Talk:Memphis, Tennessee/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

In the Matter of Memphis Musician David Saks

To User Jersyko:

Specific sources are noted, verified and proven in the discussion. 

The addition to the article has been in place for nearly a year until it was flagged because an unknown user with an IP in Virginia deleted it. You apparently have forgotten the condescensions you demonstrated in February of this year in the rather lengthy, time consuming and unnecessary bantering about of this matter that was proven with reliable resources, including the documents provided by , the secretary of the Memphis City Council. Again, rather than resort to the hero-worshipped Google for information, try and type in: "David Saks" Memphis. You might find the validation your seeking without the despair of continually resorting to obsessive-compulsive deletion of the addition. It's rather childish behavior at this stage. Call the Memphis City Council at area code 901-576-6815. They'll be glad to verify it for you. Song notability and the history of Memphis are two different entities. The Official Song of Finger, Tennessee isn't notable although it is a vital part of the history of Finger and deserves as much recognition in the written history of that community as the native flower, flag or bird. There are many facts about Memphis that aren't notable or nationally recognizable but are indigenous to the awareness of it's citizens, as the case of the song of Finger. Your argument is cockeyed lending itself to to an incongruous demonstration of logic, almost ludicrous inviting ridicule. It's a waste of time arguing with you, as I said earlier this year. I suggest you and Vary try using "Wikipediatric", more suitable venue for immaturity. 20:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Anon, please don't make personal attacks. We're here to discus the article, not your opinion of me and Jersyko. You're in violation of the three revert rule. Please stop reverting the article, and please keep it civil. Thanks. -- Vary | Talk 21:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
You have the burden to prove verifiability per WP:V. Note that, in our discussion above, I said the information you allegedly received from the Council secretary is "interesting," I never agreed that it is sufficient as a source. WP:V requires that a source be published. I'm asking for a published source that can be added as a reference in the article text itself, and you haven't added that reference in the article. Secondly, Wikipedia:Notability (songs) indicates that the source *should* also prove the song's notability for it to warrant inclusion. If all it takes is a msn search to find such a reliable source, well, you should have no trouble finding one and adding it to the article, right? Cut the personal atacks; they are a blockable offense. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 21:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The proof was presented in February of this year. Mr.Saks' webpages and the articles in the Commercial Appeal have been referenced and verified. It doesn't surprise me that you resort to to whistle blowing and small handbook rules and regulation citation to justify lackey, sycophantic crawling. Refer to the comment from the user in New Orleans who provided the links to the articles by Peggey McKenzie in the Commercial Appeal about Mr. Saks. No one ever said anything about adding a reference in the article text, and if it had been it probably would have been deleted by vandals ! Since your the penultimate authority, Jersyko, why don't you attest your merit and assist the validation process ? Perhaps you'll become a notable person one day because you were capable of demonstrating that you were motivated by consideration, understanding and generosity. 01:28, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
You're asking me to provide a source for information you, and only you, want in the article. No thanks. Please provide the links if you want to have further discussion about whether the sourced material warrants inclusion. Right now, we don't even have a source to put in the article to verify the information per the verifiability policy. If we have them, we can go on to a discussion of notability, though I'm skeptical that it will warrant inclusion unless the sources are convincing otherwise. Finally, Saks' webpage is by no means a reliable source; personal webpages are mentioned explicitly. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 02:38, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
Jersyko, you've forgotten that others requested the inclusion of this information in the article and provided ample proof, per the submission of the many and varied entires in the discussion above, meeting the the verifiability policy and providing reliable source nearly a year ago. Take the time from your busy editing schedule to review the entire discussion. Otherwise, it's beginning to appear that your repetitive deletion of the entry is being made with prejudice. All of the links were provided and it's not up to me to prove this to you if the data is to extensive for your review. We're waiting for your next handbook referral that exempts you from the process of reexamination and places the burden of reaffirmation elsewhere, justifying your compulsion to delete the information. 'If every user of Wikipedia decided to delete an article or information contained within because they wanted every detail of the entry validated at each viewing to suit their need to prove by example, explanation or source, Wikipedia would be reduced to a burned out cinder.' Leave the article alone; although whistleblowing appears likely because the needs of one haven't been acquiesced. We'll keep adding the entry while you keep searching for truth. Call the Memphis City Council at area code 901-576-6815 and ask for , as she has the truth waiting for your personal review, including information about Mr.Saks' notability to the good citizens of the City of Good Abode. It might interest you that Mr.Saks was the featured guest artist on Sirius Satellite Radio Channel 13, the Elvis Channel, last week. In addition to being the composer of the '"Official Songs of Memphis"', Mr. Saks was at Elvis' home, Graceland, the day Elvis passed away, visiting. Elvis Presley was found dead a few minutes after Mr.Saks left Graceland. 15:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid that the one passing reference to the song in an article on another subject that was provided in February does not constitute 'ample proof.' Even if the song could be verified as having been named the official song of 1990, that would not make it notable enough for inclusion, because there's no context for the claim, no reference to it on the city council web site, and no articles available announcing the event itself (that is, there's no article in, for example, 'Commercial Appeal' announcing that the song was named the official song of 1990.) Please see Talk:Memphis,_Tennessee#Official_Song for the relevant discussion.
The other information you've provided about Mr. Saks has nothing to do with the song's notability or verifiability.
Please stop reverting this article against consensus. You have reverted six times in the past 24 hours. Please see WP:3RR for a thorough explanation of the rule and its purpose. It would be helpful if you would log in when editing Wikipedia, as you have a non-static IP, and every time it changes, so does the location of your talk page. This makes it difficult for other editors to contact you directly, as you may miss messages that were left on the talk pages of IPs that are no longer assigned to you. Thanks. -- Vary | Talk 15:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming your ignorance in the matter, Vary. The article proclaiming the city council resolution was printed in The Commercial Appeal on Thursday, May 24th, 1990 under the section "Local Government Briefs" in an article entitled "Council Approves 1990 Song".Take a moment from your busy cycle of deletion and censorship as a Wikipedia Cop to indicate when the twenty four hour cycle begins and ends. Once you've exhausted your right to remove it three times it'll be tough for you for the remainder of the day until the next twenty-four hour period returns allowing you a refreshed period of deletion privileges. Until then, continue to tag team with your cronies. Otherwise we'll wait until tomorrow to return the item to it's rightful place in the wake of your insignificant perusal. Incidentally, this isn't a personal attack on you, Vary, although you seem to be rather clueless and somewhat rashly impulsive. Additionally, I'm not interested in speaking with you directly. 17:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a link to that reference? Does the reference demonstrate notability per Wikipedia:Notability (songs)? And that was most definitely a despicable personal attack on Vary. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 17:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
In answer to your question about the 3RR: as stated in the policy I linked to and requested you read, the three revert rule extends to any given 24 hour period. Additionally, the policy states:
(The 3RR) does not grant users an inalienable right to three reverts every 24 hours or endorse reverts as an editing technique. Persistent reversion remains strongly discouraged and is unlikely to constitute working properly with others. The fact that users may be blocked for excessive reverting does not necessarily mean that they will be blocked. Equally, reverting fewer than four times may result in a block depending on context.
Your statement of your intention to continue to add the line to the article against consensus and without providing evidence of notability per Wikipedia:Notability (songs) is a violation of policy, just as much as your excessive reverts and personal attacks. -- Vary | Talk 17:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Send the Commercial Appeal a couple of bucks for the reprint like we did, Jersyko. And whine to someone else about it. What's more despicable than what you believe a personal attack on Vary is your blatant display of ignorance, reprehensible and unworthy of recognition. You don't sound like a friendly individual, nor helpful because of your persistent deletion of the addition, which has long since been verified. Perhaps information pertaining to this matter was removed in similar fashion by one of your sidekicks. The attacks have been narrowed and persistent by the same three, Jersyko, Dozenist and Vary, marked by a narrow focus on a display of learning, especially its trivial aspects. Regrettfully, and respectfully, you bore me, Jersyko. I'm speaking honestly and not with malice. I hope Mr. Saks never reads any of this. Mr. Saks is a kind, thoughtful individual that wouldn't want any part of this argument. This has been an effort by Mr.Saks' friends in Memphis to help him gain a small bit of recognition because of his contributions to the arts. Jersyko, your an embarrassing, obnoxious despot, another pseudo-WikiCop hell bent on having your way by tiresome attrition, as much Anon as I am with your cute user name. Again, this is my personal observation. The way you interpret it is your business. We'll young man, it's not going away, now, is it ? Maybe your cronie, the dentist Dozenist has a prescription, because, as a dentist, he might know how to treat bad breath, which is all we've been getting from you and the other two Wiki-Cops with your ridiculous, repetitive cry for proof, finger-pointing, and Wiki rules citation. One thing's for sure, you'll never forget David Saks when it's all said and done. Maybe, if you call him, he might speak with you, like I did. He's a great person, and, I might add, being a woman, that he's very handsome, very athletic and continues to run in spite of his recent eye surgery. I've never heard anyone play the piano like he does and can safely say I never will. His skill is nothing short of astonishing. I've had the privilege of seeing him at the Peabody Hotel, the Overton Park Shell, have seen and heard him in recordings and on television and radio. Sorry you haven't had the same privilege. Otherwise, you might end your demonstration of compulsive deletion. I noticed, above, that the user from New Orleans had issues with your ignorance of the matter in February, in addition to your persistent deletion. Get it together, Jersyko, Mr.Saks made musical history, and get over it. You might even take the time to search through his music manuscripts that are deposited in the Library of Congress. You can see the links to them on his terrific web site. Your a person, as Vary, who pays more attention to formal rules than they merit because of the evidence already clearly in view. I'm not your cyber-laser cane. Open your eyes and read the evidence. Mr. Saks is notable, and modest, his song is notable, his community recognizes him as notable. 23:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Addendum...'Quote Jersyko: "While I think it is appropriate to mention David Saks in this article, this should not be done in the introductory paragraph (along with the massive list of musicians), but later in the article..."' under Saks Picture February 4, 2006. 23:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

