Talk:Elvis Presley#rfc 4E45D95

Michael Jackson’s summary on his main page and cultural impact page have been grately expanded and more definitive of his legendary legacy. Both this page and Elvis Presley’s cultural impact page need the same treatmet. For example, MJ’s changed the “one of the most significant cultural figures of the 20th century” to “ever”. I think it’s fair to say the same for Elvis, who is often fighting with him for the title of best selling solo artist. This and among other things to take note of. 172.116.32.173 (talk) 07:44, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

:Elvis outsold and outhit mj with a far bigger cultural impact. Plus, was a top box office draw. 2600:1000:B11B:EA9D:D1D3:63D4:5063:52F9 (talk) 16:22, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:The reason the change was made for Jackson's page initially was because of the various sources on his article that cites various comparisons with Jesus Christ, Nelson Mandela and other major historical figures, so some editors believed it was warranted.. However this was later reverted as no consensus could be reached regarding the header. Elvis Presley is primarily seen as an American icon, while Michael Jackson, for most of his life and even today is widely regarded as one of the most globally recognized individuals in the world second only to religious figures.

:So i think Elvis's current article is appropriate

Never17 (talk) 21:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

I would say keep the Elvis page the way it is, but change the MJ page so it's far less hagiographical. ;-)

Grandmajohnnym (talk) 17:13, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

:And yet this is one of many issues that got the Wikipedia best selling artist listing directory page in trouble, and nominated for deletion. Can you imagine that some editors believe and I quote "that it was warranted citing various comparisons of Michael Jackson" to Jesus Christ or religious figures": a la St. Jude, St Peter, or Mother Teresa of Calcutta? This is hard core fanaticism. Some editors and their wiki counterparts have bordered on this type of extreme zealotry. This infatuation for Jackson has hampered the credibility of Wikipedia's best selling listing directory. In earnest, the article is being compared to "Chartmasters" which is another so called best selling listing article whose credibility is largely, nonexistent. I am hoping that we can improve and legitimize the Wikipedia best selling artist listing directory with objectivity, fairness, trustworthiness and not infatuation. And yet, I don't see it going away. The article has come repeatedly under scrutiny and repeated attacks from more than just some contributors; It has come under attack from historians and musical pundits who have question the veracity of some of these editors who believe that Jackson is greater or has outsold Presley, The Beatles, Crosby or Sinatra. Case in point: The RIAA puts Michael Jackson at number 6 in their best selling listings for artists. He is behind The Beatles, Presley, Garth Brooks, Led Zeppelin, and The Eagles. You can make the argument that this is only the tabulations for the United States. However at one point Jacksons claimed sales (within this best selling listing directory) were at 350 to 400 million. Practically overnight, his claimed sales were incremented to 500 million. The editors and wiki counterparts also made Jackson supplant Presley as the best selling solo artist within this list. This maneuver created a major uproar by many readers who believed that this was not correct, factual or honest, and accused this page and article of becoming a "Michael Jackson Fan Page". Now we know why; As of now, we are in a standstill. Not knowing how we are going to proceed, in not getting the aforementioned best selling listing article nominated for deletion again. But then again, we have tried in vain to formulate some type of consensus to give the article legitimacy and credibility. Sad to state, I think we have failed in this endeavor. Right now, after much soul searching I don't think we can ever achieve the type of legitimacy and factuality that can establish the Wikipedia best selling artists listing directory as a bona fide point of of reference. Victor0327 (talk) 03:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::Once again if Elvis fans want him to move up the best selling artists page he will have to surpass Michael Jackson in certified sales not just by a small margin but a considerable gap to justify increasing his claimed total again since both have the same claimed sales. However Presley was previously audited and certified for all of his eligible albums in the 1990s, this is well documented at the time he gained 110 certifications. His estate frequently keeps him certified up to date in the United States which is his primary market and bulk updates all of his eligible albums, his last update was in 2018 for numerous albums. This means the most logical explanation of the Elvis's albums not yet certified in the US to date haven't met the qualification for Gold and sold under 500,000 even after a multi-million dollar biographical film. This makes the chances of Elvis ever catching MJ or The Beatles in certified sales incredibly unlikely as they continue to go up for digital sales and significantly out chart / out stream him despite being far more out of date for their records.

