs incurred in the management of the trust estate, the Trustee is authorized to accumulate the net income or to pay or apply so much of the net income and such portion of the principal at any time and from time to time for the health, education, support, comfortable maintenance and welfare of: (1) my daughter, Lisa Marie Presley, and any other lawful issue I might have, (2) my grandmother, Minnie Mae Presley, (3) my father, Vernon E. Presley, and (4) such other relatives of mine living at the time of my death who in the absolute discretion of my Trustee are in need of emergency assistance for any of the above mentioned purposes and the Trustee is able to make such distribution without affecting the ability of the trust to meet the present needs of the first three numbered categories of beneficiaries herein mentioned or to meet the reasonably expected future needs of the first three classes of beneficiaries herein mentioned. Any decision of the Trustee as to whether or not distribution shall be made, and also as to the amount of such distribution, to any of the persons described hereunder shall be final and conclusive and not subject to question by any legatee or beneficiary hereunder. (c) Upon the death of my father, Vernon E. Presley, the Trustee is instructed to make no further distributions to the fourth category of beneficiaries and such beneficiaries shall cease to have any interest whatsoever in this trust. (d) Upon the death of both my said father and my said grandmother, the Trustee is directed to divide the Residuary Trust into separate and equal trusts, creating one such equal trust for each of my lawful children then surviving and one such equal trust for the living issue collectively, if any, of any deceased child of mine. The share, if any, for the issue of any such deceased child, shall immediately vest in such issue in equal shares but shall be subject to the provisions of ITEM V herein. Separate books and records shall be kept for each trust, but it shall not be necessary that a physical division of the assets be made as to each trust. The Trustee may from time to time distribute the whole or any part of the net income or principal from each of the aforesaid trusts as the Trustee, in its uncontrolled discretion, considers necessary or desirable to provide for the comfortable support, education, maintenance, benefit and general welfare of each of my children. Such distributions may be made directly to such beneficiary or to any person standing in the place of a parent or to the guardian of the person of such beneficiary and without responsibility on my Trustee to see to the application of any such distributions and in making such distributions, the Trustee shall take into account all other sources of funds known by the Trustee to be available for each respective beneficiary for such purpose. (e) As each of my respective children attains the age of twenty-five (25) years and provided that both my father and grandmother then be deceased, the trust created hereunder for such child shall terminate, and all the remainder of the assets then contained in said trust shall be distributed to such child so attaining the age of twenty-five (25) years outright and free of further trust. (f) If any of my children for whose benefit a trust has been created hereunder should die before attaining the age of twenty-five (25) years, then the trust created for such child shall terminate on his death, and all remaining assets then contained in said trust shall be distributed outright and free of further trust and in equal shares to the surviving issue of such deceased child but subject to the provisions of ITEM V herein; but if there be no such surviving issue, then to the brothers and sisters of such deceased child in equal shares, the issue of any other deceased child being entitled collectively to their deceased parent's share. Nevertheless, if any distribution otherwise becomes payable outright and free of trust under the provisions of this paragraph (f) of this ITEM IV of my will to a beneficiary for whom the Trustee is then administering a trust for the benefit of such beneficiary under the provisions of this last will and testament, such distribution shall not be paid outright to such beneficiary but shall be added to and become a part of the trust so being administered for such beneficiary by the Trustee. Item IV(b) directs the Trustee to pay for the support and maintenance of "(1) my daughter, Lisa Marie Presley, and