First, stop the personal attacks. Now. Thank you.
Second, the quote you provided was the first mention of Mr. Saks on this talk page. Not to put words in Jersyko's mouth, but at that time, the article stated that Saks wrote the official song of Memphis, rather than the official song of 1990. If that had been true, then it might belong in the article. But, as Jersyko later discovered and referenced in his subsequent comments, it's the official song of a single year. And the fact that it is so difficult to find any evidence online that the song was even named the official song of 1990, beyond Myspace and Mr. Saks's web site, does not speak well for the song's notability.
Third, above you say:
This has been an effort by Mr.Saks' friends in Memphis to help him gain a small bit of recognition because of his contributions to the arts.
Wikipedia is not a place to gain recognition. If someone or something needs to be on Wikipedia to gain recognition, it doesn't belong on Wikipedia yet. I'm sure Mr. Saks is a very nice person, but his personality, his appearance, and his athleticism are not the issue here, and neither is your opinion of his musical ability. The former are not qualifications for notability, and the latter is original research.
And I'm going to ask you once again to stick to the subject of the article. It's very difficult to have a discussion with you when I have to wade through dozens of personal attacks on myself and other editors just to find the actual point you are trying to make. Remove the personal attacks, and your above comment is less than half as long and much more readable. Ad hominum attacks won't win you any arguments here or anywhere else. Thanks. -- Vary | Talk 01:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Vary is quite correct regarding my first comment on Saks; I, assuming good faith, presumed that the edit adding Saks' song as Memphis' "official song" (with no qualification) was truthful and correct, even without a reference. Later evidence disproved my original assumption, which makes my original comment irrelevant. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 01:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you mean Ad Hominem, Vary, appealing to personal considerations (rather than to fact or reason)? My attempt at polite personal observation is once again met with Wiki-Cop, automaton-like fashion; not surprsing for someone who responds in a mechanical or apathetic way, and who carries the dispostion to respond as the mouthpiece for the other tag-team members. Recognition is the state or quality of being recognized or acknowledged, coming to understand something clearly and distinctly; in this case David Saks. Is the inclusion in the article disregarded as an acknowledgement ? Are facts not acknowledgements ? Would a statement acknowledging something or someone not be considered a fact ? Is an acceptance (as of a claim) as true and valid not considered recognition ? What do you gain, if not recognition, by your reasoning ? Banishment, brush-off, non-acceptance, apostasy, censure, repudiation, rebuff, exclusion, reprobation ? Is this what you 'recognize' in the matter of Mr. Saks ?Shame.... 02:04, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Jersyko says: "(rv - this is ridiculous, there is still no source cited, and none has been provided on talk either.)" in his recent deletion. Is Jersyko completely uninformed? No other song has or will be recognized as an Official Song of Memphis according to the Memphis City Council Secretary, 'Mr. Saks' musical contribution is, has been, and will be the only Official Song of Memphis'. 02:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

is not a published source. Note that none of us has ever called your personal character into question in any of our discussion, yet you persist in doing so, calling us all sorts of nasty things from "uninformed" to "apathetic" to "cronies". Consider for a moment that if that is the only argument you are left with in our discussions, you have irretrievably lost. Perhaps it's time to move on. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 04:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The Commercial Appeal is a published source and the reference to the article is noted. Sore Loser is more appropriate in your case, Jersyko, since you've demonstrated your inability to discern the reference. by virtue of your manifestly void cognitive content, which is the sum of what you've perceived, discovered, or learned about it. 11:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

The Commercial Appeal does not confirm your assertion that 'One Last Bridge' is the only official song of Memphis, which you claimed was confirmed by . What about 'In Memphis?' That is, I believe, another song of Mr. Saks's that was supposed to have been named the official song of a different year, although it proved even harder to verify than 'One Last Bridge.'
If the song were the only official song of Memphis, as in the official song of 1990 and all years since, then there would be credible references calling it such. If it were the only official song of Memphis, you'd think there would be some mention of it somewhere on the city government's web pages. Even if no other song had ever been named the official song of a given year, then 'One Last Bridge' would still only be the official song of 1990.
The issue here is not that the song is not verifiable, but that it has had no major references in any article other than the relatively minor one which you've cited, which was unfortunately published just about a month before the start of the Commercial Appeal's online archive. One of the qualifications in WP:MUSIC calls for the subject to have been "featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc.)" If this song were a major part of Memphis culture or history, it would be cited elsewhere.
Please stop making personal attacks. Please keep your comments to the subject of the article. If we need to take this dispute to rfc, your attitude will not win you any points with the other editors who come here to comment on the issue. -- Vary | Talk 13:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Here are additional sources. More will follow as they become available. See The Hebrew Watchman, another weekly Memphis newspaper, Thursday, February 8, 1991, "City Council Honors Saks". Also, The Atlanta Constitution, article by Al Levine, "One Person in Memphis Hasn't Given Up", in the news section A-3, Tuesday, November 30, 1993. See also, The Commercial Appeal, Thursday, November 26, 1992, "Passion is Stamped on Collector's Hobby", by Peggy McKenzie. Whether or not the circulation size of the publication or length of the article meets with your approval doesn't matter, and is ludricous to presume that notability is merited by the quality of circulation. These are major publications with large circulation. You informed me of another matter of which you apparently felt the need to condescend,if I'm safe in assuming rather than lower yourself, of which I'm uncertain if you've made receptive or willing by action, attitude or belief to substantiate the claim as a helpful party at this stage, of which I'm still skeptical that: Mr. Saks' song "In Memphis" was adopted as another "Official Song of Memphis" in 1991. This fact was recorded in the Memphis City Council Archive on January 24th, 1991. These are modest awards that aren't fit for banner headlines, only modest recognition which is in keeping with the demeanor of the composer. On another note, your sensitivity to this discussion is disturbing and I suggest you take a break if you continue to engage in this forum. Perhaps your a bit paranoid, and it comes with the nature of a program like Wikipedia due to the fact that most all users are anon, whether you log in with a nick name or not. I see it doing you more harm than good, an impediment to your psychological wellness. I am in agreement with you, however: Vary said:'Even if no other song had ever been named the official song of a given year, then 'One Last Bridge' would still only be the official song of 1990.' You're correct ! Stop deleting the article. Edit it as you feel, however, leaving it in place. This isn't a game and I'm not interested in "winning points". I'm not trying to "win" anything. Substantiation of historical inadequacy is the nature of this negotiation, of which you desperately seek to undermine, with great urgency. 16:49, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I am unable to find any of the articles you referenced online. Could you provide links if they are available? I think we've discussed, too, that the discussion is not about Saks' notability generally (this was already discussed at the Afd on Saks' article by the community at large), so the articles about his stamp collection aren't really doing anything to further the notability of his song. If there are no online links to the articles, can you tell us, based on your reading of the articles, whether they prove notability of the song per Wikipedia:Notability (songs), and, if so, how? I have requested semi-protection for this page, fyi. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 18:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