::On the subject of the long argued "1 Billion figure"

::Guinness World Records historically never cited record sales for Elvis Presley, this can be found by going through the editions of the books over the years, in various editions the claim was "His sales haven't been subject to a independent audit and cannot be verified" [https://archive.org/details/guinnessbookofwo00dona_0/page/155/mode/2up?q=elvis 1989] / [https://www.google.ca/books/edition/The_Guinness_book_of_records/z1zOhG0PF3UC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=guinness+elvis+audited+global+sales+figure&dq=guinness+elvis+audited+global+sales+figure&printsec=frontcover 1996] / [https://archive.org/details/guinnessworldrec0000unse_t7r7/page/122/mode/2up?q=%22The+Beatles%22 2000]. The first mention of this claim from them came from 2012 when suddenly they claimed he sold 1B records meaning such claim was directly ripped from Elvis's personal estate [https://www.google.ca/books/edition/Guinness_World_Records_2012/biWfNzQiR8EC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=elvis+1+billion+records+guinness+world+records&pg=PA408&printsec=frontcover]. In the UK the Official Charts Company which handles all sales figures for the country reported that Presley's total physical single sales were 21 million units [https://web.archive.org/web/20120605110655/https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/the-official-singles-charts-biggest-selling-artists-of-all-time-revealed-1431/] / including digital sales he had only sold 4.5 million singles across his entire discography in the UK this century [https://www.officialcharts.com/chart-news/the-official-top-50-biggest-selling-elvis-presley-singles-revealed__10564/]

::Let's go through the list of best selling albums by country shall we, the majority of these lists include claimed but not certified sales too

::France (MJ listed 5x, Madonna listed 3x)

::Germany (MJ and Phil Collins listed 4x each)

::Canada (MJ - #1 Seller / Shania Twain - 3x / Pink Floyd - 2x)

::Brazil (MJ and Madonna listed 3x each)

::Indonesia (MJ #1 Seller - 800k / Whitney Houston - 320k)

::Mexico (MJ is the top seller and appears 2x with Billie Ellish) /

::Netherlands (MJ has #1 seller with 1.4M and 2 entries along with ABBA and Celine Dion)

::Italy (Claudio has #1 seller, among foreign artists only Madonna has two albums. Beatles, MJ and Floyd have 1 each)

::Japan (Mariah Carey has top selling foreign album, The Beatles and Michael Jackson each have a album with over 2 million here)

::China (No foreign artist sold 500,000+ in pure sales besides Michael Jackson and Celine Dion / James Horner for the Titanic soundtrack)

::Belgium (Best Selling foreign albums are Nevermind, Thriller and ABBA Gold. Celine Dion is listed 5x, U2 listed 3x with MJ and Britney 2)

::Colombia (Best selling foreign album belongs to Backstreet Boys, No foreign artists has 2 albums listed besides Michael Jackson)

::Argentina (The Beatles, Queen and Michael Jackson are the only foreign acts with a Diamond album)

::Austria (Thriller is the best seller with over 400k, MJ and the Beatles / Robbie Williams all have 3 albums here)

::Australia (ABBA has 4 albums listed, Bat out of Hell is the #1 seller, among 20th century acts Springsteen, Pink Floyd and MJ each have 2 albums)

::This covers Every major foreign music market. In every single one of them Elvis Presley has not one single album making the list for any of these countries. If he was a big seller there they would have already reported on it.

This is not a forum and changes will not be made by fans blindly complaining. So far the only thing i've noticed is the same group of Elvis fans going from article to article being very immature demanding pages be taken down such as the best selling artists page for example. This is exhausting and will never go anywhere.

