User talk:Jaye9

Master of Puppets Call me MoP!  02:36, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem! Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺ )  03:05, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I removed it, hope that helps. Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  17:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Elvis article
Hello Jaye9. Thanks for your question. Yes, 141 put the Sight and Sound quote in the article. I don't think it is good or appropriate, but 141 has thwarted all attempts to remove it. It's really good that you can check out things like this. Please feel free to ask me anything; I may want your help too! Rikstar (talk) 17:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * See Elvis talk page. Rikstar (talk) 15:35, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Arbcom case has been filed. Steve Pastor (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Jaye9. I posted a reply to your recent Jailhouse Rock comments. I must apologise too, for slightly editing a few gaps and things here and there; it was bit tricky to read in my browser, and I do think people should get the point you were making because all contributions are important in editing what is in some ways a very problematic article. Best wishes. Rikstar (talk) 10:41, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, Jaye9. Do you have the source details for the Marty Lacker comment about the London visit? This would be very useful to prevent people doubting what you have written. I will then delete the stuff about the London visit from the article because the Lacker quote is evidence that the story is 'bullshit'. Rikstar (talk) 09:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * You're doing fine, J. It's all coming together. I've added a link to EIN. I will soon delete the London visit bit. Rikstar (talk) 11:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Would love to help, and appreciate your help in improving the main article. The articles you refer to are not well known or easily available - which makes me wonder how/why they could or should be relevant in a general, encyclopedic article about Elvis. My source material is limited to other, well-known (but up-to-date) works. Bear in mind that other parties can easily see and get involved soon or later with our discussion/concerns. I'm sure 141 appreciates (and it's a fact, as far as I'm concerned) that we only have the best intentions i.e improving the main article to achieve Featured Article status. There may well be accusations of fan bias, but we should, unfortunately, get used to that. Rikstar (talk) 19:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Your "Gay Writer..." is a good addition. I like the "overtly heterosexual" reference, for obvious reasons. Keep up the good work! Much appreciate you staying with this article. Rikstar (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't get to see your recent posts sooner. 141 has now quoted them in his response of May 18, so it would not be right to change them. Rikstar (talk) 00:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Jay9, I think we need to work together on what you think should be added or removed from the main Elvis article. You're spending hours responding to 141 just in the talk pages and I don't want you to end up angry or frustrated. Try not to spend hours responding to him if it won't make much, if any difference, to the main article. 141 seems to get pleasure from 'proving' his point at others' expense, in this and other articles. Try to keep any personal comments (compliments or otherwise) about other editors out of the talk pages - there are plenty already from others, which all (rightly, in my view) reflect how we feel about some of 141's contributions. Your time is precious. You've got good source material which may be very useful. We need to stick to the facts and reliable sources. The problem is that responding to an edit which 141 stubbornly refuses to be deleted by adding another edit that redresses the balance means the article may grow to rather needless lengths, but don't worry about that now. Don't forget 141 can read everything, including what you write here, and he will use that against you, me and anyone else if he wants to. He will of course make accusations that he knows will annoy you.


 * I've got little time lately and a few connections problems since Microsoft's SP3 update, but I'll do what I can. I do think we can accept that Presley was not a 'Casanova' i.e. had actual sex with hundreds of women, but what do you think about that? Rikstar (talk) 14:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the article name, I'll check it out. Rikstar (talk) 14:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

RE: Citing
Are you referring to citations, like this? See WP:CITE for more information with those, and if you need any help I can help you set them up as I'm fairly good with them. Also, to edit under another user's comments from before, just click the "edit" button to the right of the screen, over the section header; this will let you edit that section alone. Hope that helps, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  22:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. I sympathize with your struggle to learn how to edit - I'm still learning! I have found it useful to click on 'edit this page' whenever I see something I like or want to copy. That way you often see exactly which keys a user has pressed to achieve a particular effect. It would be good for you to take the time to study the wiki help pages, etc. Many users are also very helpful and patient when you ask for advice. I am hoping to help edit the Elvis article again, but it will depend on who else is involved. Editing has been very difficult because of one particular user, so I just keep an eye on things for now. Rikstar (talk) 15:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Signing in
Hey! Hmm, that's strange; do you mean your computer signed you out by itself? In that case, your internet connection may have reset itself while you were looking at a page, and Wikipedia automatically signed you out because you don't have the "keep me signed in" button checked (it's on the log in screen). Otherwise, I'm not sure. I'll go sign your comment, though. Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  13:48, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * No problem, I'm just really happy I could help! Cheers, Master of Puppets   Call me MoP! ☺  04:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Elvis
Hey Jaye, just wanted to let you know I got your message this morning. Don't worry about not getting back to me till now, life takes priority! :) I think we decided to leave out most of the original 74-76 section because we felt there were too many conflicting reports, especially about the fight at Tahoe, but if you can add anything to it with new, referenced information that you think would benefit the article then I'd support that. About that thing you read that I might find interesting, I'd love to read it. You can leave it on my talk page and I'll have a look at it as soon as I can. Many thanks. ElvisFan1981 (talk) 08:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Hello! Sounds like you got some good material for the Beatles meeting. ElvisFan suggested a new section on famous people he met but I don't think it wouldn work; it would just be like a list - Elvis met x in 1958, worked with y in 1961, met z in 1964, etc. There has to be something significant about the encounter for it to be given a mention (like Nixon), although some famous names can be mentioned in passing. I think some of the stars he made films with should be put in "Acting career"; Walter Matthau, Barbara Stanwyck, Angela Landsbury, etc. Rikstar (talk) 05:41, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for the Beatles stuff Jay9 - got to be useful. Rikstar (talk) 23:05, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've created a new section for Elvis' post-army recordings. The de Leon (is it a small 'd'?) stuff would be useful here; I'll see what else I have. Thanks. Rikstar (talk) 10:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Letting you know I clicked around on that site and... couldn't really find a biography??? Steve Pastor (talk) 20:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Jaye, I've been away and/or learning about linux. Thnx for your message - will get back to you when I can. Rikstar (talk) 23:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)