If you had taken the time to read the entire two page article about the stamp collection, mentioned in the discussions above and cited, which was a Thanksgiving Day tribute to Mr. Saks in the Commercial Appeal in 1992, you would have known of the references to the City Council Resolutions that were mentioned by Ms. McKenzie, i.e. quote Ms. Mckenzie pp.13, November 26, 1992, The Commercial Appeal, "He is also a musician and songwriter whose songs have won local awards, including City Council Songs of the Year in 1990 and 1991". What else has Mr. Saks won, Jersyko ? Perhaps you could enlighten us. You judge the book by the cover, Jersyko, and continue to demonstrate persistently shallow conclusions, non sequitur and insulting, somewhat assailing and unimpressive. If I were your English professor you'd get an F. Call the Wiki-Cops like you always do when your feathers get ruffled. Notability may take the form of a celebrity who is an inspiration to others, widely known and esteemed, worthy of notice. Mr. Saks meets this criterion, and he is the basis for comparison; a reference point against which other things can be evaluated. Must he be celebrated, having an illustrious past in your mind ? Must he be a luminary, another type of celebrity who is an inspiration to others ? Would you prefer lionization of Mr. Saks, assigning great social importance to his life and his work ? Or is there something redoubtable, enervating and challenging about this search for David Saks to you, Jersyko, and it inspires fear ? We're eagerly awaiting your next entry filled with great social redemption and importance in your search for truth, justice and the American way. Your Wiki contributions are a gift to mankind and have a profound impact on all who read them...not. 23:34, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

'Tribute'? It looks more like a human interest story to me. If it were a tribute, his name would be in the headline. The reference in the stamp collection article doesn't help with WP:MUSIC because the songs are not the reason the article was written, the stamp collection is. The fact that this award is referenced in an unrelated article on Mr. Saks doesn't make it germane to an article on Memphis. If there were 'multiple, non-trivial' references in articles not about Mr. Saks's stamp collection or other non-music related activities, that would help the songs' notability. The references you've provided would make the songs appropriate for inclusion in an article on Mr. Saks, had the discussion in afd not already decided against including the article.
It has been explained to you repeatedly why this information is not appropriate for the article. You have been repeatedly asked not to resort to personal attacks during this discussion. It's not about 'ruffled feathers' or hurt feelings, it's about civility. Jersyko and I are managing to keep our tempers, and I'm sure you're able to do the same. Calling us names will not keep your preferred version of the article in place.
Also, if you think that these new articles you've mentioned support your position, please provide links to the articles that you're using as sources. Don't just tell us they exist, show us. It's incumbent on you to provide links, not on us to go digging through newspaper archives to find them ourselves. I have spent enough time on Commercial Appeal's web site as it is, and I'm not going to do your homework for you. If you want to use the articles as evidence, provide us with working links. Thanks. -- Vary | Talk 00:21, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
"Jersyko, your [sic] an embarrassing, obnoxious despot", that's hilarious, how did you come up with that one? Ok, I think that's plenty of that. I've asked the administrators to review your actions regarding personal attacks on this page. I hope you can cool down and, if you like, come back at a later date and actually contribute to Wikipedia constructively. I won't be discussing this with you any more for now, as it is clear you are primarily intersted in defaming Vary and me. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 00:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Vary, I've satisfied my end of the arrangement and have done my homework. Should Ms. McKenzie have headlined the story, "Passion Stamped on David Saks' Stamp Collection" ? Would that have made it notable even though the two page article was about him exclusively ? Some years ago Pat Boone recorded an album entitled "Pat Boone Sings Guess Who?" because Colonel Tom Parker wouldn't let him use Elvis' name on the album cover. Does that make the album unworthy of notabality for Elvis ? In acknowledgement of your temper, it's not my concern. I've not demonstrated any sudden outburst or anger. If you have problems consult with a behavior modification specialist if this is a characteristic (habitual or relatively temporary) state of feeling. You refuse to recognize the information and reliable proof already assimilated in volume because this matter has escalated to a personal crisis that robs you of your psuedo-authority permiting you to delete parts of publications or correspondence as it suits you annonymously. You've been told that some of these links are not available on the web, yet you persist in demanding evidence. Your not interested in Mr. Saks at this point, only the refusal to acknowledge him with this entry. Are you afraid of exposure by falseness or pretension that challenges the trait of being spurred on by a dislike of falling below your standard ? As for Jersko, I'm not interested in proclaiming his ignorance of the matter or spurring him on to contact the Wiki Anti-defamation league. Does this mean that I'll have to see the principal now and receive a spanking ? Stop removing the article about Mr. Saks. Again, edit it with a highly developed state of perfection if you must; giving it a flawless or impeccable quality. Your not interested in the result of improving something which already has an essential and distinguishing attribute, only eliminating it. Although there may be a subtle difference in meaning or opinion or attitude, the quality of excellence in thought, manners and taste would demonstrate that your part of a society in an advanced state of social development. Please demonstrate these characteristics rather than resort to threats and deletion. Good evening. 03:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Anon, under your edit David Saks receives more mention than any other artist on the entire Memphis article, are you aware of this? Why are the songs listed as "an" and "the" official songs of Memphis for the specified years, which of these correct?
Mr. Saks' abilities and artistic contributions to Memphis can't even be acknowledged, let alone verified in this article. While meritable on a local level, Mr. Saks' accomplishments do not warrant mention in an encyclopedia. WP:MUSIC/SONG--Scribner 13:34, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Scribner, if you had taken the time to review the validation above you would have observed that Mr.Saks has had two songs adopted by the Memphis City Council as the Official Songs of Memphis, which eluded us. In addition, his abilities and artistic contributions, as of which you refer, have amply, sufficiently, more than adequately been verified, including his music manuscripts in the Library of Congress. Perhaps the reason Mr. Saks receives more mention on the Talk page than any other issue is due to some level of notability that he's attained elsewhere, or, perhaps regrettfully, as a result of this forum, which of course, in the manner of Wikipedia citation, is a level of recognition within the mind of the editor of who he or she believes they're comfortable by their pseudo-authoritative process of reaching a decision or drawing conclusions, albeit a compulsive or passive judgement. Much of the deletion is malicious because the editor doesn't have the fortitude to examine the facts, nor the strength of mind that enables one to endure adversity. I've spoken with Mr. Saks at length. He's flattered by the issue and finds it very amusing. On the other hand, he has friends that have made this issue a basic generalization that is accepted as true and that will be used as a basis for reasoning and conduct. There hasn't been the establishment of dominance through legal authority, and it seems ludicrous, preposterous to treat this matter along these lines in the fashion of Wiki whistle-blowing. Wikipedia is filled with, crammed with informants who thrive on exposing wrongdoing, whether declared and not proven or actual, within this organization in the hope of stopping it, such as Jesyko, Vary and Dozenist. Sometimes of necessity, and other times as a sadistic need to bully the newbie. The city council has indicated that Mr. Saks' two songs, In Memphis, and One Last Bridge will stand as the only songs adopted by the Memphis City Council as the Official Songs of Memphis until a council vote reverses the issue, which appears highly unlikely. I agree with you that Mr. Saks' accomplshments are meritable on a local level. So is demographic information and the information about the Seal of the City. David Saks has earned a place in the history of Memphis music, and deserves inclusion in Wikipedia. 23:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I think Scribner was referring to the article, not the talk page. Under your preferred version, the article would spend more time talking about David Saks than it would about any other artist, including a large number of artists who are far more notable than Mr. Saks but are mentioned only briefly.
I wonder if you'd elaborate on what you mean by "There hasn't been the establishment of dominance through legal authority". What legal authority should be establishing dominance, and whose dominance over what? -- Vary | Talk 02:54, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

—It is ridiculous that this discussion regarding Mr. Saks has reached a sophomoric level. This is not a popularity contest on who knows Mr. Saks or how many articles have been published regarding his songs "One Last Bridge" and "In Memphis". Verifiable proof was given months ago that his two songs were recognized by the Memphis City Council as Official Songs of Memphis. There should be a heading for Official Songs of Memphis. This is as pertinent as Tallest Buildings. 03:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

As I've said before, information in wikipedia articles has to be not only verifiable, but also notable and encyclopedic. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. See WP:MUSIC/SONG -- Vary | Talk 04:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
The article on Tennessee has a "Trivia" section and handles inclusion of the seven state songs as such, with an eight word sentence and a hyperlink. Anon, please look at this to gain some perspective on your edit.--Scribner 05:08, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Isn't this collection of dissemblers wonderful? Quote WP:MUSIC/SONGA song is definitely notable if it meets any one of the following standards: '1.Has won a major award.' '2.Is an official anthem of a notable state, region, province or territory.' Scribner, are you the kind of individual that intends to misrepresent the true nature of this matter in the familiar fashion of cronyism ? Why quote the source if you intend to either conceal of misrepresent the facts with an artificial or obviously contrived arrangement of the details ? 14:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

(1) Being named the "official song of Memphis" for one year is not a "major award." A Grammy is a major award. I do not mean to belittle the accomplishment, not many people achieve such an award, I'm sure, but that does not mean that it is therefore a "major award" and encyclopedic. (2) Being named the "official song of Memphis" for one year does not make the song the "official anthem" of the city. Even if it did, Memphis is not a state (the United States), region (the South), province (Tennessee or Ontario), or territory (Northwest Territory), it is a city. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 15:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