Never17 (talk) 06:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:Well first and foremost my friend, it is nice to hear from you. Second and most important let us not obscure the main issues that you have not rebutted to. The justifications for increasing Jackson's claimed sales from 350 million to 500 million based on total available certifications is a moot point that no one has been able to addressed or respond to. Moreover certified sales? Eminen with (345.8 million), Taylor Swift with (300.4) Beyonce with (308.7) and Drake with an astounding (556.8) million certified sales and countless others, have all eclipsed Presley in their certified totals. Does that mean that they have outsold Presley? or Jackson for that matter? or the Beatles? If you are to increased their claimed sales based on total available certifications like they did with Jackson, then this maneuver would then be resoundingly factual. Would it not? and yet your point and it's validity has been disputed many times. Not just by me but by many other respectable contributors who have exchange opinions with both of us. We have also covered this issue extensively and the points that you have raised have been unequivocally misrepresented. And I state this, with the utmost respect. The billion figures came from RCA (Presley's label) in 1982, and later (BMG) who purchased RCA, acknowledged this fact. And of course, the RIAA auditors who audited Presley in 1992, agreed without a doubt that Presley had sold way over a billion units. There is just too much documentation to just omit this fact. The Guinness Book of World Records is a book of facts. The book and its editors, do not fabricate or mislead the reader in any venture of fact. They have Presley as the best selling solo artist in history. They also pointedly have stated that Presley is by far the most certified RIAA artist in history with an staggering 299 RIAA certificates for the most Gold Platinum, and multiplatinum albums and singles as of present day. And most interesting and alarming, is the fact that there are over350 Presley albums and over 150 singles that have not been certified due to the RIAA thresholds criteria of not reaching the 500 thousand echelon required for being tabulated in the sales process. But that is another issue all together that for some reason, this best selling listing directory fails to adhere to. Again, I can over explain myself with facts and perhaps we will fail to reach common ground in reaching consensus. That being stated we can agree to disagree. Thank you for your response. Victor0327 (talk) 09:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::Guinness didn't start claiming that until 2012.

::The only complaints being made and demands for the page of best selling artists being removed are solely by Elvis fans unhappy that Michael Jackson surpassed him, constantly flooding the talk page with spam.

::This is not a forum, and such discussions being brought up over and over again is pointless and never goes anywhere since it's long tired and parroted claims from the Presley estate from 40 years ago.

::Do not get mad at the editors, if you want him to move up the article get people to start buying his records and stop buying Thriller, Fleetwood Mac's Rumors and other popular works from 20th century acts that continually outsell him worldwide

::This is enough. Never17 (talk) 09:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::You Have a great evening my friend. Once again thank you for your response. Victor0327 (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/music/2013/10/03/elvis-presley-tops-digitally-streamed-artists-soundexchange/2909811/ 161.11.160.60 (talk) 13:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::let me get this straight

:::the mj article uses gwr most successful entertainer in hx but the elvis article cant use the gwr highest selling solo artist in hx. How can you cite a source and disavow the same source ?

:::fyi mj is not the most sucessful entertainer in hx. not based on box office, ticket sales, tv ratings, and concert attendance 161.11.160.60 (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

:::Here's the problem, Never17...

:::If you compare the combined album/singles discographies here at Wiki for Elvis with anybody else, you have to scratch your head as to how anybody could have more records sold than him. Between his obvious chart success and humongous number of albums, it just cries best-selling artist of all-time. Now the certified numbers for MJ are a definite plus for him, since he was fortunate to start his solo career when record certifications were more in vogue for musical artists due to publicity's sake than when Elvis started. All I'm saying is there is more to the story than the RIAA. Grandmajohnnym (talk) 21:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

::::He's got around 60 singles and 200 albums that haven't sold enough for gold meaning they sold around 100k-400k units each or even less then that. The midpoint of that would be between 250,000 to 300,000 units each on average let's say, that would come out to 78-80 million units for the remaining records. At best we could give him another 100M+ from those but that's a long shot however if they didn't even sell 500k in his primary market the sales from outside the US would be pretty much negligible.

::::To date only 3 acts are claimed to have sold 500M or more. So our conflict only hinges on MJ / Beatles / Elvis who are all according to different sources the best selling artist of all time.

::::Since both Jackson and Elvis currently have claimed sales of 500 Million records it means that The Beatles stand as the best selling artist at the moment. Therefore i think it's fair to the Beatles those two cannot have their figures raised again unless their certified sales vastly exceeds that of the Beatles with a gap substantial enough to justify the move. Under this circumstance i think their certified sales should be at least 100M units above the Beatles (400M+)

Basically the point i'm making is you have a genuine argument, but so do i. Rather than picking holes and trying to tear apart the sales of these artists or comparing them due to discussions like this. I'd rather just accept what they have now and address the matter of who should be raised when that time comes which isn't now

Never17 (talk) 23:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

{{hat|WP:NOTAFORUM}}

:Weird?

:If Elvis wasn't global/,How come the leader of north Korea was a fan?