 * See my talk page for the beiging of this. Jay, I always tell people to watch all 3 of the Sullivan shows on which Elvis appreared. It is available on dvd and used to be in the Elvis article as a reference. You would think that you would notice something like that. Elvis DID shake his legs while Sullivan talked in show #2. But I didn't see any "cardboard tube". Show #3 was the only show in which Elvis was shown only from the "waist" up. But he sang mostly ballad like songs on that segment. This text used to be in the article - . On the third Sullivan show, except for a short section of “Hound Dog” included in a medley, Elvis sang slow paced ballads and a gospel song. The fact that Presley was only shown from the waist up on this last broadcast led to many second hand accounts that Sullivan had “censored” Elvis. .   1In spite of any misgivngs he may have had, as Elvis stood beside him near the end of this broadcast, Sullivan declared, "This is a real decent, fine boy. We've never had a pleasanter experience on our show with a big name than we've had with you... you're thoroughly all right." Steve Pastor (talk) 19:37, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Jaye, I've tried to check out the links you gave me, but I can't see any in-depth material about what you've mentioned. The link: "entertainment.howstuffworks.com/elvis-presley-biography.htm/printable-443k,heading Howstuffworks "Elvis Presley Biography" just leads me to a few brief sites of photos, songs, etc., but no real biographical detail relevant to Bill Burke, myth busting, etc. or any of the other stuff you have mentioned. Hope you can clarify. Rikstar (talk) 13:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
-ElvisFan1981 (talk) 22:20, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
 * And thanks from me, jaye9. I'm sorry for being late in responding to your earlier queries about Elvis coming second in that singing contest, but I got tied up with other things. You cite some good sources: may be a note - about him NOT being second - could be added. Please, keep using the talk and discussion pages to air your views with me or anyone else interested in improving this article - that's what it's here for! I haven't managed to read your last post to me fully, but I will get back to you about it when I can. Rikstar (talk) 10:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your response. Yes, I think the intention to add a note about him not coming second needs flagging up in Discussion first. And we need an accurate citation to support it. Cheers for the AC/DC recommendation! My wife just got Back in Black as her new ringtone. Rikstar (talk) 22:07, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Jaye9, It's a good point and I couldn't agree more - records, footage, etc. are all there to be used as such a guide: it's the original source material. And I agree Presley's own views are valid. We just have to avoid coming to our own personal conclusions based on it and putting them in any wiki articles, without other corroborating, third-party sources. I know my own viewing and listening steered me towards writers like Guralnick. I only got a copy of "Last Train to Memphis" a few weeks ago and have just thumbed through it. Interestingly, he appears to make no mention of Elvis being censored, or any of the other claims typically associated with the Ed Sullivan shows. This lack of information/opinion to me is enough to question when the "from the waist up" stories started. This is I think what Steve has been saying is wrong with the existing account of Ed Sullivan, and why a total rewrite is needed. P.S. I was born in the 60's, so I wasn't there either! Rikstar (talk) 11:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Festive cheer
Thanks Jaye, that's really nice. Same to you. :) ElvisFan1981 (talk) 10:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Likewise Jaye, all the very best! Rikstar (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for all your editing efforts since you got involved with 'Elvis'. It can be very trying at times, but I think you already know that! I have a mind to edit it down to 'bare bones', but I will do this in a sandbox so the main article is unaffected. I got to thinking about doing this after reading 'Judy Garland', a featured article recently. Then again, I might just not have the energy... Very best wishes for the new year. Rikstar (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Elvis sandbox