It appears that these editors are losing track of the subject at hand. The issue is not how many major awards these songs have received in order to to be included in a Wikipeida article regarding Memphis, Tennessee. They are of merit and should be included because they are official songs of Memphis and deserve to be noted. Jersyko, item number #1 appears to be your opinion regarding what constitutes a major award. I'm sure many people will beg to differ with you.-- 17:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Acutally, no, it's not Jersyko's opinion. The Grammy Awards are specifically mentioned as an example of a major award in WP:MUSIC, along with the Juno and Mercury Music Award. -- Vary | Talk 17:38, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm not trying to slam this down your throat, Vary, but open your ears to these facts in reference to your venerated citation of WP:MUSIC, David Saks: 1.Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network. (Featured subject and guest in one hour interview July 24th, 2006 on Sirius Satellite Radio at Graceland, an international broadcast, in addition to many more radio and television interviews throughout the years). 2.Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or the local scene of a city.(Official song of Memphis) 3.Has won a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno or Mercury Music Award. (Memphis City Council Search for the Official Song of Memphis) 4.Has won or placed in a major music competition. (Memphis City Council search for The Official Song of Memphis) 5.Has composed a number of melodies, tunes or standards used in a notable genre, or tradition or school within a notable genre. ( Library of Congress depository: collected works for solo piano (notable genre), "Impressions of Memphis") 6.Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...). The Commercial Appeal, The Atlanta Constitution, etc. Vary, once again, your pseudo-authoritative display of arbitration resorts to consortia by cronyism demonstrating prejudicial determination of a dispute and not by an impartial referee agreed to by all parties. And please, let the pseudo-editor Jersyko, a person who believes he's responsible for the editorial aspects of publications, the person who determines the final content of this text (especially of an encyclopedia) speak for himself. He's a lawyer, and has practice being a 'mouthpiece'. 18:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I and other editors have responded to each of the above points more than once, and I don't see any point in continuing to discuss this with you. The reference simply can not stay in against consensus. If you still think your claims have any merit, I'd suggest filing a request for comment to bring in some fresh editors to the discussion. That should satisfy your concerns about 'cronyism'.
And If you can't make your points without resorting to personal attacks, maybe you should step back completely and let the additional editors that an rfc should bring in determine the matter. -- Vary | Talk 19:15, 15 August 2006

'Perhaps this issue should be decided by the additional editors that an rfc should bring in to determine the matter as the current editors are exhibiting bias. It matters not how popular a song is or what prestigious awards it has received to be included under the heading 'Official Songs of Memphis". -- 01:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The Mayor of Memphis' office confirmed to me today that there are no "official songs of Memphis." Additionally, the City of Memphis library information center, confirmed that there are no "official songs of Memphis." Anon, you and David Saks are mistaken or lying by claiming here and on David Saks' personal website that David Saks has written "The official song of Memphis." It reflects poorly on David Saks to represent this claim as fact.--Scribner 01:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, that would explain the difficulty there's been in finding current references for the song as the official song. Thank you for going the extra mile to try to find verification, Scribner. -- Vary | Talk 02:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

This reflects poorly on you, Scribner, that you did not do your homework. This award was given to Mr. Saks by the Memphis City Council on January 24, 1991. Had you checked with , Assistant City Administrator, for the Memphis City Council instead of the Mayor's Office, these facts would have been verified for you. Have you not been following the discussion that verified this information months ago? At issue is that there should be a heading for Official Songs of Memphis and not the popularity of Mr. Saks or his songs. Please do not resort to name calling. See Wikipedia rules.-- 02:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC}

Vary, To wit, I, and many others, have responded to each of the above points more than once, many, many times, and there isn't any distinct part that can be specified separately in a group of things that could be enumerated by your constituency in the fashion of a Memphians notoriety. You absolutely fail in that manner. And there is absolutely no need to continue to discuss this with you, either, because of your tenacious unwillingness to yield. At this point you've more than amply demonstrated this and your becoming unpleasant. The evidence has been presented on numerous occasions, by several others throughout this forum and the ones preceeding it, who believe that Mr. Saks deserves a place in the article, as I will always believe. This is not just nonfictional prose forming an independent part of a publication. It's fact. Your persistence to deny this is ludicrous. The reference will be returned in some manner as regardsconsensus eventually, in spite of the lock-down. Your unrelenting whining about personal attacks suggests that your weak. I repeat, for your benefit Vary: 'In acknowledgement of your temper issue, it's not my concern. I've not demonstrated any sudden outburst or anger. If you have problems consult with a behavior modification specialist if this is a characteristic (habitual or relatively temporary) state of feeling. You refuse to recognize the information and reliable proof already assimilated in volume because this matter has escalated to a personal crisis that robs you of your pseudo-authority permiting you to delete parts of publications or correspondence as it suits you annonymously. You've been told that some of these links are not available on the web, yet you persist in demanding evidence.' It's suspect that the article about Mr. Saks was fine for many months until an Anon deleted it on August 8th. It's also coincidental that some of the college swots that participated earlier this year are back. Mr. Saks deserves a place in the history of the City of Memphis.' Vary, Best wishes with your Wiki-editing career, although I hope you don't give up your day job.' Read Wikipedia:Assume good faith. There hasn't been any vandalism. 02:31, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

W.C. Handy

W.C. Handy's song, "Mr. Crump" might be a fitting mention at some point,with a link. The article's getting pretty large now.

"In 1909, Handy and his band were asked to play for the campaign of the Memphis political boss, Edward H. Crump. At the time, the most popular song in their repertoire was a piece called "Mr. Crump" which contained some lines not exactly complimentary to their patron:

'Mr. Crump doan allow no easy riders here. We doan care what Mr. Crump doan allow, We gonna Barrel-house anyhow. Mr. Crump can go and catch himself some air.'"

As you know the song's title was later changed to, "The Memphis Blues." [1]--Scribner 19:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

This is a fun piece of trivia. It gets a quick mention in Handy's article, but it could work here, too, although I can't think how too incorporate it. -- Vary | Talk 02:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Formatted content: (-- 01:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)-- 01:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

In the Matter of Memphis Musician David Saks

Scribner, I don't know who you spoke with, but it wasn't the right person. The Mayor's office wouldn't know anything about it. It's a city council issue. Call this number 901-576-6793 and ask for . She's the City Council Secretary and has been for 15 years. If you had searched the article you would have seen that another editor spoke with her in February. Your another uninformed meddler. Saks has a right to display this on his site. You tell him, or his webmaster, that he doesn't ! Or even better, Mr. Saks' phone number is public. Call him and ask him. No one that would call him a liar in an anonymous users forum has the fortitude, such as you, Scribner. Only a person who demonstrates fear or timidity would resort to such an insult. Did you check to see if any of Mr. Saks' recordings are in the public library ? They're in the Memphis Music Collection and in the Memphis Room. 02:45, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's another link for you: [2] 03:46, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

What does that link prove? It indicates that the song exists, but no one is disputing its existence. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 03:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

It substaniates the fact that there is music and material available in the public library written and composed by Mr. Saks. There may be accompanying material that is relative to his city council recognition, i.e., liner notes or inserts, personal information, critical evaluations of his work, music manuscripts, etc. I have no knowledge to what extent beyond this reference. Perhaps further investigation would be helpful and provide additional insight into his work. I'm not attempting to compromise his integrity. Only corroborate his merit and support with this evidence or authority, and to make more certain, by confirmation, his worthiness of inclusion. 04:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

The full address above will time-out at the library link if the page isn't refreshed. I'm including the information in this entry for you: Title : Tennessee [sound recording] / David Saks. Author : Saks, David. Publisher : [Memphis, TN] : s.n., c1990. Subject Heading(s) : Memphis musicians

DBCN : ADZ-3341 Holdings Location Call Number Status 1 Central/4thFl-Memphis Room MA SAKS TEN S 00C ADULT CASS NonCirculating 2 Central/2ndFl-Memphis Music MA SAKS TEN S 00C ADULT CASS Checked-in

Memphis Public Library

A more complete record is available. Type 'Saks, David' in the search engine. 04:20, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Piggly Wiggly

Why is there no mention in this article that Memphis is the home of the first self-service grocery store, Piggly Wiggly? There is no mention of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly, and original owner of the Pink Palace.-- 12:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)-- 12:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