:https://history.info/on-this-day/1941-north-korean-dictator-kim-jong-il-elvis-presley-fan/ 161.11.160.60 (talk) 15:33, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

:bs

:elvis outsold and outhit mj.

:graceland is the only private home where a sitting president ( bush) entertained a head of state ( pm japan)

:we have lilo and stich to the hit elvis movie to a netflix elvis cartoon. wheres mj in current media.? zzzzzzzz

:there are elvis statues across the globe. Millions from across the planet visit graceland.

:the proof is in the stats

:elvis outsold mj

:elvis outhit mj ( more number ones,top tens,etc)

:plus elvis was a top box office draw. 161.11.160.60 (talk) 16:45, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

::Elvis's broadway musical opened in 2005 only to flop horribly and closed down the same year due to low ticket sales [https://playbill.com/article/all-shook-up-to-close-on-broadway-sept-25-com-128157]. Michael Jackson's Broadway musical has been top 4 in annual revenue each year and will finish this year within the top 10-15 all time.

::Elvis's Cirque De Solei show opened in 2010 and closed down the next year due to low ticket sales [https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/theatre-and-performance/vegas-casino-pulls-plug-on-cirques-elvis-show/article4252642/]. Michael Jackson's first show is the most financially successful production ever, he followed that up with another one which has sold nearly 6 million tickets and given the average ticket prices would likely come out to 1 billion in revenue

::Elvis was audited and certified for most of his albums in the 1990s within the United States, they recently re-certified him again in the US for more albums back in 2018 [https://www.riaa.com/elvis-presleys-riaa-certified-album-sales-146-5-million-units/]. His certified sales are still nearly 70 million below that of Jackson and the Beatles whose certified sales are identical. 95% of his sales are concentrated within the US and UK, the latter of which is automatic when it comes to single certifications for digital performance. Michael Jackson has sold more in the UK alone right now than Elvis from every foreign country combined, and Jackson is missing all of his Japanese and Italian sales from the 80s due to them not being operational until the 90s.

::Elvis's 100 million dollar biopic had less international box office revenue than Michael Jackson's low budget and boycotted rehearsal footage from 2009 which had a limited time release for around 3 weeks compared to the 3-4 month theatrical run of Elvis's movie [https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr4112339461/]. This is it had nearly 200 million in international haul alone (unadjusted) which far exceeded not only Elvis but Taylor Swift's movie internationally despite being in her prime and touring actively overseas to promote it. [https://www.boxofficemojo.com/releasegroup/gr3506393605/] Elvis's biopic did only 136 million internationally and 156 million in the US from a near 4 month theatrical run, which is genuinely abysmal numbers and shows their little interest among today's consumers for him.

::The we are the world documentary was the most watched musical documentary in the world last year, doing nearly 4x the viewership figures of Elvis had on the same platform.[https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/music-news/music-documentaries-concert-films-business-revenue-luminate-report-1236108688/]

::Michael has 8.8 Million daily streams on Spotify right now largely from 6 albums, he only has around 300 tracks on his catalog. The Beatles with nearly 3x the amount of songs in their catalog are only above him by 300,000 combined streams. Elvis Presley has a whopping 1600 different tracks on Spotify and is only at 3 million daily streams [https://kworb.net/spotify/artist/43ZHCT0cAZBISjO8DG9PnE_songs.html][https://kworb.net/spotify/artist/3fMbdgg4jU18AjLCKBhRSm_songs.html]

::Janet Jackson, the sister of Michael Jackson had a documentary rank #1 in the United States in 2022 with over 20 million viewers. [https://www.ebony.com/janet-jackson-is-releasing-a-second-lifetime-documentary/]

::According to Billboard, Michael Jackson sells over 1 million album units in the United States alone every year. No other legacy act sells more annually in album sales. [https://www.billboard.com/business/business-news/michael-jackson-estate-sells-music-rights-sony-valuation-1235604155/]

::On Youtube, Michael Jackson has 5 videos over 1 billion views worldwide. Elvis has 600+ videos on his official music channel [https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSEmH1YyFWltSBYkfLMtkcg], the views from Billie Jean and Beat It alone exceed the combined viewership of every video the channel.