any other lawful issue I might have." (emphasis supplied). Paragraph (d) of Item IV provides for a division of the residuary trust by creating a separate and equal trust for "each of my lawful children." (emphasis supplied). Paragraph (c) of Item IV provides for distribution of the assets of the respective trusts "as each of my respective children attains the age of twenty-five (25) years." (emphasis supplied). The trial court held that by the use of the foregoing language, the decedent intended only for "Lisa Marie Presley or other legitimate children to take under the will." The Probate Court of Shelby County has concurrent jurisdiction with the Chancery Court to construe and interpret wills. 1985 Tenn.Priv. Acts ch. 28. The construction of a will is a question of law for the court and will construction cases are uniquely suited to the summary judgment procedure because they generally involve legal issues only. Estate of Robison v. Carter, 701 S.W.2d 218 (Tenn.App.1985). As we previously noted, for the purposes of the motion for summary judgment only, it is conceded that the appellant is Elvis Presley's illegitimate daughter. The cardinal rule in construction of all wills is that the court shall seek to discover the intention of the testator and give effect to it unless it contravenes some rule of law or public policy. Third Nat'l Bank in Nashville v. First American Nat'l Bank of Nashville, 596 S.W.2d 824 (Tenn.1980). The testator's intention is to be ascertained from the particular words used in the will itself, from the context in which those words are used, and from the general scope and purposes of the will, read in the light of the surrounding and attending circumstances. Moore v. Neely, 212 Tenn. 496, 502-03, 370 S.W.2d 537, 540 (1963); Fisher v. Malmo, 650 S.W.2d 43 (Tenn.App.1983). Every will is sui generis and therefore reference to other cases involving the testator's intention is usually of little assistance. See Burton v. Kinney, 191 Tenn. 1, 231 S.W.2d 356 (1950); Marsh v. Porch, 35 Tenn.App. 62, 242 S.W.2d 691 (1951). A will should be construed to speak as of the date of the testator's death. T.C.A. § 32-3- 101 (1984). In construing a will it is necessary to look to the entire will and the testator's intention must be determined from what he has written and not from what it is supposed he intended. Burdick v. Gillpin, 205 Tenn. 94, 103, 325 S.W.2d 547, 551 (1959); see First American Nat'l Bank v. DeWitt, 511 S.W.2d 698, 706 (Tenn.1972). Appellant contends in her brief: The word "lawful" is merely a modifier of the word "issue" and merely explains that issue eligible to take under a will must be issue who are lawfully able to share in an estate under a will. It has no correlation to the term "legitimate." Indeed if used with the word "issue," the term "legitimate" would make little sense. "Legitimate" is generally perceived as applying only to children. However, the term "issue," is discussed is much broader than the term children. The idea that "legitimate issue" would mean grandchildren, cousins, etc. who are issue and who are "legitimate" (i.e. were born in wedlock of their parents) would not be sensible.... [t]he courts are to give effect to the testator's use of the word "issue" which is widely definable, then the idea that "lawful" must correlate to mean "legitimate" is insupportable. We cannot agree with the appellant's reasoning. We agree with appellant that generally the word "issue" includes all persons who have descended from a common ancestor and unless the context indicates otherwise means lineal descedents without regard to degree of proximity or remoteness. Burdick at 109, 325 S.W.2d at 554. In Third National Bank v. Noel, 183 Tenn. 349, 192 S.W.2d 825 (1946), our Supreme Court stated: The rule in this state, as announced in Ridley v. McPherson, 100 Tenn. 402, 43 S.W. 772, is that issue includes all persons who have descended from a common ancestor; that unless controlled by the context, it means lineal descendant without regard to degree of proximity or remoteness from the original stock or source. This is in accordance with the great weight of authority as shown by many cases collected in notes, 2 A.L.R. 918, and 5 A.L.R. 195. That the rule still prevails in this jurisdiction, unless controlled by the context, is recognized in the later cases of Lea v. Lea, 145 Tenn. 693, 237 S.W. 59, and White v. Kane, 178 Tenn. 469, 159 S.W.2d 92. In the two later cases the Court found the