Talk:Elvis Presley

Elvis is the highest selling solo artist in hx.

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 (UTC)

There is also the fact that in the four months after his death, an estimated 200 million Presley records were sold worldwide. None of those sales have ever been certified. Henceforth the billion records he sold worldwide figures. Victor0327 (talk) 23:45, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I'm confused. According to the RIAA website, the Brookville records (Elvis and Elvis in Hollywood) have been certified at least Platinum, as well as the budget albums from the '70s as either Gold or Platinum certifications. Are you saying the certified totals are only part of a larger number of sales that can't be certified at the present time? Grandmajohnnym (talk) 13:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Well let me try to answer your question as coherently or cohesively as possible. The RIAA certified totals of Presley albums are 146.5. However The Recording Industry of America will only certify sales of albums that have reached the 500 thousand threshold mark, thus getting the albums bestowed with "Gold Award Status". Any albums that have not reached that echelon mark, for example, the albums "Good Times" "Promised Land" "Raised on Rock" have each sold over 400 thousand copies each, at last count. These three albums cannot be certify due to the faulty computation methods that the RIAA presently uses. Now people will argue that these RIAA rules apply to all artists; true, but in the case of an entertainer like Presley, who has released so many albums, he loses millions in the tabulation process being added to his United States sales. Moreover the astronomical amount of Presley albums released posthumously, after his passing, such as "A valentine gift for you" "Rocker" or the "Return of the Rocker" which were albums released in 1985 and 1986 have never been certified due to this faulty measure in RIAA methodology. In fact, another album named "Reconsider Baby" which sold enormously, and was released in 1985, selling over 450 thousands copies, but yet, to reiterate, can never be certified due to the methodology used by the RIAA in not reaching the coveted 500 thousand threshold mark. Now can you picture this? there is over 358 albums at last count, which failed to meet this RIAA criteria. If you compute or count the totality of all these uncertified albums, not counting the in-between levels, (RIAA only counts and certifies increments of millions) Presley loses easily close to over 100 million in album sales in the United States alone. How's that for controversy? Now getting back to Brookville records; the albums "Elvis" and "Elvis in Hollywood" were released in 1973 and 1976 respectively. I remember purchasing both albums as a kid, via mail order. Well, according to RCA (which by the way went bankrupt in 1986) and many music periodicals at the time (which are also no longer in existence), such as "Cashbox" and "Crawdaddy" magazines; both albums sold easily over 5 million copies each. Yet, only a fraction of the sales were certified by the RIAA in 1992. Why 1992? well this was the year that the RIAA auditors went through the corporate files of Colonel Tom Parker only to locate a semblance of the true sales for Presley recordings. And yet, Presley was awarded 110 Gold Platinum and multiplatinum awards, which became the largest Presentation to an entertainer for RIAA certificates. Lastly, if you figure the lost sales, meaning the sales in the aftermath of Presley's passing, which an estimated 200 million Presley albums were sold worldwide, you will realize that the certified totality of the RIAA is virtually ludicrous. Hence the obvious, not counting the sales of singles which Presley absolutely dominates; you can conclude without a doubt that Elvis Presley is the greatest album seller of all time and the highest selling artist period. I hope this helps my friend!! Victor0327 (talk) 15:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Okay, gotcha. Thanks, Victor! BTW, the Brookville Elvis album commercial was the first time I ever heard him sing. He became my first and only favorite singer overnight. I wound up trading for that album and Elvis in Hollywood years later and still own them to this day. :-) Grandmajohnnym (talk) 19:13, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

You are very welcome my friend. Yes those albums are also still in my collection as well. It has a pleasure chatting with you. Victor0327 (talk) 19:42, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

It has been a pleasure chatting with you. (Typo). Victor0327 (talk) 19:43, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Edit Request - Cause of death

Hello, I request that you cut out in the overview section that unhealthy eating played a role in his death. His diet was unhealthy, but there’s no evidence that it was so bad that it could kill him. The cause of his death lies soley on his prescription drug abuse. The life and career section makes it clear that any other additional factors were either exacerbated or created by his addiction. The idea that his favorite foods played a part is just a faux cultural joke. CulturalCritic648 (talk) 05:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)CulturalCritic648 (talk) 03:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Military service in infobox

Usually for people who do activities they are not primarily known for their articles may show this information with a specific infobox placed in a more relevant section if possible. The fact that there is not only a section here, but also a whole article devoted to his military service that already uses the military infobox makes it seem superfluous to use the template in the main infobox here. Linking that article in the lead seems already sufficient. Inpops (talk) 15:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks to editors

Thanks to all of the editors who have maintained this featured article and congratulations on it being today's featured article.

Happy 90th birthday, Elvis. —  AjaxSmack  02:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Intro paragraph

Should we change "known mononymously as Elvis" to "often known mononymously as Elvis" or something? The way it is now makes it seem like his stage was just "Elvis" all the time 75.100.17.28 (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Well his first name according to a recent George Gallup poll, is easily one of the most recognizable names in the history of humanity. Victor0327 (talk) 16:24, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

I've never gotten the point of the (hyperlinked) "mononymously". I mean, if you have to hyperlink it, it's not obvious, and the whole thing is just so redundant. "Known as Elvis" is good enough. And six blue links in the opening three sentences is more than enough, IMO. Drmies (talk) 19:01, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Yes my friend. I could not have agreed more. "Known as Elvis" is good enough!! Victor0327 (talk) 19:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I would go with "referred* to by many as simply Elvis" instead.

• maybe "acknowledged" might be better.

Grandmajohnnym (talk) 11:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

... or just "known by many as simply Elvis" - no need to throw everything out! :-) Grandmajohnnym (talk) 13:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

To reiterate, as I previously pointed out; a recent George Gallup Poll stated that the name Elvis is more widely known in the last 100 years than any other two (first or last) names in the world. That is truly incredible, considering he is closing in on the 50 year mark of his death. Needless to state, yes "known by many as simply Elvis" makes perfect sense. Victor0327 (talk) 14:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, that is incredible regarding his name's currency today. A lot of people are regarded as legendary, but he truly was and still is. Grandmajohnnym (talk) 17:36, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

This summary page needs a glow up

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)