 * Many thanks for your comments! I'm still working on it a bit, but I think it'll soon need to go public in the main talkpage. I'm not sure about the feasability of it replacing the existing article. The main thing is we've now got a basic biography to work with. One of the main things I was conscious of was ejecting bloat and bringing in more about Presley's music. I've added images from other linked articles; I assume they can all be used. I hope all this renews people's faith in the possibility of achieving a decent article at last!! Rikstar (talk) 00:12, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Enthusiasm! Isn't it about time we had some of that about this darn article?! I'm gonna post a link to my sandbox on the main talkpage; people can then add comments there. Thanks for your support. Rikstar (talk) 00:57, 3 January 2009 (UTC)


 * There's a couple of footnotes that I haven't been able to fix, but everything else seems ok. Rikstar  409  09:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, Jaye. I also lost any real interest in this article a while back, which made me think there's something fundamentally wrong with the format - not just our over-familiarity with the content. Wikipedia should have lots of interesting, well-sourced facts and anecdotes, but with Elvis, there's too much, and so there's always too much argument about what to include. I may make more changes to the sandbox version, but nothing major probably. Rikstar 409  09:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message, Jaye. The editor who does not approve of the sandbox version has an established record of opposing certain changes and being in favour of edits to do with Presley's sex life and what he seems to believe was the low-life, lazy scum his parents were. He has posted lengthy discussions questioning Presley's sex life, and contended he was bisexual/homosexual and a pedophile. His user page drew attention to a claim that Presley had sex with his mother. This editor has made what I and others consider to be very useful contributions, but many of his edits (or proposed ones) have not had the same support. I think the negative stuff about his parents that I removed should go with other info about them in a new or different article. It would be ludicrous for anyone to suggest this new version does not contain enough criticism. The jibe that it should be renamed: "Elvis Presley's step-by-step development into a gospel-minded rock 'n' roll superstar" is churlish. I agree that Garland and Lennon don't read as negative as Presley's article, but then no one has been stubbornly working to include negative and salacious claims in their biographies. I'm tired of editors who use the openness of wikipedia as an excuse to include anything and everything, but then object to edits that oppose their own agendas. I agree there could be more about Presley's women, but there is already a separate section on relationships.


 * I don't see why the sandbox version shouldn't be the main version and rated higher, but then we'd have to see how it was changed after that. Frankly, I think some editors will butcher it back to how it was. I believe they are fully aware of the hassle this would create, and that this threat helps to keep the undesired current version in place. I note too that the same editors are making little if no effort to improve the B-rated article, which again supports the theory that some sort of agenda is being pursued and the quality of the article can go screw itself. I think some editors get a perverse kick out of causing such problems - and I'm not prepared to deal with such nonsense. Believe me, it has been bad. For this reason I'm reluctant to continue having anything more to do with the main article unless others take it forward to see if it invites the same kind of unhelpful and tedious attention it has before. Rikstar  409  11:46, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Rikstar, thanks for your comments. I'm replying on my talk page to you,as I carn't respond to your talk page for some reason. Yeah,what can you say,I'm exhausted just thinking about it,but we will get there. I appreciate why you don't want to tackle the main page,we'll just see what happens. Let me say one thing to you if I may,you are a very intuitive person,you know as much as I do what's going on here. It's as transparent as rice paper. However, we have to show good faith at all times,those are the rules. No personal opinions,just reliable sources. This may be a strange thing to say to you,but you need the material to combat certain topics that particular editors are interested in,if you get my drift. Let's start with,do you have these books: Soft cover Albert Goldman 1981,Elvis and the Memphis Mafia by Alana Nash,Down At The End Of Lonely Street by Broeske & Brown,that's a start. I want to be optimistic and say,we can get that Elvis sandbox version in as the main article. If we carn't, then I will try and tackle the main article,but I would greatly appreciate your help. These books and reading them are a start,should this be the case.--Jaye9 (talk) 14:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Found your reply, thanks. Rikstar  409  13:33, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 02:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Request to debrief re:Elvis article
Hi Rikstar,

I've thought long and hard about this,but may I have your email address Rikstar,so as to converse with you about the Elvis article. I feel by doing so,it may or may not save as both alot of time and effort. Heck,anything is worth a try. If you would rather not,I'd perfectly understand. All the best.--Jaye9 (talk) 02:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi Jaye9. I have enabled my email to be available in My Preferences. I hope you can access it. Look forward to your first email! Rikstar  409  09:06, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Rik,

