Talk:Are You Lonesome Tonight?

Elvis bursting out in laughter

Is it worth mentioning that on one occasion, Elvis performed this song with a female singer doing background vocals, and her high falsetto singing caused Elvis to burst out laughing in mid-song...? I have heard the recording several times, but don't know anything more about it (such as when, where and who was the unfortunate accompanying vocalist.)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eitheladar (talk • contribs) 11:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

It isnt her vocal that makes him laugh, its the altered lyrics he gives the song. Listen again. Damiancorrigan 02:58, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

According to a CD I have, Elvis starts laughing because just after he sings "Do you gaze at your bald head and wish you had hair", a guy with a whig on first row stands up, takes off his whig and walks out. I don't know what's correct, though. Jon Harald Søby 07:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Would the parody version in Top Secret! be worth mentioning? I seem to remember Val Kilmer in it singing lines like "is your kitchen a fright, shop at Macey's and love me tonight."--T. Anthony 04:40, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

There is many versions of that reason why he started to laugh... One is about bald man, another is about man who removed his wig, one is even about two bald girls who removed their wigs and started to dancing and twirling their wigs around their fingers. Also there is a version that there were no bald-headed people, cause Elvis had been elvish already from beginning.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.131.21.56 (talk) 16:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Listening to the version I have (available at iTunes) he clearly starts to laugh each time when that background singer is really off but just keeps on going. His comments also suggest this, i.e., he laughs, trying to compose himself, first a bit in disbelief, then just letting go as he recognizes that the train is moving and nobody is going to stop that lady--the background singer. -53 seconds into the song (which is also when the background singer is "taking off") he starts laughing (sounding like he can't believe this is happening) -then around 1:10 "oh Lord.." -1:35 "oh God, ....whooaa" -1:50 "I had no calls tonight.." (as in he had no saying in who is singing there in the background) -2:00 "Sing it, baby"

I mean, the audience, the band and everyone else must have heard that background singer, too, right?? At the end of the song "that's it, man - 14 years down the drain", which I understood as even after 14 years of being on stage the surprises never end (undeterred background singer). If this was indeed the reason, I always thought it was kind of cute that Elvis did not interrupt the show right there and just let that lady have her 2 minutes. Even though I was not around during those times, of course, listening to this particular recording it never appeared to me that he was drunk or on drugs at that moment. In any event, it's such a funny and authentic version of the song and really cheers you up!! Reallysayitaintso (talk) 20:57, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

what the hell even is this article, why are there two paragraphs of unsourced material about the dude laughing during a concert Kyeo77 (talk) 03:21, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations

Congratulations on making it to today's listing on the "Did You Know..." section of Wikipedia Main Page. The process of making it the listing takes a bit of effort and involves the quick cooperation of many editors. All involved deserve recognition, appreciation, thanks and applause.

Best Regards,

  Bfpage |leave a message  21:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Altering the words

A version of the song, recorded on August 26 [1968] and documenting Presley altering the words of the narration and laughing through the rest of the bridge...

That sounds very like his last show, a few weeks before his death in 1977, when he was far gone in drug-addiction. Are you sure you're not confusing two performances? Valetude (talk) 09:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to one external link on Are You Lonesome Tonight? (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/specials/hot100/charts/top100-titles-90.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:49, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Stapling a contract??

The claim about the song ending with the sound of stapling a contract seems extremely dubious to me. There's no way someone would be stapling a contract near a microphone at the end of a tender recording session with the King of Pop; it's got to be a joke. Listening in my music studio on top end equipment, it doesn't sound like a stapler; I'd say based on channel placement it was part of the guitar strum so they couldn't take it out (with the technology of the time). It seems a silly urban legend. The footnote isn't linked to an actual website (update: archive.org confirms no record for that website, "soundhistory.org"), so I think it was a prank. I am not an experienced wikipedian so I haven't dared remove it myself. Joseph The New House —Preceding undated comment added 19:58, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

Include findings of this article

Found in the podcast of Malcom Galdwell: Revisionist History: http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/30-analysis-parapraxis-elvis

I propose to include this article (22 pages): Alan C. Elms & Bruce Heller "Twelve Ways to Say “Lonesome”: Assessing Error and Control in the Music of Elvis Presley" [PUBLISHED IN THE HANDBOOK OF PSYCHOBIOGRAPHY, EDITED BY WILLIAM TODD SCHULTZ, PP. 142-157. NEW YORK: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2005.]

Link https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DI8PUbyHg-U8zUYjJD8xdiaglNpn03q5/view?usp=sharing Wolfgang Maria Michael (talk) 19:22, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Traditional?

I believe the words of this song were part of a traditional song (different tune) which was collected by the Carter Family and recorded by them. Perhaps someone could confirm?58.11.188.237 (talk) 05:17, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Both our article, and this site, suggest that the 1936 Carter Family recording simply included some different lyrics to the original 1927 recording - although the writing credit on the Carter Family recording was given to A. P. Carter. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:53, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Chapter "Composition and early versions"

(Are_You_Lonesome_Tonight?_(song)#Composition_and_early_versions)

1. I would seperate the content of this chapter into: two chapters: "Composition" and "Early versions".

2: I would rename the chapter "Early versions" to "Versions before Elvis".

3: Respectively I would rename the chapter "Later versions" to "Versions after Elvis".

4: There are so many versions before Elvis. I'm sure that all these versions would be much more easily to be followed up, if these versions were bulleted.

5: I would also place the date as the first part of each bulllet-section.

