Talk:Elvis' Greatest Shit

"Yoga is as yoga does" and "Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce"

Elvis Presley and Elsa Lanchester Singing Yoga Is As Yoga Does I don't suppose we can put this external link in the article? Pity. But I see copyright issues, even as the video is so compelling‽ 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:29, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Elvis Presley - Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce the lyrics and delivery make this unique. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:33, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Album name

The cover art in the photo shows two !! in the title. Should that be reflected in the album name? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:59, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

The lyrics of Dominick the Impotent Bull

This could be a Viagra advertisement. The Presley dynasty is missing out. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:24, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Cover photo

It's a shame we can't read the text on the cover. Secretlondon (talk) 01:25, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

This is a better version of the image, without the moire patterns. Secretlondon (talk) 01:29, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

I updated the information in the article. Depended on the pressing. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:17, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Anagram and link

By getting rid of that footnote you get rid of the fact that it is an anagram, and the link. I disagree as to the lack of necessity. "The title is an anagram for Elvis' Greatest Hits." The whole thing has been put in a footnote, and is unobtrusive. It may assist some readers; if it doesn't it is out of the way. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:05, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

"shit" is an anagram of "hits" Well yes it is, and not a particularly difficult one to work out. But what is the relevance of this indisputable fact? Is it deliberate? Did the compiler choose the title because it is an anagram, because the songs are (in his opinion) shit, because Elvis died whilst in the throes of a massive shit, because the compiler could not spell, because the guy doing the cover art screwed up? We don't know. We may never know. Pointing it out seems a tad clumsy. pablo 19:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Short of looking at the liner notes, we are unlikely to find a WP:RS that explicitly discourses on the reasons and motive of the producer in choosing the title. Given the tone of the cover art and titles, it is not a stretch to point out the connection, which imply what is said in the footnote. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:18, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Push quintessential sex revel. Nevertheless, lux antique piss. Penis-equivalent, lest rush sex .
These are all anagrams of "seven plus six equals thirteen". They mean nothing, though one could certainly construct a tawdry tale around them, and then add unnecessary footnotes to it. pablo 19:20, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

To use that footnote would be OK, but then we would first need an article upon which to append it. Do you propose to write it? Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Nope. Many of the "footnotes" and some of the content that you have added to this article have consisted entirely of your own opinions and interpretations and speculations around the subject of the article. Others are digressions into the relative popularity of the films from which the songs were lifted. Your pointing out of the rather obvious anagram; "shit"="hits" seems to give this banal fact more weight than I believe it deserves. But have it your own way; I don't care that much. pablo 19:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

You removed the opinions, and there doesn't seem to be a dispute about any of that. So your point is . . . ?

I also note that you at least have finally been adding content and not just removing it. I commend you for that effort.

LOL No, Ho Oh Blab on Pablo Blab Ho on LOL I'm working on the palindrome. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

a) my point is that you enthusiastically add your opinions to articles; which slants them

b) fuck off and patronise someone else
c) work harder; that really isn't very good. pablo 20:11, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

You need to be WP:civil. You started this. WP:SAUCE. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:13, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Unless we have a source that tells us that either "Elvis' Greatest Shit is an anagram of Elvis' Greatest Hits", or "Shit is an anagram of Hits" it is WP:OR (even if the latter is blindingly obvious) and doesn't belong in the article. There are several possible explanations for the title, and we don't get to decide which ones we need to point out to our readers. Now, stop arguing, and do something useful. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:33, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

7&6, nobody is requesting a citation for the fact that "shit" is an anagram of "hits". That's obvious. What we are asking for is a citation for the implication that this fact had something to do with the use of the word in the title of the album. Otherwise we might as well add a footnote to Barack Obama that his name is an anagram of "karma boa cab" - it's true but it's irrelevant. Hut 8.5 20:47, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Of course, you have evidently overlooked that Andy the Grump did request a source (see immediately above) for "Shit is an anagram of Hits". Which I supplied. Which was then deleted along with the content. Evidently you want what you want, and reserve the right to change your position. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:33, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

You added a source, but the source was for "shit" being an anagram of "hits". What we need, though, is a source that said the bootlegger "Richard" knew this and chose the word "shit" in this album's title for this reason. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:44, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Oh my word. I notice most of the content I originally put up has stayed, and I'm going to suggest that's because I took all of it from reliable sources. If you can find a source that states explicitly that the title came specifically from an anagram of "Hits" (and my sources suggest it was merely done to provoke), then reference it and it can stay. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for creating the article. FWIW, most of what I put in stayed too, notwithstanding your tone. This is a cooperative effort. Of course, if you don't want to be credited for the DYK See Template:Did you know nominations/Elvis' Greatest Shit‎, you should post that on the page, and I'm sure they will honor your request. The article quadrupled in size since I came on board, from your original effort, and that was done cooperatively by a group of volunteers. For me, I think that this is a good, useful and interesting article that grew from the seed you planted, despite the initial bureaucratic hurdles you encountered. Cheers. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:05, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

All I said was when you add stuff on Wikipedia, put it against a reliable source and other people will have a harder time challenging it. That's all. Be cool - here is a picture to help. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 11:45, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if someone (ie not me, and not 7&6=13) could review the extensive footnote texts for relevance to the subject of the article; I think that they could do with a trim. pablo 11:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

If you don't like that anagram, you won't like these either

Elvis Aaron Presley:

• Seen alive? Sorry, pal!
• Say, real, live person ?
• A sorry, penile slave?
• Viola players sneer.

