Talk:Hound Dog (song)

message: Can anyone confirm that the all male singing group The Bellboys sang this verse, as Thornton did?
Information added to this article since this question was posed should make the answer clear. Steve Pastor 18:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They did not. Elvis' version is taken word-for-word from Freddie Bell's. Pstoller (talk) 22:19, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "You ain't lookin' for a woman"

message: Yesterday I ran across some information about this B side of the original release. Does anyone out there have the orignal record, so I can verify that it is the song I think it is, rather than another song by the same name? If you do have the record could you supply an image of the Hound Dog label? Thanks Steve Pastor 18:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Nightmare" is another Leiber & Stoller song; it can be heard on the Big Mama Thornton CD, Hound Dog: The Peacock Recordings.Pstoller (talk) 22:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nightmare 

message: This is what Allen has written about this show. There's also a nice photo.  I think a rewrite is in order. Steve Pastor 20:16, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Steve Allen Show

message: :Image:HoundDogThorntonPeacock.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:HoundDogThorntonPeacock.jpg

message: Please look at the alternate sides of the RCA Victor issued recording of Hound Dog.  Note that Hound Dog was given the number G2WW-5935. Don't Be Cruel was given the number G2WW-5936. So, unless the A side was given a higher number than the B side, Hound Dog was the A side. Any contrary arguments? Steve Pastor 19:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an old question, but still a current one. My understanding is that "Hound Dog" was initially the A-side, but not because of the matrix numbers, which merely indicate the sequence in which the tracks were recorded. Think about it: "Hound Dog" was already causing a national sensation because of Elvis' television appearances, so it was a natural as the A-side. It was also the first of the sides to chart. "Don't Be Cruel" eventually became the bigger hit, and thus was subsequently perceived as the A-side. But, that was after the fact. If I can find a citation from a truly authoritative source to clarify the matter, I'll put it in the text. Pstoller (talk) 21:34, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: RCA Victor A side or B side

message: This same site also has a clip from the Milton Berle Show performance. However, it has a dubbed in sound track using the version Elvis recorded with thh Jordanaires. Also, the tape has been looped, and leaves off the really interesting end of the song where Elvis does the really bluesy, slow, Thornton type section. This was what really created a buzz in the audience. I've seen other tapes, dvds, movies, that do the same thing. The Elvis '56 dvd has the full performance. I can't endorse any version that is not 100% accurate. Steve Pastor (talk) 21:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Thornton performance on film

message: "The various self appointed guardians of public morality attacked Elvis in the press. [3] TV critics began a merciless campaign against Elvis making statements that; Elvis "is a no talent performer", he had a "caterwalling voice and nonsense lyrics", he was an "influence on juvenile deliquency", and began using the nickname "Elvis the Pelvis". Outrageous, factless rumors began to be mentioned in the press like Elvis "smoked marijuana to work himself into a frenzy while singing" and he had "once shot his mother"."
This entire passage seems quite overly defensive of Elvis, whether or not true. Just thought I'd point it out.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.66.47.150 (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self Appointed Guardian of Elvis 

message: :Image:Elvis presley hound dog.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 13:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Elvis presley hound dog.jpg

message: This video does not use the original sound from the show. It is synced to the recording that was released bt RCA. You can hear the Jordanaires, who were not on the show, clapping along with the music and singing backup vocal. Also note that the same sequence is repeated. Steve Pastor (talk) 14:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: link to video of Hound Dog

message: Section from the artcle establishing correct name... just in case anyone brigns it up again.Steve Pastor (talk) 19:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's Willa on her tombstone. 68.12.189.249 04:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

text: There's also this entry in Encyclopedia of the Blues By Edward M. Komara Steve Pastor (talk) 22:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Willie Mae or Willa Mae?

message: The image :File:Elvis DontBeCruel HoundDog Single 1956.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Elvis DontBeCruel HoundDog Single 1956.jpg

message: I think we should guard against the possibility of this article becoming too long, and effectively unreadable.  We are currently at 102K, when guidance on the ideal length suggests 30K to 50K.  Although we'd agree over the importance of the song, we don't need to include every piece of reliably sourced information.  Too much detail simply makes the article unreadable.  I know we'll (hopefully, in due course) cut out the lists of non-notable other versions, but, even so, the article is becoming daunting for readers.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:48, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Good comment. According to the guidelines, the key measure is "readable prose". Currently the article is at 42K of readable prose. The 102K is made up additionally of references and the wiki measures. As you indicate, the final section of other names will be substantially reduced. I understand that my process is different than yours. My process is to add material, re-organise as I go, and delete at the end. I believe I substantially improve the quality (and certainly quantity) of every article to which I contribute. Also, I recognise my interests are more inclusive than those of many. A good lede will satisfy the casual reader, but others will want more depth. I put the legal section towards the end as I felt it "jumped the gun" in the story-telling, and reflecting on your prior comments, may not be as interesting to everyone. Consequently, those with shorter attention spans can quit before the concluding sections. Possibly, if there is consensus, if necessary, the litigation section could be spun off into a separate article, given Valjo v Elvis Presley Music (especially) is cited extensively in RS. Of course, as WP is collaborative, anyone can do as desired along the way. I appreciate the comments and the constructive manner in which they are made.smjwalsh (talk) 03:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think Valjo… needs a separate article. As with all sections, we should review it for length/concision when the bulk of the new writing is done. Certainly a much-needed slash-and-burn on the discography will help. The material on covers, answers, and parodies is also on the overkill side, but that's in keeping with your process. A temporary excess of valid material should be the worst problem on Wikipedia. Pstoller (talk) 05:57, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article length 

message: This video clip says:
::"Provided to YouTube by The Orchard Enterprises
::Hound Dog · Big Mama Thornton
::Ball n' Chain
::℗ 1989 Smithsonian Folkways Recordings. Originally released on Arhoolie Records."
So presumably The Orchard Enterprises have distribution rights to this music and it is copyright compliant? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:51, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Video clip