context required that a different meaning be given to the word. While we recognize that such an interpretation of the word issue is not much favored by the courts and will not be adopted if there is a faint glimpse of a contrary intention in the instrument involved, nevertheless what may be called the technical definition of issue is now a rule of property and is to be accepted unless we can perceive in the instrument using the word some glimpse of a contrary design. (emphasis in original). Id. at 358-59, 192 S.W.2d at 828-29. In the case before us, we must look at the context in which the word "issue" was used to determine if there is "some glimpse of a contrary design." Id. at 359, 192 S.W.2d at 829. In Item IV(b), the testator provides for "(1) my daughter, Lisa Marie Presley, and any other lawful issue I might have." Obviously, he is relating "other lawful issue" in the same class with his daughter. This becomes even more evident when we consider Item IV(d) providing for the division of the corpus of the trust. The testator explicitly provides for "one such equal trust for each of my lawful children then surviving and one such equal trust for the living issue collectively, if any, of any deceased child of mine." The word "issue" is ordinarily construed to mean "children" where it has been used interchangeably by the testator with the word children. 80 Am.Jur.2d Wills, § 1220 (1975). See Lea v. Lea, 145 Tenn. 693, 237 S.W. 59 (1921); White v. Kane, 178 Tenn. 469, 159 S.W.2d 92 (1942). In the case before us, the testator, in dealing with support and maintenance, equates other "lawful issue" with reference to his daughter. In light of his division of the corpus of the trust among his lawful children, it appears that the testator is using the term "issue" in Paragraph IV(b) as meaning children. The will also uses the explicit term "lawful" when describing the children that will take under the will. Appellant asserts that this merely means that they must prove that they are children of the testator. We disagree. In Decker v. Meriwether, 708 S.W.2d 390 (Tenn.App.1985), one of the issues before the Court was whether an illegitimate child could take under a will provision providing for property to pass to her father's lawful issue. This court held that in view of the words used and the surrounding circumstances, it was the testator's intent that only legitimate children of the father would take under the provision of the testator's will. In the case before us, it is uncontroverted that Elvis Presley had been involved in a paternity case and was cognizant of claims placed against him for children born out of wedlock. In Item IV, paragraph (b), the testator makes provision for the support and maintenance of his family, vesting the trustee with absolute discretion in the manner and amount to be used for that purpose. At the time the will was executed, the testator had one child of his only marriage. The provision for the child is coupled with the provision "and any other lawful issue I might have." (emphasis supplied) There was no doubt in Mr. Presley's mind that Lisa Marie was his issue, nor was there any doubt on his part that she was born in lawful wedlock. With this knowledge of the status of his daughter, he explicitly describes the other objects of his bounty as "any other lawful issue." Moreover, the clause provides for issue the testator "might have" indicating his intent to provide for those coming into existence after the execution of the will. The intent of the testator to provide for only legitimate children becomes even more clear when we consider his disposition of the corpus of the trust. Here again, he utilizes the descriptive word "lawful" when referring to his children who should receive his bounty. A will should be construed to give effect to every word and clause contained therein. Bell v. Shannon, 212 Tenn. 28, 367 S.W.2d 761 (1963). Unless we disregard and give no meaning to the word "lawful," we are compelled to believe that the word was used to denote those born in lawful wedlock. Appellant's argument that the word "lawful" has to do with a determination of who might qualify as "issue" of the testator is not persuasive. The determination of who is or who is not an "issue" and a determination of who is or who is not a child can be made without any reference to the legal marital status of the parents of the particular person for which the determination is made. Appellant has not cited, nor has our