That's clearly a great observation, and I applaud you for your bringing this to the attention of the forum ! It's almost incredible that something that important could have been overlooked by the editors. It also demonstrates that there is a nefarious, almost villainous nature of indiscriminate deletion and the detrimental, prejudicial means of inclusion through pseudo-authoritative editing techniques which may undermine the integrity of any article, as in the case of David Saks and the deletion of the very small piece of excellent information about him. Mr. Saks deserves his own article from what I've discovered about him. One of the major reasons why many colleges and universities refuse to allow Wikipedia as a reference in bibliographical assemblage is primarily due to the fact that a system of components assembled together for a particular purpose seem rather incongruous or incomplete. That is not to say that all articles are without merit.They're exposed to the conditions of wanton destruction. Thanks again for this wonderful entry. It's an eye opener and I believe Wikipedia needs more input like this. Reneec 13:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you've got us there. If Piggly Wiggly's not in the article, clearly David Saks needs to be, and he even needs an article of his own. I see. Wikipedia articles are all works in progress.'s suggestions are interesting ones, and I'm sure there are many other notable pieces of information verifiable in reliable sources that should be in this article. That fact, however, does nothing for the inclusion of Saks or his song here. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 14:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[personal attack removed]. Once again, your the mouthpiece for other users who've demonstrated beyond reasonable means that Mr. Saks merits the relation of compromise, and inclusion. Your starting to sound like the consensus of 'one'. To suggest that I am or is using the observation as a comparison for establishing notability is preposterous. Don't take it personally.Reneec 14:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

"amusing, ludicrous, farcical, derisory, idiotic, laughable and cockeyed", you know, any one of those would have gotten your point across (it being that you want to be insulting while also being dismissive). Why the thesaurus? I see it's a recurring theme whenever you're attempting to insult people here. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 14:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

No thesaurus availabe here, Jersyko. Just the facts, Joe Friday. Your the mouthpiece. [personal attack removed]. And stop Wiki-copping my Talk page. I've haven't violated the 3rr today and haven't lost my temper, yet. I'm not dismissive, just uninterested in you or your comments at this stage. I actually intend to show indifference and disregard of your input, perhaps a dismissive shrug-off. [personal attack removed].Reneec 14:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

1, 2, 3, 4, 5!. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 15:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Reneec, please be civil and refrain from making personal attacks. I've removed your personal attacks above. — Saxifrage 18:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's the truth about David Saks

I called Ms. (name hidden) of the City of Memphis, today, 8/16/06, here are the facts regarding David Saks:

  • There is not an official song of Memphis, end of story.

<personal attack removed>Reneec 05:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

  • The council did honor David Saks with a "The song of the year", for "One Last Bridge" for the year 1990, only.

<personal attack removed>

  • Last year David Saks contacted Ms. ,, citing Wikipedia as his source, requesting proof from the city for his composing Memphis' "Official Song."

<personal attack removed>.Reneec 05:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Mr. Saks has never received the honor because it was never bestowed, Ms. has told Mr. Saks this on more than one occasion.
<personal attack removed>Reneec 05:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Mr. Saks has called Ms. twice in the past couple of days and was told that he was wrong, that he did not compose the "Official Song of Memphis".

<personal attack removed>. Reneec 05:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

  • There are additional facts regarding this matter that I will not disclose, all but Mr. Saks would find these facts humorous.--Scribner 18:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

<personal attack removed>. Reneec 05:29, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Scribner. Your have much fortitude. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 16:53, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Sigh. Thanks for doing the legwork, Scribner. -- Vary | Talk 17:30, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
lol such a large fight over somethign so small Barcode 18:40, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you Scribner for going through the effort. We are really grateful. - Dozenist talk 22:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's the Dependably Honest, Real Truth About David Saks

'*There's not only an "Official Song of Memphis", there are two of them.'

  • Saks hasn't spoken with Ms. today, since February or anytime this week..
  • I spoke with him about ten minutes ago and he said that tried to contact him today while he was at the University of Memphis' memorial tribute to Elvis Presley.
  • He still hasn't spoken with her. Ms. apologized to him in a recorded message for not returning his call promptly.
  • has forwarded copies of the Official Song of Memphis resolutions to other editors.
  • Saks said that he would forward the city council documents to anyone who requested them from him.
  • Saks' call to the city council is an attempt to get to the bottom of this.
  • Why don't you call Saks, Scribner ?
  • What are the additional facts that you believe others would find amusing that you want to sheild from Mr.Saks ?
  • If you had taken the time to review all of the data you'd know that the council resolutions word the awards as "official songs", including "In Memphis", adopted in 1991, and "One Last Bridge", adopted in 1990.
  • "One Last Bridge" was approved in unanimous resolution, 11-0, as an "Official Song of Memphis".
  • See the record of the regular session of the Memphis City Council for May 22, 1990, signed by City Councilman Bill Davis, and City Council Chairman Jimmy Moore, proclaiming "One Last Bridge" an "Official Song of Memphis" for 1990.
  • This document was also signed by Linda Rogers, Deputy Comptroller of the City Council Records.
  • See the record of the regular session of the Memphis City Council for January 24, 1991, signed by Memphis City Councilwoman Mary Rose McCormick proclaiming "In Memphis" as "The Official Song of Memphis" for 1991. 21:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)'

Please remain civil and don't engage in personal attacks. Violations of these user-conduct policies can result in revocation of editing priviledges. I have removed your personal attacks. — Saxifrage 21:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I have removed another personal attack. I see that you've removed the "[personal attack removed]" notes, as well as had second thoughts about another you wrote just a moment ago. This is improvement. — Saxifrage 21:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Anon, your sentimentality toward Saks is telling. I guessed our identity days ago. Anyone who doubts what I have stated here should call Ms. at 901-576-6815. Ms. is aware of the dialogue on this page.--Scribner 22:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Scribner, what does guessing my identity and sentimentality have to do with anything? Would you also claim that dozenist and jersyko are expressing sentimentality in their bias and cronyism in this discussion because they are friends, as referenced in jersyko's biography? I want to have the facts printed just like you are trying to do. Did you speak to the same Ms. that I did in February 2006 as previously referenced in this article? Why it has taken so long for you to verify what I did in February 2006 intriques me. At issue is not the number of awards or how well known Mr. Saks or his songs are but that he has awards from the City Council for two "Official Songs" of Mephis and there should be a heading for this, just like Tallest Buildings. I'm amazed as well that there is no mention of Clarence Saunders and his contribution to the City of Memphis due to creating Piggly Wiggly, the first self-service stores in the nation, and building the Pink Palace.Bold text-- 23:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmm, is it such a good idea to post this poor lady's telephone number here? Perhaps we should remove all references to it. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 22:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk It's a City Council number. I asked Ms. if she would like for me to remove her name (placed here by Anon). Ms. said no, and read the talk page while we were on the phone. She knows her name and the City Council number are on this page. Additionally, I asked her if she minded if I posted the contents of our discussion, which she had no problem with at all.--Scribner 23:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Her number's publicly available and easy to find, so I don't think listing it here is a problem, but clearly we shouldn't all pile on and telephone the poor woman about this. She's being very kind to comment on the issue at all, and I'm sure she has more important work to do. Scribner, I don't suppose she mentioned any way of providing formal documentation that there isn't an official song of Memphis? Ordinarily there'd be nor call for it - you'd need the documentation to prove something is true, not that it isn't - but right now we're stuck in a 'Tis! 'Tisin't! match that could go on indefinitely. A definitive, formal 'no', preferably on city letterhead, could go a long way towards putting this to bed.
I stress that, should Ms. be unable or unwilling to provide such proof, that would not constitute proof that 'One Last Bridge' is the official song of Memphis. We'd still need solid references to it as something other than the song of a given year. -- Vary | Talk 00:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Anything the city puts in print will likely be run through the legal department. We can ask Gail Carson at the mayor's office for a letter. Let's keep in mind, it's the contributing editor's burden of proof. We don't have to disprove an unverified claim.--Scribner 00:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
You're absolutely right, and normally I wouldn't even suggest it, but this has gone on so long and caused so much drama, I'd love to see a clean resolution. -- Vary | Talk 00:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Mr. Saks has provided the Official City Council Documents.




