Talk:Elvis Presley/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20

This is an Archive. Do not edit it. Thank you.

• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive1
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive2
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive3
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive4
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive5
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive6
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive7
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive8
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive9
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive10
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive11
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive12
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive13
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive14
• Archive: Talk:Elvis_Presley/archive15

Male Friendships

dont abuse this site. I have removed the comments regarding Elvis' brother Einis the penis, as they were not close to each other. 138.25.102.115 13:30, 13 November 2006

As far as I know, there were no such comments in the article, and nobody has removed them. This seems to be the edit of a troll. Onefortyone 02:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Onefortyone 00:57, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

I find it astonishing that this section has not only returned but has returned with such definitive statements such as Presley having homosexual relations with Nick Adams etc. As this lengthy and detailed discussion above shows (and in most of the archived sections of this page), there seems to be no evidence for any of this beyond base conjecture. Lochdale 21:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Homosocial relationships are not identical with homosexual relationships. The paragraph I have written is well sourced and supported by many independent sources. It is very interesting that you continue removing paragraphs I have written. Onefortyone 00:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

With all due respect, I believe you have an agenda when it comes to this particular issue. The article is "well sourced" only if you read things a certain way or if you accept the absolute credibility of some questionable secondary sources. We have had this debate repeatedly (and you have had it with others). You've been banned from this article several times. You have tried to get me banned several times and have failed. I'd rather never deal with you ever again but what you are doing here is wrong and this encyclopedia should not be used for your own personal agenda. Lochdale 00:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Would you please provide evidence that the sources I have cited are "questionable" as you claim. Are there any sources denying that Elvis spent much time with the members of the Memphis Mafia or that Nick Adams was Elvis's friend? Of course not. Onefortyone 00:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Would you please provide suppport from Guralnik saying that Presley was gay or that he lived a homosexual lifestyle? Can you provide any legitimate support for that other than base rumour? Your entire position is POV. By using a legitimate, well -research source to back up rumour (at best) is a clear breach of Wiki rules. As I mentioned, I am hopeful that this can go to arbitration. Lochdale 03:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Lochdale, my last contributions did not mention such claims. The real problem is that you simply claim that my edits are questionable, but this is not true. You also claim that most books do not support my contributions, but you are wrong, as facts show. You should have noticed that, as a kind of compromise, I didn't mention sources such as the controversial manuscript book by Elvis's stepmother Dee Presley in my last contributions, primarily centering on what is written in reputable Elvis biographies. But this material has also been deleted. It seems as if you did not read any of the major Elvis biographies. I have not yet seen that you have given direct quotes from one of the sources you claim to have read. Indeed, you frequently misquoted Guralnick's name as "Guralnik" in the past (see, for instance, this discussion), and you didn't even know the exact title of Guralnick's book Careless Love: The Unmaking Of Elvis Presley, as you cited it as "Careless Whisper". See [10]. You did also disparage university studies I have used for my edits, saying, "I would disagree with that the information presented is really worth mentioning as a lot of it seems to be from college disertations etc...." See [11]. This statement speaks volumes. Your only aim seems to be to delete my contributions. Just one question. Is there a reasonable argument for excluding the whole paragraph on Elvis's male friendships from the article? See [12]. These friendships with members and employees from the Memphis Mafia are well documented and part of every Elvis biography and they are certainly accepted by the mainstream, as all these people played a significant part in the singer's life. Why should this paragraph be totally removed from the article? On the other hand, look at the unsourced "Trivia" sections of the article, for instance [13], and sections such as Elvis Presley in the 21st century or Elvis Lives?. These sections are fan stuff in no small degree, as they are always singing the praise of the megastar. Is all this material encyclopaedic? I don't think so, but some users, among them Lochdale, do frequently support these sections by their contributions (see [14], [15]). Though I am not of the opinion that all this material should be included in the article, I never removed these paragraphs, as Lochdale frequently does with my contributions. In my opinion, Lochdale is part of an Elvis fan group which endeavors to suppress specific details about the singer's life from the article, if he is not somehow related to multiple hardbanned User:Ted Wilkes (we have already discussed my suspicion here and elsewhere). And what about the well documented FBI files I have cited and the false claims by Lochdale concerning these files? See [16]. It seems as if I am the only user who frequently, and accurately, cites his sources, and Lochdale is frequently deleting the passages I have written. These are the facts, and Lochdale's deleting tactics are not acceptable. Onefortyone 14:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

There is an over-emphasis on Nick Adams in this section. Adams does not get that much ink space in Guralnik's book particularly when compared to West and Schilling. I am going to pare that down but I appreciate your edits. Lochdale 18:25, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I pared down the section regarding the Memphis Mafia. I think it currently gets the point across. Way too much emphasis on Adams (which is particular poor in an article that barely mentions Bill Black and Scotty Moore (who was friends with Presley all of his life). Lochdale 22:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I do not think that there is an over-emphasis on Nick Adams in the section, as his friendship with Elvis is well documented in the major Presley biographies. You may add details concerning the other friends, but you should not remove the whole passage on Adams. Did you know that in May 1957 Adams even published a charming account of his close friendship with Elvis? By the way, do you really think that Scotty Moore was friends with Presley all of his life? On pages 146 and 155 of his book, That’s Alright, Elvis: The Untold Story of Elvis’s First Guitarist and Manager, Scotty Moore says that Elvis "promised us that the more he made the more we would make, but it hasn’t worked out that way. The thing that got me, the thing that wasn’t right about it, was the fact that Elvis didn’t keep his word. ... We were supposed to be the King’s men. In reality, we were the court jesters". Elvis turned them "out to pasture like broken-down mules, without a penny." Does this sound as if Moore was a friend of Elvis all of his life? I don't think so. Onefortyone 00:33, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Consider this, in Last Train to Memphis Dewey Phillips or George Klein are mentioned at least as many times as Adams is. The article clearly over emphasisizes Admas and should be edited accordingly. This is an article about Presley. Not about Adams. As for Scotty Moore, consider how poor this article is that you have bogged it down with nonsense yet barely register Moore's relationship with Presley. Again, look at other articles on other rock figures to see how far this article has fallen. Lochdale 02:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

O.K. As a compromise, I have now only included Elaine Dundy's statement in the Elvis article. This is only a short note by a reputed Elvis expert, and it's well sourced. The other passages are now in the Nick Adams article. I hope this is satisfactory to you. It must be very easy for you to add further material concerning Presley's other friendships, as you have read 2000 books on Elvis. Would you please provide direct quotes from all of the sources you intend to use. I look forward eagerly to your new contributions which certainly will improve the quality of the Elvis Presley article. Onefortyone 14:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I edited about parts about the Memphis mafia ...crap about Red West loving Elvis the most and who was his closest friend; there is no way nobody can be right about neither

You have deleted direct quotes from reputable authors. Therefore, I have reinstated the said passages. Onefortyone 19:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Now there is no evidence of anyone in particular having the "title" Elvis' best friend; according to Marty Lacker (on Elvis.alt.king newsgroup) he favored one person one week and another the next week, and besides, many authors are just in it for the quick buck, like the article in the november issue of Playboy - that has been refuted on Elvisinfonet.com

Parents, childhood and youth

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Just a spelling nit

RE: the first sentence —

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

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

You are incorrect. At birth, his name was Elvis Aron Presley[17]. He used both spellings throughout his life and apparently considered officially changing the spelling to Aaron, but never did. The Aaron spelling does appear on his gravestone.Shsilver 16:11, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

Allegations of racism

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

Version 1

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

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

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

Version 2

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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