research revealed, any authority to support appellant's assertion that "lawful issue" as used in the will before us could be construed as establishing the testator's intent to provide for those that can prove their blood relationship under the law. The authorities developed from our research define "lawful issue" to include only legitimate children. See Traders Bank of Kansas City v. Goulding, 711 S.W.2d 872 (Mo.1986) (en banc); Brisbin v. Huntingdon, 128 Iowa 166, 103 N.W. 144 (1905). In Central Trust Company v. Skillin, 154 A.D. 227, 138 N.Y.S. 884 (1912), the Court said: "Lawful" is the antithesis of "unlawful" or "illegitimate." In popular usage, the words "lawful issue" have an accepted meaning. All children are "issue" of their parents, for the operation of natural laws favorable to the procreation and birth of offspring is not affected by the existence or nonexistence of a marital contract. But when this word relating to children is qualified by the adjective "lawful," it is ordinarily understood to mean those begotten and born in lawful wedlock, and none others. United States Trust Co. v. Maxwell [26 Misc. 276, 57 N.Y.S. 53]; Black v. Cartmell, 10 B.Mon. (Ky.) 188, 193; Brisbin v. Huntington, 128 Iowa, 166, 103 N.W. 144, 5 Ann.Cas. 931. At common law the words "child," "son," "issue," even when unqualified by the adjective "lawful," excluded all but the latter class. Cartwright v. Vawdry, 5 Vesey, 530; Earle v. Wilson, 17 Vesey, 528; Wilkinson v. Adam, 1 Vesey & Beames, 422, on page 461; Swaine v. Kennerley, idem, 468; Brisbin v. Huntington, supra; Collins v. Hoxie, 9 Paige, 81; Cromer v. Pinckney, 3 Barb. Ch. 466; Johnstone v. Taliaferro, 107 Ga. 6, 32 S.E. 931, 45 L.R.A. 95; Shearman v. Angel, Bailey, Eq. (S.C.) 351, 23 Am.Dec. 166; Gibson v. McNeely, 11 Ohio St. 131; Doggett v. Mosely, 52 N.C. (7 Jones Law) 587; Thompson v. McDonald, 22 N.C. (2 Dev. & B.Eq.) 463; Heater v. Van Auken, 14 N.J.Eq. 159. 138 N.Y.S. at 886. We note also that even without the use of the qualifying word "lawful," the general rule recognized in Tennessee is that absent clear evidence of contrary intention, words such as "children" in a will are construed to mean legitimate children and not to include illegitimate children. Scales v. Scales, 564 S.W.2d 667 (Tenn.App.1977). This appears to be the majority rule in the United States. See Annotation, Right of Illegitimate Child to Take Under Testamentary Gift to "Children," 34 A.L.R.2d 4, § 5 (1954), and cases cited therein. Accordingly, we construe the will of Elvis Presley to exclude illegitimate children as beneficiaries. The last issue presented for review as stated in appellant's brief is: VI. Whether, in the event this court determines that the term "legal issue" excludes illegitimate issue, such decision would constitute state action to discriminate against illegitimates without any substantial state interest which is violative of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States and therefore unconstitutional. This issue is raised for the first time on appeal. Since it was not raised in the trial court, it cannot be raised in this Court for the first time. Lawrence v. Stanford, 655 S.W.2d 927 (Tenn.1983); Sutton v. Bledsoe, 635 S.W.2d 379 (Tenn.App.1981). In summary, the order of the probate court is modified to vacate the finding of that court that the appellant is not the illegitimate daughter of the testator, and the finding of that court that the appellant could not be legitimated. As modified, the order of the trial court is in all other respects affirmed. Costs of appeal are assessed against the appellant. HIGHERS and SUMMERS (Retired), JJ., concur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.144.55 (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi again! Is the court findings that Deborah In summary, "the order of the probate court is modified to vacate the finding of that court that the appellant is not the illegitimate daughter of the testator, and the finding of that court that the appellant could not be legitimated holds any merit to you?". again this is based on records of law and courts proceedings not a BLOG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.144.55 (talk) 16:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Please do not copy large amounts of text like that to talk pages - provide a link to the source from where you obtained it. Doing otherwise may constitute a copyright violation, and is unnecessary and intrusive.