Reneec 22:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Commercial Appeal has a columnist, Blake Fonenay, who covers the Memphis city government, including the city council. Apparently, the Memphis council, like most city councils, regularly adopts minor ceremonial or honorary resolutions of this kind. In May 2004, the council recognized an Ernestine Pledger-Peete for her work as a barber instructor at the Tennessee Technology Center at Memphis. And apparently early this year, the Memphis city council adopted a resolution to declare February 'direct deposit month.' The archives of Mr. Fonenay's blog are available online. Of most interest to this discussion is the section of articles tagged as City Council. It's entertaining reading.
What Scribner learned from his research was the truth - 'One Last Bridge' was adopted as the official song of 1991, yes, but not as The Official Song of Memphis. The latter is notable, the former is not, and doesn't belong in the article any more than Direct Deposit Month or Mrs. Pledger-Peete do. Please do not accuse other editors of lying, especially if you have no evidence. -- Vary | Talk 23:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Vary, perhaps you should remind Scribner not to accuse other editors of lying? As can be read from the previous discussion, Scribner was the first to suggest that other editors were lying. The truth was researched and revealed in February 2006 but you failed to acknowledge it. I have to question the professional ability of editors that choose to place "Voodoo Fest" (which clearly belongs in a New Orleans article) instead of Clarence Saunders, founder of Piggly Wiggly or Official Songs of Memphis in a piece on Memphis.-- 01:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
The documents you uploaded actually prove exactly what we've suspected, the songs were named the "official song of Memphis for 1990" and "official song of Memphis for 1991" only. The documents are proof that they not named the official songs of Memphis ad infinitum. The "recognition" document is completely irrelevant to the notability of the songs. The appropriateness of the article on Saks himself has been fully discussed and hashed out in the David Saks Afd. You really shouldn't take offense at being found "not notable" for Wikipedia purposes. After all, I'm not notable, either, as are almost all other people. That doesn't mean, however, that we cannot do something that could eventually make us encyclopedic. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 00:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

This entire section of the discussion page has gotten very far from the policy about verifying assertions in Wikipedia:Verifiability. As Scribner pointed out, "We don't have to disprove an unverified claim."

On an unrelated note, what is the status of copyright on material created by the City of Memphis? I know that Federal US creations are public domain, but this does not apply to state, county, or municipal governments in the US. Likely those images will have to be deleted for lack of copyright release. — Saxifrage 01:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Speaking simply from my legal knowledge, you're right, Saxifrage. States and their subdivisions (including cities) are not included in the Copyright Act's "public domain" section. In particular, I know that Memphis claims copyright in its works. You can see such a claim at the bottom of the city's website, for instance. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 01:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Since I'm relatively new to this forum, you'll forgive if I mention that I didn't notice any copyright symbols on the city council resolutions. Since they belong to Mr. Saks, and he's contributed them to Wikipedia, maybe someone capable of arbitrating this should call or email him. Or the city council. His email is available on his website. I don't believe that Mr. Saks' attorneys nor the legal advisor to the City of Memphis would request that you remove the council resolution jpegs.The Official WebSite of David Saks66.239.212.25 02:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

A copyright symbol does not need to be on a work for it to be covered by copyright. See Copyright Act of 1976 for further explanation. Saks does not own the copyright, even if the papers are in his possession and even if his name is on the papers, as he did not create the work. Rather, the City of Memphis ows the copyright in the papers. If you want to keep the jpegs on Wikipedia, you need to get explicit permission from the relevant City authorities. I'm explaining this simply as a legal matter based on my legal knowledge; these are not opinions based on any of our prior interactions or my bias or prejudice, but legal facts. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 02:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Jersyko, if you'd noted the dates on both the recognition document and the official song of Memphis document, "One Last Bridge", you'd see that they were entered the same day, May 22, 1990, and relative to the same item, mainly the Official Song of Memphis of 1990, which may be a reference to the council session. Mr. Saks didn't include another recognition document for the other song, and I wouldn't ask him. To do so would be tantamount to abasement, depriving him of self-esteem, which Scribner has attempted. The council doesn't seek an annual song of Memphis, and the documents have relevance in substantiating the recognition and notablity of the composer by the city government which recognizes Mr.Saks with "Appreciation of Outstanding Contribution to the Community". To dismiss it as irrevelant is a ludicrous assertion. Whether they were the songs of 1990 or 1790 also has no bearing on or connection with the subject at issue, and is repetitively digressive and becoming a tiresome argument that you continue to slam that allows you to proceed to a conclusion without reason or intuition. Jersyko, have you discovered an expiration date on the Memphis City Council Official Song of Memphis resolutions ? When do they officially expire and cease being "Official Songs of Memphis" ? Could it be that the Memphis City Council has committed an error by not providing an expiration date on the resolutions? They're the cities official songs and were the only songs given this distinction by the city government in the late twentieth century, or any other century in the history of Memphis. What Scribner said about his conversation with , is a lie. What he said about there being no official song of Memphis is also a lie. This is not a personal attack on Scribner. He has the propensity to submit a statement that deviates from or perverts the truth. I'm not sure if Scribner's intent is to deceive, if he or she is being intentionally vague or ambiguous, or is trying to cover up a deliberate act of deviating from the truth. never spoke with Mr. Saks this week. She did try to call him today. Mr. Saks was at the University of Memphis with George Klein and Sam Phillips son, Jerry Phillips, for the memorial service for Elvis Presley. I'm sure there are many worthy occupations, lines of work, businesses, commercial activities and people of all concerns that deserve recognition and have been recognized by the city council. The recognition of David Saks was an honor presented to him that was of a distinctly greater degree than is commonly the nature of the Memphis City Council. It was a tangible symbol signifying approval and the distinction of this gentleman. 02:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Your claims will be dismissed until you can substantiate them with reliable sources. For reference, the policy on this is at Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. If you don't follow the rules, you will be ignored and dismissed. — Saxifrage 02:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Saxifrage, the facts have been established. Read everything, from top to bottom. Must these issues be repeated over and over and over like Chinese water torture to satisfy your needs? I'm not looking for a proselyte. You do what you must. These claims have been proven and verified many, many times over the last year. It's not up to me to read the text for you. If you were thirsty, would you ask me to drink a glass of water for you? Would your thirst be quenched by my actions? I doubt it. Similarly, covering all of these issues for your benefit, once again, is ridiculous. Your tag-teaming this matter with Jersyko, Vary, Dozenist and Scribner without giving the evidence the examination it deserves on your own. Why edit as it suits you rather than try to assist the matter? Is it because you demonstrate partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation? It's starting to sound like it. Don't prove despotic without carefully examining the evidence, all of it, not just the last two or three days. There's a massive volume of information supporting Mr. Saks. Stop threatening me. BTW, calls for notability, reliable sources and verifiable sources have been requested at least fourteen times on this page alone, and, in each instance, have been provided. It's repetitively tiresome. Many, many reliable and verifiable sources have been provided, and, if you include song or music notability it ups the ante. Mr.Saks' supporters obviously won the argument a year ago, as they have this day. Devil's Advocacy is in play by the shallow tone of the editor at times and the demonstration of tribal, virulent swaggering is below the belt and foul. The compulsive deletion and tag-teaming has become personal. Most of Mr. Saks' supporters are newcomers and don't have the deletion and reversion privileges that veteran cronies tenaciously subscribe to. The integrity of any editor or writer is in question, including myself if you don't have the fortitude to admit that your wrong rather than milk the editor past the precise location of something obviously verified and reliable; it demonstrates that the challenger is spatially limited. It's just a suggestion, not a personal attack. 05:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Verifiable information would be the City of Memphis saying that the songs are "Official Songs" somewhere publicly available. They haven't done this, it seems. — Saxifrage 07:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

'Has anyone discovered an expiration date on the Memphis City Council Official Song of Memphis Resolutions ? Of course not. That's preposterous. When do they officially expire and cease being the "Official Songs of Memphis" ? Ask Ms. if the Memphis City Council assigned an expiration date to each of Mr. Saks' songs ?' 05:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

We have no idea or evidence for how the City of Memphis operates internally. Perhaps they need expirations dates, perhaps they don't, perhaps the Resolution means something in particular, perhaps it means something else. Without evidence that they are currently Official Songs (evidence which has not surfaced, and which seems to have been refuted informally by an editor in good standing) we have no basis for putting them in the article. Your protestations to the contrary are notwithstanding, since WP:AUTO takes your opinion out of the equation. — Saxifrage 07:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the "Official Song" status expired at the end of 1990 and 1991.--Scribner 13:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The city council spokespersons have reaffirmed recently, and several times earlier this year, that the two songs will always stand as Official Songs of Memphis, and never placed any restrictions or expiration dates on them. Because they were adopted for a particular year doesn't rob them of their status as Official Songs of Memphis any more than recognizing the trombonist of the year award would rob a musician of this achievement. The Official Song of Memphis award is a notable and prominent musical accomplishment and deserves a category under the article, perhaps in 'The Arts'. The other councilmen that can attest to this fact are councilmen Sammons, Lowery and Councilwoman McCormick. Former council chairman Jimmy Moore would speak with you. Why don't you and Mr.Saks meet at the council chamber next Tuesday for their session and request a hearing during their call for adjournment and recognition of visitors? His office number is 901-278-8008. He's extremely cordial and as polite as anyone you could imagine. I've known of him as a broadcaster, when he was a student at Rhodes College and the University of Memphis, and as a notable Memphis Musician. Your judgement is imperfect in a faulty way and it robs you of the fortitude to retract or disavow your formerly held attestation, in rather poor taste, that there was never an official song of Memphis. Scribner, I find it extremely difficult to provide or furnish a mental attitude regarding anything from you at this point because of my suspicion that your input consistently possesses the quality of being fraudulent. I don't intend for this to appear personal. Only a calm, intent consideration of the collection of facts by which your conclusions are established through intentional misrepresentation.Reneec 14:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Did the City Council approach you, David Saks?--Scribner 15:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Problems in Memphis (2)

Sorry, I have to bring people's attention back to the problems, which so conveniently seem to be omitted from this article.

