![]() | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects: | |||||||
|
Could someone go through these links and make sure they're pointing to an appropriate page? e.g.Double Trouble,Little Sister andSeeing Is Believing are disambiguation pages, "Help Me" is the title of a Joni Mitchell love song that she first recorded for the 1974...,Swing Down, Sweet Chariot is "a funk song by Parliament" Thanks! A redlink would be better than a wrong link.Ewlyahoocom03:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest to separate the list of Christion songs into a separate article. It is not a direct aspect of Elvis; if so we would expect a same kind of lists with "Blues songs", "R&R songs", "R&B songs", "C&W songs" in this template, even with higher Elvis-relevance (what I do not advocate here). Of course the new article will be linked in this template. -DePiep11:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have slightly reconstructed the template, view ithere and scroll down. Tell me what you think! ---Scarce||||Talk -Contrib.---22:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Although it's impractical of course to include all compilation albums, whether they have Wikipedia articles or not, I do feel the RCA Camden releases with previously unissued material need to be included under compilations. Seeing as there were only 3 of these releases, I'm going ahead and adding them.68.146.81.123 (talk)15:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why areA Date with Elvis andFor LP Fans Only considered "compilation" albums? Because they are a mix of RCA sessions and older Sun recordings? By that logic,Elvis Presley should also be considered a compilation.—Chowbok☠22:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We seem to sill have a problem despite our guideline on the matter. Not sure how unlinking related articles will help our readers. I think this disruption should stop. Hard to help our readers when we have editors going out of there way to fuck things up. --Moxy (talk)21:41, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What were you all thinking by letting "Elvis' Greatest Shit" on the compilation's list? Why are you going to list a bootleg, for one, and two, something that's inappropriate? Doesn't it occur to anyone that every single album on that list is actually a legitimate release and this one isn't? Or am I the only who isn't oblivious around these parts? Then I try to be reasonably polite about it and I get the starch remark of, "it wasn't broken so why change it?"
Well... it stands out like a sore thumb that it's not supposed to be there. So don't bother reverting it.
WolfSpear (talk)04:17, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]