I suggest that you also take note of Wikipedia policy regarding sourcing, and on original research. Court records are rarely suitable as sources, since they can be difficult to interpret, and without expert knowledge, one can not ascertain whether the rulings etc are still valid. Unless someone can find reliable sources that discuss the claimed biological relationship between Elvis and Deborah Presley, there can be no question of including the issue in the article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:19, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Recommending a book to add to the "Further Reading" section of the Elvis page.

Recommending a book to add to the "Further Reading" section of the Elvis page.

It's called "Meet Elvis Presley" written and published by Dr Charles Margerison of The Amazing People Club in 2008.

ISBN 978-1-921752-57-5

Lenmar123 (talk) 00:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Or possibly ISBN 978-1-921629-91-4? Doesn't seem to be very scholarly. Or, from the on-line write-up, very high in content. Fat&Happy (talk) 00:42, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Recommending a VHS video to add to the "Further Reading" section of the Elvis page.

May I suggest a 1999 2-video package Titled "He Touched Me, The Gospel Music of Elvis Presley"? It's over 3 hours of Elvis and his friends, interviews and performances of Elvis with The Statesmen, The Blackwood Brothers, The Imperials, and The Jordanaires. It includes both concert and studio performances. Hosted by journalist Sander Vanocur, with Gordon Stoker of the Jordanaires, and Joe Moscheo of The Imperials. The videos are rich with details of Elvis's personal life, his relationship with his friends, and his deep, abiding love of gospel music. It shows a very different Elvis from that presented in this article.

The video set is still available on Amazon, if anyone here is interested in Elvis as a real person. Santamoly (talk) 04:14, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like a truly wonderful video. However, the section is devoted to Further reading. N.B.: Moscheo's book The Gospel Side of Elvis is already included in the section.—DCGeist (talk) 05:10, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Haley/Snow/Presley ad

I have been working on the yodeling article and was quite surprised to learn that both Hank Snow and Bill Haley started out as yodelers. While searching for files at the Commons I happened to come across an ad wherein Haley and Snow shared top billing but Elvis was billed as well. That would be 1955, probably the February tour arranged by Parker. I find the ad very interesting for several reasons. First, of course, it's hard to imagine a time that Elvis did not have top billing. Then, note that the Elvis style was called "rockabilly", and there it is right there - Haley was rock and roll and Snow was "hillbilly". The price of admission is interesting as well. If there is no objection, I'd like to put the ad back and ask for feedback. BTW, I was one of those screaming girls... :-) Gandydancer (talk) 22:26, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

BillHaleyHankSnowTicket

Can you show us the image here, so we can see what you're describing? AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

I will go ahead and put it back while we discuss it so people can see how it fits in. Gandydancer (talk) 00:13, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I meant show it on this talk page. Never mind, I'll do it: AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Why should the Hank Snow part (and rest) be in this article? Can you crop it and re-upload? Musdan77 (talk) 01:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I can't see where it describes Elvis as 'rockabilly' - Bill Haley seems to be 'Rhythm and Blues'. As for the image, it is of poor quality, and I don't think that it tells us much. We can't include every last detail of Elvis's life here, so personally, I don't see a lot of merit in including it - though if we do, it definitely needs to be cropped, as Musdan77 suggests. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

And it doesn't give the date (year). So for that reason, I say it's not good enough. Musdan77 (talk) 01:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

In fact the image is of little use anywhere on Wikipedia unless it can be verified as actually being what it is represented to be. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Rockabilly was used to describe his early work and style but I do not see where that is shown, and I also agree although interesting I don't think it's of article quality, if it were of better quality then perhaps. Mlpearc powwow 01:58, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like I'm outnumbered, however I still feel that my observations are correct and I believe it would be a great addition. To answer some points:

• Anyone that thinks it would need to be cropped just doesn't get it. Read the articles rock and roll, rockabilly, R & B, and Bill Haley. Note this quote:

Presley's unique musical style rocketed him into the spotlight, and drew masses of followers: "But it's Presley's singing, halfway between a country western and a R&B rock 'n' roll style that has sent teenagers into a trance. Whether you like it or not, there will always be an Elvis Presley." (Helen McNamara, June 9, 1956 Issue Saturday Night Magazine) And then to be so lucky as to find an old ad with Presley right there halfway between the two. BTW, I can only guess that Haley was billed R&B because the term rock 'n roll was so new that most kids had not yet heard it - it was a different age and information did not zip around as it does today. But Haley definitely was not R&B - he was more influenced by Bob Wills. Also, see this [17]

• As for the date, of course it's 55 - when else could it be (have you read the article?).

• As for the quality - that does not seem to be a problem.