Here are some that were mentioned before:

 Memphis ranks number one in the nation for infant mortality.
 Memphis ranks number one in the nation for child pedestrian deaths.  
 Memphis ranks forth in the nation for high crime and I think now that New  Orleans is off the list it is actually third.

As a former resident, the most annoying aspect for me was:

Out of control urban sprawl, i.e. Memphis is more of an isolated suburb than a city, resulting in a terrible public transportation system. A car is an absolute necessity in Memphis, so teenagers are never able to develop the kind of independance associated with urban living until after they start driving. Tourism is also difficult especially for people visiting from outside the United States. The city streets look deserted (except Beale street at night)because the sprawl makes walking unfeasible. Most east memphis residential neighborhoods don't even have sidewalks. Area shopping malls thrive at most a few years before a new one opens further east drawing away all the bussiness.

I also have an objection to the sentence: "Memphis is also a literary mecca." Graceland is certainly a Mecca of sorts and Memphis may be for some styles of music. But to suggest it is a "literary" mecca in such a broad sense is, to quote my annoying memphis highschool teacher, a gross hyperbole! Many of the authors listed have cursory connections to Memphis and the list is not much longer than that of many other cities.

I want to mention that I know lots of Memphians get annoyed with repetitive criticism of their city. But memphis has a strong reputation, in part quite negative, and to simply paint a rosy positive picture of a city with such a reputation makes residents (or for the more enlightened, the writers of this article) look close-minded and dishonest. All cities have problems, so admit them. This isn't a travel brochure.

Also, the contemporary racial issues should be addressed to update people on the situation, especially those people whose perception of Memphis is still stuck in the civil rights era.

Some positives that weren't explicitly mentioned in the article:

  cheap affordable housing and low cost of living
  very eclectic population for a southern/central US city
  lots of trees (trust me, this is a big plus)

--Dba5 19:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC) dba

Generally, I think your ideas are good ones. Scribner had some similar ideas, which are expressed in a subsection above. Perhaps you could collaborate in this regard? · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 19:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmmm....Let's close our eyes for a minute and replace the name of Memphis with the names of Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, to name a few. How can you collaborate without expressing your own personal opinions, as referenced above?-- 01:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
A little maturity is what everyone needs to show here. David Saks exists. His songs are not really hugely known. Memphis has problems, but they are not that different than many other similarly-sized North American urban areas. I know all of this, but for me to cite it in the article I need to back it with published sources, not just phone calls to people whom I know or who happen to agree with me, even if they work for the city government. I think that we need to give very little weight to comments from those editors who are so very opinionated but think little enough of Wikipedia to either sign their comments or even bother to create an account, and more to those who do both. Rlquall 02:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments Rlquall. Dba5, your comments are factual. I have documented them before and will do so again, time permitting. Memphis may be the hardwood capitol of the world, I'd heard it before and here it is again. Interesting.--Scribner 03:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Rlquall, you sound like a reasonable individual. No disrespect, however, an account only gives a little more privilege in the editing arena, but does little more than that. Your as anonymous as I am and your Wiki-account doesn't demonstrate or manifest your visiblity anymore than it would on Paltalk. Does your club membership in Wikipedia give your opinion more validity? I think not. And what makes you think that anyone without an account is demonstrating contempt, or as you've suggested,' think little enough of Wikipedia' ? Your generalizing that all users without an account participate in a manner that is disrespectful and contemptuous of those who register. That's not an essential qualification for participation in this forum or any other in Wikipedia. Courtesy is, however. Some of the best arguments I've ever read, ever, come from the works of Anon. Why don't you draw from specific cases for more clarity of your assertion? Membership has it's privileges, I agree. Many enter briefly because they refuse to recognize Wikipedia as authoritative because it's unrestrained by convention or propriety, and faced with defiance and impudence. Many colleges refuse Wiki citation in bibliographical reference because of this. Good luck and I hope you find a chair on the Wikipedia membership drive committee. I'd nominate you but I haven't registered. Non-members can't vote, right? 03:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Amen....-- 03:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Don't talk to yourself with sockpuppets, it's silly. — Saxifrage 07:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
What you seem not to understand is that an account gives, funnily enough, accountability. A user with a persistent account has an edit history and is traceable in all their activities at Wikipedia. Just like in real life, a reputation is created and preceeds an editor. Thus, yes, the willingness to submit to such scrutiny is a sign of greater trustworthiness.
So long as you demonstrate lack of understanding of this project when you thumb your nose at the community and our ways, and so long as you remain "more anonymous" than all the rest of us, yes, you will get very little respect. If you don't like this, you might want to get an account and start establishing a reputation beyond "that anon with a David Saks obsession and no desire to contribute anything else". Oh, on that note, there's another thing that engenders respect for an editor's opinion: a track record that shows they have an interest in improving the encyclopedia generally, rather than a single-minded self-serving agenda. If you want respect, go edit something else and come back here when you've learned a little more and you've established that you're not just here to insert yourself into a high-visibility project. Don't worry—Memphis isn't going anywhere and will be just the same when you do come back. — Saxifrage 07:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
On the note of citations, any student who's competent knows not to cite an encyclopedia, whether Wikipedia or Britannica. Encyclopediae are tertiary reference works and should be used to find the original references for real research. I doubt your assertions about the reasons for Wikipedia citations being disallowed come from your own investigation of this issue. — Saxifrage 07:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What you seem to be dispossessed of, Saxifrage, and what's even more farcical, is that your as out of order with your claim that the anon has an obsession with David Saks as much as you are with your sneering display and expression of contempt for an anons input. Whatever they say will stay in the forum and on the servers. The anon expressed earlier that your tag-teaming compares the issue to a water torture style of examination, rightly so. You obviously came in to the David Saks matter as a newby and hadn't done your research. The only notoriety for any particular characteristic in this matter that you've demonstrated is not what I would refer to as a great contribution to Wikipedia, and doesn't do much for your reputation either. And where do get off with your presumption of 'single-mindedness'? There've been many editors and participants. You don't understand that your attempt to suppress the input of any anon without an account is ludicrous,derisory and prejudicial. You demonstrate this characterisitc with your unbelievable partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation, 'so long as you remain "more anonymous" than all the rest of us, yes, you will get very little respect'. Should one become a "Borg" in the manner of Star Trek to be accepted into this forum? I'm certain that Memphis isn't going anywhere, but your going nowhere, either with your conclusions or with the principles that guide your reasoning within a given field or situation you've been confronted, no more evident than in the case of David Saks. No one's thumbing their nose at Wikipedia, just responding in the spirit of cooperation. I hope that I'm addressing a competent individual and not an ignorant college swot that all to frequently disrupts a forum with contrived, phony intellectualisms that sound like the spewing of a third year undergraduate repeating some dull and officious fact that came from the mouth of a monotonic erudite. Additionally, your quip, 'Encylopediae are tertiary reference works and should be used to find the original references for real research' is odd. Are you referring to the Tertiary Period, Saxifrage, which archaeology refers to as a period from 63 million to 2 million years ago? Or are you referring to something that comes next after the second and just before the fourth in the position of order? In that case, you need updating. I suggest you read Copi's Logic.Reneec 15:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Reneec -- a checkuser request in February confirmed that you are the same user as nearly all the anons that have commented here. I hope that you're not trying to deny that now, as it really seems that you are. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 15:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not true, Jersyko. Although my IP isn't static, when I've enetered the forum without logging in, the string has always remained the same in the first three sets. 66.239.212. Accusing me of being Mr.Saks is evident of Scribner's persistent dereliction of responsibility in this forum.Reneec 16:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence of Scribner's, Vary's, Saxifrage's, Dozenist's, or my "persistent dereliction of responsiblity" on Wikipedia? Becuase it is important to point out that, at one point or another, you have accused each of us of something quite similar. That's (at least) five people you are making these very caustic accusations about. You offer absolutely no evidence, however, of any such "persistent dereliction of responsibility", however, other than a perceived animosity of these editors toward either you or David Saks. Consider for a moment that each of these editors has made hundreds, even thousands of contributions here on Wikipedia, nearly all of which have absolutely nothing to do with David Saks. You, however, have done absolutely nothing but push David Saks since you came here. Do me a favor: do not make blanket, insulting, even defamatory accuasations about the worthiness of other editors simply because they happen to disagree with you on your single-purpose crusade. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 16:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Above, Reneec says
"That's not true, Jersyko. Although my IP isn't static, when I've enetered the forum without logging in, the string has always remained the same in the first three sets. 66.239.212."
Right, and the comment you referred to above as having been made by 'an anon' (the water torture bit) was posted by one of those addresses, (talk · contribs) in this diff, and later edited and re-signed by another addy in the same range, (talk · contribs), in this diff. -- Vary | Talk 16:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Jersyko said:Do me a favor: do not make blanket, insulting, even defamatory accuasations about the worthiness of other editors simply because they happen to disagree with you on your single-purpose crusade. What bestows the privilege of favoritism in your personal manner, Jersyko ? Do me a favor and stop asking for favors. Once this has been settled I'll move on to the next. I can't help the fact that your becoming enervated by attrition. What subject would you prefer that I "push" ? You amuse me.Reneec 16:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, maybe if you keep insulting us, we'll eventually agree with you! · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 16:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