6: And sort the versions (and all details about them) strictly by their date. Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 03:06, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Archive??

Dear SilkTork, I'm not sure whether I understand the history right, but I assume that it was you who archived some parts of this talk page.

For 1: There is so little on this talk page and there is so little in this archive, that I don't see a good reason for this archive to exist.
Therefore I would tend towards un-archiving. Would you, SilkTork, please explain, why you archived what you did?

For 2: I find the first chapter of the archive ("Elvis bursting out in laughter") quite interesting.
And I assume that this subject is still of interest to others as well.
Another reason why I don't understand the archiving.
But in this chapter the contributions are out of sequence, according to their dates. Therefore I find it hard to follow up who wrote what when and who answered what and when.
I would like to put these contributions in proper order, but I'm not allowed (according to a WP rule) as long as they are in this archive. Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Steue. The archive took place over five years ago when I was doing a standard tidy up of the talkpage [1]. I did not alter the sequence - I archived it as it was. If you wish to comment on the same topic as a discussion that has been archived, you can do so, and if you feel it is relevant you can link to the archived discussion. We don't tend to revive stale discussions, especially those which are of little value. My preference would be to archive more stale material from this page. The main discussion that was archived is speculative opinion on why Elvis is laughing which pushes the boundary of what is acceptable on an article talkpage. If you wish to have a discussion about building on or altering the information we have in the article about that incident, you can do so. If you simply wish to add your opinion on why Elvis was laughing, you can do that more profitably, without infringing on Wikipedia's talkpage guidelines, by going to a music forum website, such as forums.stevehoffman.tv. I hope this helps. SilkTork (talk) 10:29, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

If I may contribute, there is that version of him laughing. It does seem to have some popularity among Elvis fans, but I don't see why it would contribute anything to the article in particular. Not to that degree maybe, but he would many times laugh and monkey around while he was performing on stage and in the studio.--GDuwenHoller! 21:23, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear SilkTork,

thank you for the ping and the link to forums.stevehoffman.tv.

That's what I assumed in the first place: that you archived it as it was - with some parts out of order.

I understand that you consider these contributions of little value, but I wish you had put the contributions in proper order, or, at least, they were in proper order for the future.

Even if some of these contributions may push the boundary of what is acceptable on an article talkpage, according to your opinion, I suppose that I'm not the only one who would like to be able to follow this (stale) talk easily, even if some contributions are speculative. And you will surely agree that I / we who are interested in this issue, could follow this discussion much easier if the contributions were in proper sequence.

I don't want to belittle your work for/in the Wikipedia, but, sorry, I got the impression that, at least in this case, you overdid the tidying a little bit. Please think about it. The bytes remain on the hard disc wether in the main discussion or in the archive. And there are so little contributions at all that there is no chance that any one would consider this talk page un-easy to use.

So, in my opinion, generally speaking, it's not the best idea to archive a chapter of a discussion in which the contributions are out of order. Because this takes away the chance for someone to bring these contibutions in proper order. And I suppose that you were aware of this un-orderly state. Such an out-of-orderness makes it hard for all in the future, to follow up this part of this discussion, no matter of what (little) value this part may be to some people.

And I repeat one of my arguments: there are so little contributions in this discussion, that, to my opinion, there was nothing worth archiving, rather to the contrary.

My wish is:

1. un-archive this chapter.
2. ping me.
3. Let me put the contributions in proper order. And
4. If you "can" not but do so, then archive this chapter again.

Friendly greetings, and hopefully
Steue (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

To GDuwen,
of course you may contribute, at least according to my opinion. I (written in bold) welcome these first hand informations greatly. Without reliable reference they have no chance to survive in an article, but I welcome them in the talk page. I find it extremely pitifull, that such first hand informations are not allowed to be added to the articles, without outside reference(s). But they should at least be tolerated in the talk page.
Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Dear SilkTork,

[ is it / would it be ] possible (without creating chaos to the database) to re-arrange the contributions in an archive?

Ping welcome, Steue (talk) 01:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Chart discrepancy

Elvis Presley's version is listed as Hot 100 #96 and the record itself as 1960, but Wikipedia shows it as #96 for 1961, and the link goes to an external site, Music Outfitters, which matches the Wikipedia 1961 page. I'm not sure enough to edit it, but it seems there should be some parenthetical annotation "(1961)"

Laughing version

Are there any good sources for where and when this version was recorded? And for the claim that the soprano backing singer was Cissy Houston? There are multiple informal claims as to why Elvis started laughing, including that he spotted a man in the audience who was completely bald, either before or after the immortal ad lib. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 26 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) The Night Watch (talk) 18:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

---

• Are You Lonesome Tonight? (song) → Are You Lonesome Tonight?
• Are You Lonesome Tonight? → Are You Lonesome Tonight? (disambiguation)

– This iconic song has virtually no competition for WP:PRIMARYTOPIC since the only other Wikipedia entry bearing this main title header is the two-sentence stub delineating Are You Lonesome Tonight? (album). — Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 17:15, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

• Support. I've also PROD tagged Are You Lonesome Tonight? (album), which doesn't appear notable. The disambiguation page is superfluous, but that can be discussed elsewhere. 162 etc. (talk) 18:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support. It would be hard to think that most of the people typing in the title are not looking for anything but the song itself. More than agree that the current disambiguation has to go as well.--GDuwenHoller! 18:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
• Support per nom, WP:PRITOP, @162 etc., and @GDuwen. – CityUrbanism 🗩 🖉 18:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.