::Elvis has 21 statues, of those monuments 12 came from the United States with half of that figure being from his home state of Memphis. Michael Jackson has 24-25 statues worldwide with only 2 of them being from the United States. China has 10 statues & a museum, Brazil has one, Africa has two, India has one

::Elvis's best selling album sold 20 million, only one of his albums has sold that. Michael Jackson averaged over 31 million per album across his solo studio albums

::Elvis's highest attended concert was 60,000 in Michigan. Michael Jackson did over 100,000 paid attendees 9 times in Latin America within the span of 2 months, he averaged 65,000 (higher than Elvis's peak attendance) per show during the History tour which was after serious allegations completely outside the United States. Michael Jackson has 11 concerts attracting 100,000, this is almost the same amount as every concert in the last 15 years combined across every musical act.

::There's legitimately no world where Elvis is even in the conversation with Michael Jackson. Elvis does not come close to Michael Jackson in terms of global impact, longevity, and commercial success. Jackson consistently and widely outperforms Elvis across every metric—whether in Broadway and Cirque du Soleil productions, certified sales, international appeal, streaming numbers, box office performance, or concert attendance. While Elvis's influence remains largely confined to the United States and the UK, Jackson's legacy is a truly global phenomenon, with sustained popularity in virtually every corner of the earth, think of a country in the world and Michael's popular there. His dominance in modern digital platforms further highlights the stark contrast between the two, as Jackson continues to attract new generations of fans worldwide & is trending in the news every single day due to artists being compared to him or the media using his likeness to generate headlines. Simply put, Michael Jackson’s success, cultural reach, and enduring influence far surpass anything Elvis Presley achieved. Elvis isn't even close to artists like Queen, Bob Marley or Madonna today. His peers are acts like Frank Sinatra and Bing Crosby. Never17 (talk) 18:42, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

:::you are souting debunked nonsense with lack of common sense

:::1) the riaa severely undercuts elvis true sales because of they account for sales.

:::Brookville Record sales cannot at present be certified (7 x platinum – 2 albums) Another 5 to 7 million sales of Pickwick releases cannot be fully certified. Numbers are known, but they come from an audit report and not from actual sales accounting Missing sales info on pre computer sales Missing international sales reports. Elvis was not with RCA in many countries Missing SUN sales figures (small numbers I know, but!!!) About 400 U.S. album releases (RCA, Special products and more) all between one of other level of certification. RIAA only counts full millions. So if any album sold 1.999,999, it still counts as 1 million 24.218.114.189 (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2024

:::when elvis died in 1977

:::elvis sold over 200 million records. rca records needed 3 plants to keep up with the demand. 24.218.114.189 (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

::::He did not sell more than 200 million records in a year, that's complete nonsense and quite literally impossible.

::::All of your figures are taken directly from the Elvis estates claims which just like that Aloha in Hawaii concert where they claimed 1 billion viewers when it was actually only around 180-200 million. They have a history of overestimating and inflating numbers Never17 (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

:::::1) riaa severly undercuts elvis sales. by all metrics gwr, riaa ,sony records elvis is the highest selling solo artist in hx.

:::::2) elvis was declared king of digital streaming 2013 ( mj never was)

:::::3) elvis declared worlds greatest idol ( americaN IDOL TV SHOW)

:::::4) PEOPLE MAGAZINE DECLARED ELVIS entertainer of the century and worlds biggest teen idol

:::::5) elvis statue in vegas stating KING OF LAS VEGAS, because people flew in across the globe to see non self proclaimed king elvis and raised vegas revunue across the board

:::::6)elvis has the biggest selling christmas album in hx

:::::7) people visit graceland across the globe

:::::8) elvis movie during covid. mj movie right after he died

:::::since you like to compare a seventies concert to a 80 mj concert

:::::elvis tv ratings blow away mj or jackson 5 tv ratings

:::::elvis known throughoput the globe from india to africa

:::::elvis outsold mj ( multiple sources state this)

:::::elvis outhit mj ( more number ones, top tens,etc)

:::::elvis is the most certified riaa artist in hx

:::::elvis had a far bigger cultural impact

:::::racist radio stations were forced to play elvis music to compete with non racist ones

:::::even his hair style is iconic

:::::top ten most iconic hairstyles article 24.218.114.189 (talk) 22:15, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

::::::Avatar 2 came out the same year as Elvis and made 2 billion, at least 9 different movies in 2022 made over 500 million worldwide at the box office and 3 different films made 1 billion.