I don't quite know what I'm doing,I clicked on my preferences and of course it comes up with my details. I have enabled my email to be available as well. Sorry to be a pest,but could you help me with this please. I warn you though,I'm really dumb when it comes to computers.--Jaye9 (talk) 10:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Think I've worked it out,just sent you an e-mail,it's just a tester,hope you receive it okay Rikstar. If you want to e-mail me back when you get the time and will go from there.--Jaye9 (talk) 11:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Have received and replied to your email. Thanks. Please reply here if you don't receive it. Rikstar  409  20:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Back comes my talkpage
Should you want to, you can now post on my talkpage. There was a glitch that a kind wikipedian sorted out very quickly. Rikstar 409  10:37, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for your comments on my talk page. I'm glad that you didn't mistake what I wrote. It's so confusing sometimes with people adding to talk pages just where and how things are meant to be. I understand you being a little worn out with the whole conversation, it can be draining when it feels like you're talking to a brick wall. I don't dismiss anyone on the Elvis talk page, but sometimes information needs to be very carefully worked over before it can be even remotely suggested for inclusion in the article. It appears that many editors on Wikipedia are more interested in steam-rolling their ideas through rather than taking on board concerns of other editors. It's a little like real life I guess. I also believe that some editors get a kick out of trying to get an emotional response out of others, it's some kind of game to some of them.

I'm not suggesting that Goldman would have done this, or anyone who was involved in his book, but from experience I know that a lot of negative energy comes from people when they are offered cold, hard cash, and sometimes it can lead them to say things they don't really mean or say things out of context. Once it's out it's too late, though, and some journalists/authors will abuse this. I agree with you that those closest to Presley are probably the ones who really know what they're talking about, and their stories always do match up and are consistent. It would be so easy for any of them to do a tell all book and make it very negative, they wouldn't have anything to lose and Elvis certainly couldn't argue over it. But the fact that all of them only have positive things to say and that they dispute so many negative things said about Elvis leads me to believe that they aren't protecting his memory, they're only being honest about their experiences.

I hope that you enjoy your break, if you decide you need one (and I wouldn't blame you, I'm feeling the same lol) and return very soon. A lot of your input on the Presley article is very much appreciated and necessary. :) ElvisFan1981 (talk) 12:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Remember, you're in control....
That's what I keep telling myself when I'm on wikipedia, Jaye. It's good to see you still contributing on the Elvis talk page. I always remember that I'm in control of what happens to me on wikipedia; I don't have to respond to anyone, I don't have to discuss a topic with anyone and I certainly don't have to feel like they're superior to me in any way. If, at any time, you feel like responding to someone but you are a little annoyed at them or unsure of what to say, then take a breather, go away and practice in your head what you want to type, and then return when you are 100% certain it comes across calm and relaxed without fear of anyone thinking they've got to you. Also, don't forget that sometimes it's ok to be emotional about a subject you are passionate about :)

And I think I'll take you up on that offer of keeping in touch via email. I'll try to email you later today through your wiki account (I see it says "email this user" next to some names). ElvisFan1981 (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, finally got round to sending that email. :) ElvisFan1981 (talk) 10:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Sullivan Show
I've found TV A Go Go to have the most thorough account of what was seen on the shows, and what is on the public record. It's like the author actually watched the kinescopes of the shows, which are of course now avaiable on dvd. What I have seen with my own eyes, and have included images of in the Sullivan article, is now in print so I have a written reference. Thank goodness for that. On the other topic, I have deleted the "junk" stuff from this and other sections repeatedly. I don't understand why other editors who have complained about it remaining in the article don't do the same. It's pretty frustrating to see it come back again and again. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * TV A Go Go states that 82.7% of tv viewers in America watched the 1st Sullivan apearance. I'm thinking MTV.com is quoting this book without crediting it. It's on page 16, so would be same ref as material I recently added. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Steve Pastor (talk) 20:45, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you
{| style="border: 1px solid ; background-color: ;"
 * rowspan="2"  valign="middle" | [[Image:Barnstar   of Diligence.png|100px]]
 * rowspan="2" |
 * style="font-size: x-large; padding:  0; vertical-align:   middle; height: 1.1em;" | The Barnstar of Perseverence
 * style="vertical-align: middle;  border-top:   1px solid gray;" | There were some dark days during the editing and discussion of 'Elvis', but you showed great determination to see justice and fairness in the face of some, well, let's call them 'obstacles'. For all you have had to endure, I award you this barnstar. Richly deserved.  Rikstar  409  04:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * style="vertical-align: middle;  border-top:   1px solid gray;" | There were some dark days during the editing and discussion of 'Elvis', but you showed great determination to see justice and fairness in the face of some, well, let's call them 'obstacles'. For all you have had to endure, I award you this barnstar. Richly deserved.  Rikstar  409  04:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)