• [QUOTE] In fact the image is of little use anywhere on Wikipedia unless it can be verified as actually being what it is represented to be.[/QUOTE] OK, I give up. I'll go back and work on the yodeling article. Gandydancer (talk) 02:26, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I raised a flag over this statement in the article some time ago. "Presley was one of the originators of rockabilly..." It is in fact clear that he was influenced by Carl Perkins for one. One of the Comets players have been quoted as saying that they were playing rockabilly (he wanted to play more complicated "jazzy" chords). Haley and the Comets were huge stars in early 1955 with 4 tunes in the Cash Box Top Singles list. Elvis was popular only in the South at that time. Yeah, note the listing of Scotty and Bill in that ad, both of whom were very important in developing the early Elvis style. I think all of this is important. But Elvis the "orginator" has won out. Anyhow, great discovery, even if it doesn't fit in the article. Steve Pastor (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

This link [18] seems to be a decent summary of the origins of rockabilly. At one point it states, "...Elvis undisputably stands as the progenitor of the new idiom..." Though it pays due tribute to those who were helping to mould the idiom from 1945 onwards, it cites the Presley Sun sessions as crystallizing the emerging rockabilly style. It is only one source, as an example, but I guess we've discussed challenges to this version of history elsewhere. I'm not sure if there are any sources to challenge this that have not been looked at yet. Rikstar⁴⁰⁹ 12:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Robert Palmer has written about ten pages on rockabilly for a large format book on Country Music. (I recently became aware of) He does not repeat the Elvis blah blah blah. He seems to give more credit to Sam Phillips for stripping things to basics, (eliminating steel and fiddle) and credits Scotty and Bill's versitility as part of the Memphis region's heterogenous music scene. He also mentions that "Blue Moon of Kentucky" did better on the charts than "That's Alright", something that was removed from the article long ago. (There are primary sources for that, too.) Gone too is the fact that Bill Black started "Blue Moon of Kentucky". "Elvis was an orginator" isn't "history". It's an opinion about history, widely held though it is. It's indisputable, though that Elvis was the first widely known and popular artist in the "rockabilly" style. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Elvis Day by Day - 16 Sunday Municipal Auditorium, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, at 3:30 and 8:00 p.m.

For one night Elvis joins yet another Hank Snow tour, this one costarring Bill Haley, whose "Rock Around the Clock" is in its fifth month at the top of the charts. The phenomenal success of Haley's 1954 record, re--released when the song was used over the credits of the hit film The Blackboard Jungle, in some ways certifies the success of the new music and validates its name once and for all as "rock 'n' roll." In subsequent weeks Billboard will note the clever strategy of "Col Tom Parker of Jamboree Attractions, one of the nation's major bookers and promoters of country & western talent, [who] instituted a new policy when he presented a combination of popular and country & western music on a recent one--nighter tour." It might further be noted that Haley and Elvis are advertised on the top half of the poster, above Hank Snow. http://www.randomhouse.com/rhpg/promos/elvisdaybyday/1955.html Steve Pastor (talk) 00:07, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Questions over birth/citizenship

Elvis' birth certificate spells his middle name 'Aron' while state records (and alleged death records) spell it 'Aaron'. This presents novel questions over the validity of his birth and death records, whether he is (or allegedly was) a US citizen, and whether he was born or died in the USA as many have claimed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.178.3 (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Even if the spelling is different (you give us no source for this), I can see no reason why a simple error could deprive Elvis of his citizenship. In any case, unless this is discussed in mainstream reliable sources it is of no relevance to this article - this is not a forum for wild speculations. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:57, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from 72.47.71.214, 20 September 2011

72.47.71.214 (talk) 20:12, 20 September 2011 (UTC) I would like to write a new section about Elvis entitles "Religious Views." It is based on a book written by his step brother Rick Stanley who grew up with Elvis and who is a friend of mine.