::::::Elvis made less than Black Adam which was considered a flop and Sonic the Hedgehog 2. It only ranked 23rd worldwide that year in foreign box office. It ranked 12th in Domestic Box office despite a 4 month theatrical run.

::::::There's literally no argument here, i get your a fan and that's fine but facts don't support the narrative. Elvis Presley is a American icon from the 1950s and 1960s at a time when America was still fairly racist and skewed heavily against minorities. Today he doesn't resonate much with the average consumer since the world now is extremely diverse and there's tons of other more popular artists out there across multiple continents. This constant bias fanboyism has grown tiresome and it's no longer worth engaging with. Never17 (talk) 22:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

:::you have zero rebuttal

:::mj movie is actually mj . mj did die 3 weeks prior. elvis movie is an actor obviously

:::notice you omit

:::elvis outsold mj

:::elvis outhit mj

:::elvis was the biggest draw in vegas ( blew away jackson 5 vegas sales)

:::jackson 5 even copied elvis jumpsuit

:::mj last supper has elvis in it

:::elvis is known globally from numerous articles, statues, songs and the millions of people who visit anually

:::elvis was declared king of digital streaming 2008-2013 ( mj never)

:::elvis was declared the worlds greates idol

:::the stats show elvis was bigger and had a far bigger cultural impact to hair,clothing and sexual atttudes

:::you have been debunked. 24.218.114.189 (talk) 00:07, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

weird?

elvis biggest selling single ( its now or never) outsold the we are the world single ( you have been debunked)

elvis outsold mj (that debunks your argument)

millions from across the globe visit graceland ( Global)

millions from across the globe flew into vegas to see him perform ( Global)

{{hab}}

Lately, there has been a repeated removal and restoration of the birthplace in the lead section. Should we keep or remove it?

Since we don't want to start an edit war and this is an FA, I'm opening a discussion for other editors to give their say on this. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:18, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

I think that the birthplace in the lead section is appropriate. It has always been there, go back to 2020 and it was there. Go back to 2015 and it was also there. There is nothing wrong saying that Elvis was born in Tupelo and his family moved to Memphis at the age of 13. ( Bryan1518 (talk) 20:59, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

:Totally agree. I can't think of a single reason not to include it. Grandmajohnnym (talk) 23:40, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

: What reason might there be not to include the town of his birth and residence for his first 13 years of his life? I cannot think of one. Mathglot (talk) 01:10, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

::I've reinstated the birthplace unless someone objects. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:58, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

The information of Presley's family moving to Memphis when he was 13 years old has always been here. It was here back in 2020 and 2015. There is no reason to remove it now. How is it an issue when it's factual? I just don't understand the issue of removing information like that. It's important to understand that Presley's family moved to Memphis when he was 13 years old because he attended high school in Memphis, not in Tupelo. If that information isn't there, some people are going to think that Presley was never raised in Memphis at a young age which he was. ( Bryan1518 (talk) 14:25, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:A few days ago, {{user|Nikkimaria}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elvis_Presley&diff=prev&oldid=1282075629 reworked the lead section], but it was repeatedly reverted, hence why I started this discussion. While I have no argument with including his birthplace in the article, I've asked Nikkimaria for her thoughts on this. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 14:55, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

The information of Presley's family moving to Memphis when he was 13 years old has always been here. Thank you for telling me that a certain someone, reworked the lead section. If the information of Presley's family moving to Memphis when he was 13 years old has always been here, why remove it now? I'm not saying you but to that specific person, why remove it now? It's factual. It happened and it shouldn't be a big issue. Could that part be there or no? Is it OK if I put it again? After all, the information has always been there. ( Bryan1518 (talk) 15:08, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