Other related anagrams without their own page:

• "The late Elvis Aaron Presley" -> "A theory: several pills eaten.
• "Singer Elvis Aaron Presley" -> "I revere pills, grass. Anyone?"
• "The singer Elvis Aaron Presley" -> "Garishly overintense pleaser."
• "The singer Elvis Aaron Presley" -> "Arsehole is presently in grave." Anagram genius

An interesting perspective and some more anagrams for Elvis and others: Yurchey, Doug (2005). "Secret World of Anagrams". Retrieved Sepember 24, 2012. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

It would be better if we all got along. This is a cooperative effort; this is not a zero sum game. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, you're playing some kind of game? Explains a lot. So is your introducing your opinions into supposedly neutral articles part of the game too? pablo 20:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Right! Stop that! It's far too silly! Don't take this too seriously. Another user just wants you to know something you said crosses their boundaries of sensibility.

Everyone, please, take a deep breath. When I have time, I will ferret out the reason for naming the album if I can, and then we can put this behind us. --Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:17, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Dear Pablo, I was trying to extend an Olive branch. As I have told you, and you already know, WP:Civil. I have chosen to downplay your lack of collegiality, warmth, manners or civility. Apparently you want a smiley face emoticon. I hope that your message too was meant facetiously, and that it will come with one too. I was merely being ironic, and I understand that typing may not effectively communicate my intent. No offense was intended.

FWIW, I did not put this into the article.

Meanwhile, Ritchie 333 is on the case.

Chill. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

I never use emoticons. And see my point b) above. Meanwhile, can we address the extensive footnotes? If they contain relevant information then that belongs, properly referenced, in the article. Largely, they do not; what was, or was not, in your opinion a "good year for Elvis movies" has no relevance to the purported subject of this article. "Although released before Speedway, this film and its soundtrack were made after, the first of Presley's last five films in the 1960s where musical numbers were kept to a minimum. The recording session took place at RCA Studio B in in Nashville, Tennessee, on October 1, 1967, Presley ..." so what? Justify its place in the article or it should go. If you are trying to pad this out to justify your DYK credit, it probably isn't necessary. pablo 20:55, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

If by POINT b (above) you mean "fuck off", then this discussion is ended. If so, you are again irretrievably hostile and discourteous, and then I may have to go to WP:ANI if that is what you mean. Indeed, Res ipsa loquitur. But perhaps I misunderstand, so I will again give you the benefit of any doubt.

I don't know how to use emoticons in Wikipedia, so I don't.

The recording session is plainly relevant. That Elvis made his producer promise not to release the song is pertinent. The footnotes provide context for the songs. The songs are the content of the album. The chronology is important. Knowing where these songs were created and why is part of the article.

Like you earlier suggested, I agree that neither you nor I should mess with the footnotes. I respectfully suggest we let someone else do that editing, so we can move on to something productive. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 21:10, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Ok, since you asked, I've done the editing, and removed most of them as off-topic editorialising. If material is relevant, it belongs in the article body, and if it isn't, it doesn't belong anywhere. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Now that you removed all that stuff (aren't you just such a good deletionist), would it be any trouble for you to decide whether any of it belongs in the article. Or is that outside your permitted role? It's harder to build a road than it is to rip it up. I'm done here. Have a great time with the article. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:21, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elvis' Greatest Shit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100912165832/http://community.hottopic.com/feature/elvis-presley-75-things-you-didnt-know-about-king to http://community.hottopic.com/feature/elvis-presley-75-things-you-didnt-know-about-king

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:40, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Edit on 5/19/22

The edits were made because the information was incorrect:
The version of "Datin'" that appears on the bootleg is the solo version recorded for the soundtrack album, not the duet version from the movie.
Of all the films listed, only twelve (the ones that were not removed) have one song or more on the record.
Also of note, but not part of that edit: Having Fun With Elvis On Stage is in fact represented, in a snippet which precedes the truncated live version of "Are You Lonesome Tonight" from Elvis in Concert.

Furthermore:
It seemed noteworthy that "Do The Clam," one of Elvis' more successful singles, was represented on this album in any capacity. I was tempted to link "U.S. Male," even though the page is not chiefly about the Elvis single.
5/21: I've done what was asked of me and received no word about why my edit was reverted. I'm going to try again.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:B5D1:530:6D77:C87E:8A72:C189 (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC) 2600:1700:B5D1:530:75F8:1855:9A01:8062 (talk) 05:01, 20 May 2022 (UTC)