I would be happy to look at this section if you post it below. However, please remember that claims attributed to primary sources, such as the one you are describing above, should be backed up by secondary sources per WP:NOR. Thanks. Jay _{Σεβαστός}^discuss 21:38, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

There's tons of stuff written about Elvis' Christian faith, so you don't need to stick to a book written by your friend. Unfortunately, anything about Elvis' faith is usually deleted or shunted to one side in this article. It's a hard-drinking, atheistic, rock-a-billy crowd here! The article is also "owned" by a small group that deletes unwanted content vigorously. Start with "The Gospel Side of Elvis" by Joe Moscheo. It's a good book, full of first-hand personal details and observations, but likely not even mentioned in the main article. And there's also "He Touched Me: The Gospel Music of Elvis Presley" (from Amazon), which features lots of interviews with the Jordanaires, the Sweet Inspirations, the Imperials, and executives from various recording studios. Santamoly (talk) 08:27, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Book about vocal register, voice type, etc

hello,

Not related to Presley, but I want to write a similar section about the singing style of Otis Redding. Can you suggest good books which discuss the singing abilities of several prominent musicians? I just can't find any information about neither his vocal type nor any special vocal styles or vocal ranges. PS: Ref 297 doesn't link to the Reference section when you type it, but I don't know how to fix it. Thanks.--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 15:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

This isn't an appropriate place to ask questions - try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment, or possibly the Wikipedia:Help desk. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but that was not helpful. I had already posted my question on the refdesk before.--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 19:31, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Familie Pressler

"The king's family moves to New York. Not the king of Germany. But Elvis Presley, who would have been Elvis Pressler if Johann Valentin Pressler hadn't changed his name during the Civil War. He made wine in the village of Niederhochstadt in the Southern Palatinate until he moved to the States. A number of descendants of the Pressler family still live in Niederhochstadt today. But Elvis is the most famous descendant of this German family." [19]

I would really love to to know more about Elvis' German heritage--please make ammends within the article. Thank you! Hyperboreer 14:30, 28 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperboreer (talk • contribs)

Our article seems to source Elvis's German roots to this:

Kamphoefner, Walter D. "Elvis and Other Germans: Some Reflections and Modest Proposals on the Study of German-American Ethnicity" (2009). In: Kluge, Cora Lee, editor. Paths Crossing: Essays in German-American Studies. Peter Lang; 2010. ISBN 9783034302210.

From the title, it looks like an academic work, and might be difficult to track down, but that looks like the best source for finding out more. Unfortunately, we can't cover everything in a Wikipedia article (this one is rather long already), and being written by volunteers, content tends to depend to some extent on the interests of contributors. I'll see if I can find anything more, but I'll also suggest that perhaps you consider searching yourself, and adding properly-sourced further details yourself, if it seems suitable for the article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:46, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The article (or at least most of it) is here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Aron not Aaron

Elvis' Middle name is spelled Aron not Aaron. It's a common mistake considering they got it wrong on his gravestone. If you look at his birth certificate it shows the spelling.

Drewguy34 (talk) 23:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

It is more complicated than that: see footnote A in the article. [20] AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

 Not done The footnote explains it. CTJF83 00:47, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Inducted in 11 Musical Hall of fame

All sources are provided as well, Fact is, that if you see any other artist/celebrity page they have mentioned each of there hall of fame, so we can atleast mention some more important ones? Elvis is inducted in:-

1. Rock n Roll hall. rockhall.com/inductees/elvis-presley

2. Country . countrymusichalloffame.org/full-list-of-inductees/view/elvis-presley1

3. Rockabilly . http://www.nndb.com/honors/933/000113594/

4. Gospel . http://www.elvis.com/about-the-king/achievements.aspx

5. Honky Tonk Hall. http://www.digitalrodeo.com/HonkyTonkHallOfFame#fbid=YFOpfpjVEGU

6. Mississipi musicians hall of fame. http://www.mswritersandmusicians.com/musicians/elvis-presley.html

7. UK Music Hall of fame. http://www.everyhit.com/halloffame.html

8. Hit Parade Hall . http://www.hitparadehalloffame.com/inductees4wmenu.html

9. Christian Music hall of fame. http://www.hallmuseum.com/induction.htm

10. 411 music hall of fame. http://www.411mania.com/music/hall_of_fame/68232/411-Music-Hall-Of-Fame-Class-Of-2008:-Elvis-Presley.htm

11. Memorable Music hall of fame. http://www.memorabletv.com/musicworld/halloffame.htm

And one more which is not related with music, but still important:-

Martial arts. http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/news/elvis_in_karate_hall_of_fame.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicejayant (talk • contribs) 06:36, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

This list of Halls of Fame include some really minor ones.