What is wrong with saying that Presley's family moved to Memphis when he was 13 years old? The information was always here. How is it an issue nowadays on the article page? It's accurate to say that Presley's family moved to Memphis when he was 13 years old because Presley went to high school there. Had Presley stayed in Tupelo, there is a chance that he would not had gone to Sun Records in Memphis. We would never know. Putting the information that Presley's family moved to Memphis when he was 13, explains how Presley was able to record in Sun studio in 1954 which was located in Memphis. The answer is simple, he already lived in Memphis for a couple of years by that point. ( Bryan1518 (talk) 16:06, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:I don't think this is an issue. Like I said, all we're doing is trying to resolve any creative disagreement(s) we have on this article's talk page (in this case, the birthplace and his early life) rather than edit warring. Apparently, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elvis_Presley&diff=prev&oldid=1282297903 this addition regarding his move to Memphis was re-added again] without waiting for any response from Nikkimaria. Also, patience is a virtue. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:17, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:: Brief procedural note: not sure if I understand you correctly, but regardless how this discussion ultimately resolves content-wise, just in case there is an implication here that one must wait for the response of the author of a bold change before reverting it, that is decidedly not the case and unsupported by any guideline. On the contrary: editing guidelines support both bold edits, and their reversion, in which case the next step is discussion to achieve consensus, which is where we are now. Mathglot (talk) 17:06, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:::If my estimates are correct, according to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elvis_Presley&action=history history], Nikkimaria made a bold edit when rewriting the lead section, then {{user|Bryan1518}} restored the birthplace and his early life. I reverted it, advising the user to discuss it on the article's talk page. When it was reverted again, I opened up this discussion per WP:BRD. Then, I restored the birthplace per the earlier discussion. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

:I don't think "has always been there" is in itself a reason why it should be there - there are many accurate facts in the article and they cannot all be in the lead. Given that the lead is currently over the typical length for FAs, the age at which he moved seems quite reasonable to omit. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:13, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

:: Agree it is not a reason, it just needs consensus, one way or the other. Current readable prose size is 14590 words, the lead is 551 words, or 3.8% of the total. Here are some stats about some other FA solo artists:

{{cot|bg=khaki|indent=4.8em|Lead size as a percent of PAGESIZE for selected artists}}

{{hatnote|Note that the percent figure is based on {{tl|PAGESIZE}} (raw bytes) not readable prose:}}

• Bob Dylan – {{section length|Bob Dylan|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:Bob Dylan}} bytes
• David Bowie – {{section length|David Bowie|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:David Bowie}} bytes
• Elvis Presley – {{section length|Elvis Presley|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:Elvis Presley}} bytes
• Frank Zappa – {{section length|Frank Zappa|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:Frank Zappa}} bytes
• George Harrison – {{section length|George Harrison|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:George Harrison}} bytes
• Jimi Hendrix – {{section length|Jimi Hendrix|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:Jimi Hendrix}} bytes
• John Lennon – {{section length|John Lennon|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:John Lennon}} bytes
• Michael Jackson – {{section length|Michael Jackson|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:Michael Jackson}} bytes
• Paul McCartney – {{section length|Paul McCartney|pct=y}} of {{PAGESIZE:Paul McCartney}} bytes

{{cob}}

:: So the current lead size is on the high side but within range of the others. Maybe the article should be cut back. (And so should some of the others.) Mathglot (talk) 01:04, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

:::{{tq|Maybe the article should be cut back.}} is definitely also true. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:09, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

I think it's fine if someone mentioned the young age that Presley was when his family moved to Memphis. I don't see anything hugely wrong with that. I don't understand why it is an issue now? It has been there for years. Like I mentioned before, it was there in 2020 and 2015. Was it wrong for that to be there? Was that a mistake? I don't think so because it mentions the fact that he moved to Memphis at a young age. The article now seems a little mislead because it makes it look as if Presley went to Memphis in 1954 for fame when in reality that isn't true and he went to Memphis at a young age. He was 13 years old when his family moved there, why is that an issue to some here? ( Bryan1518 (talk) 00:36, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:Again, just being there for years isn't a reason for it to be there. Why does this particular fact warrant inclusion in the lead when many many other facts are not included? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:41, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I think it's important to mention the age. Could the age be mention or not? If it could, then I would probably make it shorter because previously, there seems to be a mention of Memphis, Tennessee two times and I don't think it should be mention two times. I do think that making it shorter would be appropriate, right? ( Bryan1518 (talk) 00:51, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:Yes, making it shorter would be appropriate, so no, we shouldn't specify the age. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

The age should be there but I do agree that it shouldn't had been as long before because the words Memphis, Tennessee was mentioned two times and it did seem kind of long. My question to you is did you had a problem with the age or the fact that it was too long? ( Bryan1518 (talk) 00:55, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:Both, as they are linked. Adding details that are not necessary makes the section longer. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:05, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

I was thinking of editing like this, He relocated to Memphis, Tennessee at age 13 and began his music career in 1954. This seems shorter than what it was a couple of days before.( Bryan1518 (talk) 01:02, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