You make me feel like the Don Rickles of Wikipedia. Sorry, but I have to return to my day job. I have property taxes and insurance, house notes, family and other matters that are more important. I can't play with you anymore today. Perhaps later this afternoon.Reneec 16:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I do have to wonder why you were confused about which comments were made from the ip range 66.239.212.x, which you have stated were made by you, and which were made by the other anon active on this page, from the range 70.248.232.x (a semi-static one, it appears, as all the edits this month are from (talk · contribs), while the ones in February were from (talk · contribs)). -- Vary | Talk 16:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
And Saixifrage is perfectly correct to point out that you have done absolutely nothing on Wikipedia other than push the notability of David Saks. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 15:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Reneec, regarding your last comment, I suggest you see Tertiary source. Quoted below:
Where a primary source presents material from a first-hand witness to a phenomenon, and a secondary source provides commentary, analysis and criticism of primary sources, a tertiary source is a selection and compilation of primary and secondary sources.
So, yes, he was referring to something that comes after the second and before the fourth, except there's no such thing as a Quaternary source, so far as I know. -- Vary | Talk 15:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarification, Vary. There is a quaternary source, however, and comes next after the third and just before the fifth in position, time, degree or magnitude. It's also the cardinal number 4 that's the sum of three and one. As an adjective, it's anything consisting of or arranged in sets of four. Perhaps the internet as a whole source could be considered quaternary? Reneec 16:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets are common. You don't seem to realise how easy it is to spot sockpuppetting. We unfortunately observe sockpuppeting frequently and get to recognise socks pretty easily.
There doesn't appear to be any danger of this unnotable material getting into the article, so I will take my leave for now. I'm sure someone will drop me a message at my Talk page if this gets out of hand. — Saxifrage 19:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Did David Saks request the honors or did the City Council come to David Saks?

David, tell us all exactly how you came to be honored by the City Council for the two songs. Be specific, please.--Scribner 15:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Call Saks and ask him, Scribner. His number's in the Memphis phone directory.Reneec 16:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
No, I want him to respond right here. Does he have something to hide?--Scribner 16:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

<personal attack removed> Reneec 05:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

"excercise"[sic] is spelled exercise. When you're attacking people at least get the spelling right.--Scribner 07:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Contacted the Musicians Union Local 71 today, 8/17/06, regarding David Saks. They had never heard of him, his songs, or "honors." In all fairness, they didn't research their files, but they did instantly know an old friend of mine. Reneec, fair warning...the personal attacks will not be tolerated.--Scribner 06:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
David, tell us all exactly how you came to be honored by the City Council for the two songs. Be specific, please.--Scribner 06:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, it seems clear to me now that Reneec is enjoying being fed, and is merely trying to prolong his/her meal. There's no real danger of anything actually appearing in the article that shouldn't be there at this point, so I am of the opinion that perhaps we should (1) continue to remove personal attacks posted here, (2) revert the article as necessary, (3) not answer Reneec's posts until s/he demonstrates a desire to engage in reasonable discussion again, and (4) if the attacks continue, request NPA blocks on Reneec. Does anyone disagree? · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 13:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

No argument here. -- Vary | Talk 14:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Agreed--Scribner 14:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Agree. - Dozenist talk 15:10, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

<Personal Attack Removed>I called the musicians union long ago. Saks signed a recording contract with the American Federation, of Musicians, in October of 1989 when Jamison Brandt, now either retired or deceased, was the president of the local chapter. Saks told me that he didn't become a permanent member becuase he didn't teach or serve as a session member of any ensemble other than when he was in grade school or college. Outside of sitting in with various musicians like, Shawn Lane, Joe Walsh, Jimmy Vaughn, B.B.King, Herman Green, Doc Severinsen, and others at various clubs or shows, he didn't believe that membership was essential. He said, at the time, the benefits of membership were primarily health insurance and that he had sufficient coverages from other health related programs. He was the fisrt solo pianist invited to play at the Peabody Hotel by Jack Belz, who owns it, when it reopened in the early 1980's. Call Mr. Belz and ask him if he knows Mr. Saks. He does and considers himself a friend. Call Bernard Lanksy, Elvis' clothing outfitter at Lansky Brothers, or his son, Hal, in the Peabody Hotel. They know Mr. Saks very well. As a notable matter of fact, Mr. Lansky gave Mr.Saks two new tuxedos as a gift to perform in on the grand reopening day. I spoke with Mr. Saks after I read your last snippet of info. He's sending me the contract document to upload. Who is "they", the desk girl at the musicians union ? Are they Memphians ? They probably wouldn't have heard of him unless they were from Memphis. As in the case of Mark James, composer of "Suspicious Minds", Elvis' songwriter, few people know of him in Memphis, but many know of him in Texas. Mr. Saks is sending me the contract from the American Federation of Musicians. He said it's so old that the ink's starting to wear off. But I'll send it anyway once it gets here. Debunking it is not a good idea.Reneec 14:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

<Personal Attack Removed> As promised, the debunking of Scribner's last allegation:

Reneec 15:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm....Let's close our eyes for a minute and replace the name of Memphis with the names of Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, to name a few. How can you collaborate without expressing your own personal opinions, as referenced above?-- 01:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What personal opinions are you referring to? I think that some "personal opinions" are of sociological importance and hence relevant to this article.

Memphis has problems, but they are not that different than many other similarly-sized North American urban areas.

While there are many urban areas that share these problems, few possess them to the same degree. I mean, only Memphis has the second highest crime rate in the country. Regardless, the problems should be mentioned; they are NOT common knowledge, even amongst residents.

--Dba5 21:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Please check out the web site for It states that Memphis is a pleasant city to live in and has won the award for "Cleanest U.S. City" five time. While it is not on the list for the 100 Safest U.S. cities, it is also not on the list for the 100 Least Safest cities. Chattanooga is 41 and Pigeon Forge ranks 47 on the Least Safest city list.--Boodro 21:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

"Memphis Mayor Says City is Not Livable or Safe"

Many citizens agree Memphis is number one in the nation for infant mortality rates and child pedestrian deaths...forth in crime in the nation. Of course mention is warranted.--Scribner 22:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


There is no reason for the article to start with the comment about Memphis not having been the state capital; I have never seen any evidence that there was any credible movement to make it the state capital and hence this is a non-issue. The Chicago and Los Angeles articles do not begin with speculation as to why they are not the capital cities of Illinois and California respectively; in only about half of U.S. states is the state capital the largest city; in the South this is only the case in Georgia, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Virginia; I assume that one could now add Louisiana in light of the events of the last year.Rlquall 18:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Rlquall, actually Memphis was temporarily the capital of Tennessee for a brief time during the Civil War, at least according to a historical marker in downtown Memphis that is located just north of the intersection of either North 2nd and Madison, or North 3rd and Madison. This was after Nashville fell to Union forces and before Memphis likewise did the same. I know a historical marker is not a publication but I figured that since the marker was erected either by the state or city government that had to give it some level of credibility. And since I don't have an account you can refer to me as cardinal. 10:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, it was unsourced original research. · j e r s y k o talk · 18:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Also the article begins with the claim that "As of 2006, the city of Memphis had an estimated population of 680,768, making it the ... second largest [city] in the southeastern region (only to Jacksonville, Florida)." Um, what about Atlanta? Or Miami?

My question exactly. I am pretty sure that Altanta and Miami are both bigger than both Memphis and Jacksonville. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs).

I believe the figures are based on actual city population. Atlanta is bigger than Memphis population-wise if you include the metropolitan area, but Memphis has a larger population in the city proper. · j e r s y k o talk · 00:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Spanish link

Language link on left for español should point to existing article Memphis (Tennessee) not the non-existent article Memfis (Tennessee). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talkcontribs) .

Fixed, thank you. · j e r s y k o talk · 06:03, 19 November 2006 (UTC)