The importance of Elvis to the popularization of karate, especially in film, is not discussed in the article body text, nor is it cited to a reliable source. Per WP:LEAD, we do not put things in the lead section that are not part of the article body. Binksternet (talk) 06:54, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

What's the proof that they are minor? In every other' artist page you can see these hall of fames are listed. And in this page, His karate' contribution should be recognized. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicejayant (talk • contribs) 07:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

How about make a new index for this? Just a opinion though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justicejayant (talk • contribs) 04:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Bink that these are minor, if not downright trivial. And no, you can't see them listed everywhere, for good reasons. As for karate, well, that's neither here nor there. You're talking about the King, and you're bringing up karate? Drmies (talk) 17:58, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Agree as above, it's extremely trivial. It might be worth a mention at the Karate article, specifically in this section. I'd bring it up on the talk page over there first. Dayewalker (talk) 05:40, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Present Elvis to the world

This article is a vital 1000 article that is a featured article and has not been presented as todays featured article on the main page. I think it should be. When nominated he will be unstoppable (as always). Anybody wants to tidy him up for the event? --Ettrig (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments

The following statements lack supporting citations.

• RCA also generated four albums compiling old material during this period, most successfully Elvis' Golden Records (1958), which hit number three on the LP chart.

• Recording sessions for Presley's second album took place in Hollywood during the first week of September. Leiber and Stoller, the writers of "Hound Dog", contributed "Love Me".

--Ettrig (talk) 20:45, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Citations added for each. DocKino (talk) 01:43, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

POP ICON

Elvis Presley is also a pop icon as described in this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_icon

The information should be added in the second sentence:

"A cultural icon[...]" - "A cultural icon and pop icon[...]" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ernio48 (talk • contribs) 21:46, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, it is 'opinion' not 'information'. Secondly, and more importantly, if someone is a 'cultural icon' (which seems a reasonable enough opinion to hold about Elvis) because of his music, the description of him as a 'pop icon' is redundant - or possibly wrong, given that his iconic status goes beyond just 'pop'. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:11, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Sources

Boing! said Zebedee reverted me saying that my sources "do not speak of other 14 year old girls". I disagree because of the following two sources:

• Priscilla caught Elvis’s very grownup eye when she was just fourteen, only a year or two older than the boys that Michael Jackson was accused of sexually molesting., Scientific American
• "Jackie Rowland, 14... 14 was his magical age...Frances Forbes...when I was 14, he noticed me.. Gloria Mowel and Heidi Heissen, both also at that 'magical' age" Daily Mail

On my talk page, BsZ said Daily Mail is generally not a reliable source but Daily Mail has not been blacklisted, plus is used repeatedly accross wikipedia, so that statement is disputable. Pass a Method talk 18:09, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I'd suggest that you raise the matter at WP:RS/N. I certainly see little merit in using the Daily Mail as a source for anything controversial. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Wholesale reverts are quite frustrating because you dont know whether the editor disagrees with part of the edit or the entire edit. Pass a Method talk 18:52, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I disagreed with a large amount of it, much of which was blatantly poorly sourced WP:SYNTH - if you don't want to be reverted, the onus is on you to not do that. I'll address your recent addition in some detail tomorrow, after I've had some sleep -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 21:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

By the way i found more sources for 14 year old girls;

• four 14 year olds Pass a Method talk 23:19, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure how we can take a book that makes assertions about what Elvis said to himself when he was alone ('"I ain't out of the army a week and they wanna put me right back in" sighed Presley') too seriously as a reliable source. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:07, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Except we have to find legitimate reasons to consider it unreliable, not our opinions on how it's written. It's published by the Greenwood Publishing Group, so no issues there. It states it is a biography, so however much that stands for, there's that.

Actually, nevermind, while the Elvis Information Network isn't a reliable source themselves, they make a convincing case for the unreliability of the biography. Silverseren^C 01:19, 28 December 2011 (UTC)