: Works for me! Maybe even better: "{{xt|He relocated to Memphis at age 13 and began his music career in 1954.}}" 'Memphis' is important in this context, 'Tennessee' is not, and is one click away, for anyone who cares. Mathglot (talk) 01:13, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

OK, I would probably edit the page to something similar to what you suggested. Thanks for the reply. ( Bryan1518 (talk) 02:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:No thank you - the present version is sufficient. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:27, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:: Until this settles down, I have restored the sentence under discussion to the long term stable version:

{{cot|bg=khaki|indent=4.8em|Mini-history of the sentence}}

• rev. 1168473434 of 23:56, 2 August 2023:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi, and relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, with his family when he was aged 13.
• rev. 1179134720 of 03:45, 8 October 2023:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi, and relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, with his family when he was aged 13.
• rev. 1199497884 of 05:59, 27 January 2024:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1211558044 of 05:01, 3 March 2024:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1234400695 of 04:48, 14 July 2024:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1256904072 of 03:48, 12 November 2024:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1266991639 of 03:48, 3 January 2025:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family relocated to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1270991383 of 04:53, 22 January 2025:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1281072014 of 03:05, 18 March 2025:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.
• rev. 1281081585 of 04:49, 18 March 2025:
• : Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi.

{{cob}}

:: Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 06:37, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:::So, about Presley's age when he moved to Memphis, do you think we should consider keeping or removing it? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:33, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

:::: Both are reasonable, and neither violates any guideline, so it comes down to consensus. To me, Memphis (and Nashville, Detroit, New Orleans, and Chicago in a different context) is Music City, and the impressionability of a 13-year old child moving there is different from 17 or 7, just from breathing the social air of the city, even if they never attend a performance as a child. It's a piece of information I would want to know about someone moving to a city known for its musical roots and culture. But I am open to removing it, if there is a better argument for excluding it. Mathglot (talk) 20:42, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

Yesterday, I edited the page but now, the lead sections looks a little different. Honestly, I like it how it is now. Someone made it a little different than the one that I edited and I'm totally OK with that. In fact, I think it's even better now than my edit one yesterday. Overall, I won't change it at all if it is like how it is now. The one who changed it made it better in my opinion. ( Bryan1518 (talk) 20:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)

There are a couple of different options on how to rework the sentence regarding his early life:

• {{xt|Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi; his family moved to Memphis, Tennessee, when he was 13.}}
• {{xt|Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi. He relocated to Memphis at age 13 and began his music career in 1954.}}
• Remove the sentence altogether.

If there are any alternatives, please let me know here. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:45, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

: There are also:

:* {{xt|Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi and began his music career in Memphis in 1954.}}

: and the very similar:

:* {{xt|Presley was born in Tupelo, Mississippi. He began his music career in Memphis in 1954.}}

: I don't happen to favor either of those, but since you asked. Mathglot (talk) 00:50, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_Christmas_albums_in_the_United_States

Please add to his achievements 161.11.160.60 (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

:I think Michael Jackson has the record now.

:Just a joke, folks. :-D Grandmajohnnym (talk) 22:37, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Elvis is supposed to have increased his visual appeal by wearing a length of hosepipe down one leg of his trousers. This has ‘urban legend’ written all over it, but anyone have any… er… hard facts? 163.47.69.10 (talk) 21:57, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

thumb

{{edit semi-protected|Elvis Presley|answered=yes}}

Slagelperrya (talk) 15:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

:This has been nominated for speedy deletion on Commons because it is pretty obviously a copyright violation. Please don't upload images to Wikimedia Commons if you found them in a web search etc.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Please add to his achievements

https://www.amazon.com/People-Weekly-Magazine-Years-Idols/dp/B00TZG6LTY 161.11.160.60 (talk) 13:59, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:Not without evidence from secondary sources that this bit of vacuous fluff has any lasting significance (clue: it doesn't). AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

::Wierd?

::The secondary sources show elvis sold far more merchandise then any other act/singer for teens.

::Sources show elvis was declared kimg of digital streaming (article was posted above)

::Elvis has the biggest selling christmas album in history

::The most popular us stamp in hx.

::Weird

::None of that is ever posted about him. 2601:19C:4A04:F425:A48B:82CF:5211:DE54 (talk) 15:00, 24 May 2025 (UTC)