There's Not One "Official Song of Memphis," There are Two! WATCH Videos by David Saks - READ David Saks Exposed as Fraud in Wiki Edit War Infamy!

Here's the Dependably Honest, Real Truth About David Saks

'*There's not only an "Official Song of Memphis," there are two of them

January 3, 1993. David Saks talks about the Elvis Stamp and Stamp Collecting on WHBQ Radio Memphis. Audio only with photos.

A Stamp From the King - Part 1

On January 8, 1993, David Saks was honored by the United States Postal Service and Graceland, the home of Elvis Presley, as the recipient of the very first officially released Elvis Stamp in front of millions of Elvis fans attending the event and watching on television throughout the world.

David had recently been honored by the City of Memphis by having two songs which he composed, 'One Last Bridge' Official Song of Memphis...

 

David Saks

Published on Jan 18, 2015

"One Last Bridge" was adopted as an "Official Song of Memphis" on May 20, !990 by the Memphis City Council. It was recorded on Beale Street the same year in this rough cut by David. It was never recorded again because of the political motivation involved in the selection process by the government to find a song about Memphis. It was chosen after dozens of songs had been submitted for consideration, including Walking In Memphis.

David isn't a singer. He's an instrumental composer.

...and 'In Memphis' adopted in resolution by the city government as the Official Songs of Memphis.

Here's the Dependably Honest, Real Truth About David Saks

'*There's not only an "Official Song of Memphis", there are two of them.'

• Saks hasn't spoken with Ms. today, since February or anytime this week..

• I spoke with him about ten minutes ago and he said that tried to contact him today while he was at the University of Memphis' memorial tribute to Elvis Presley.

• He still hasn't spoken with her. Ms. apologized to him in a recorded message for not returning his call promptly.

• has forwarded copies of the Official Song of Memphis resolutions to other editors.

• Saks said that he would forward the city council documents to anyone who requested them from him.

• Saks' call to the city council is an attempt to get to the bottom of this.

• Why don't you call Saks, Scribner ?

• What are the additional facts that you believe others would find amusing that you want to shield from Mr.Saks ?

• If you had taken the time to review all of the data you'd know that the council resolutions word the awards as "official songs", including "In Memphis", adopted in 1991, and "One Last Bridge", adopted in 1990.

• "One Last Bridge" was approved in unanimous resolution, 11-0, as an "Official Song of Memphis".

• See the record of the regular session of the Memphis City Council for May 22, 1990, signed by City Councilman Bill Davis, and City Council Chairman Jimmy Moore, proclaiming "One Last Bridge" an "Official Song of Memphis" for 1990.

• This document was also signed by Linda Rogers, Deputy Comptroller of the City Council Records.

• See the record of the regular session of the Memphis City Council for January 24, 1991, signed by Memphis City Councilwoman Mary Rose McCormick proclaiming "In Memphis" as "The Official Song of Memphis" for 1991.

66.239.212.50 21:03, 16 August 2006 (UTC)'

Please remain civil and don't engage in personal attacks. Violations of these user-conduct policies can result in revocation of editing priviledges. I have removed your personal attacks. — Saxifrage ✎ 21:16, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I have removed another personal attack. I see that you've removed the "[personal attack removed]" notes, as well as had second thoughts about another you wrote just a moment ago. This is improvement. — Saxifrage ✎ 21:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Anon, your sentimentality toward Saks is telling. I guessed our identity days ago. Anyone who doubts what I have stated here should call Ms. at 901-576-6815. Ms. is aware of the dialogue on this page.--Scribner 22:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Scribner, what does guessing my identity and sentimentality have to do with anything? Would you also claim that dozenist and jersyko are expressing sentimentality in their bias and cronyism in this discussion because they are friends, as referenced in jersyko's biography? I want to have the facts printed just like you are trying to do. Did you speak to the same Ms. that I did in February 2006 as previously referenced in this article? Why it has taken so long for you to verify what I did in February 2006 intriques me. At issue is not the number of awards or how well known Mr. Saks or his songs are but that he has awards from the City Council for two "Official Songs" of Mephis and there should be a heading for this, just like Tallest Buildings. I'm amazed as well that there is no mention of Clarence Saunders and his contribution to the City of Memphis due to creating Piggly Wiggly, the first self-service stores in the nation, and building the Pink Palace.Bold text--70.248.232.236 23:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, is it such a good idea to post this poor lady's telephone number here? Perhaps we should remove all references to it. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 22:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk It's a City Council number. I asked Ms. if she would like for me to remove her name (placed here by Anon). Ms. said no, and read the talk page while we were on the phone. She knows her name and the City Council number are on this page. Additionally, I asked her if she minded if I posted the contents of our discussion, which she had no problem with at all.--Scribner 23:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Her number's publicly available and easy to find, so I don't think listing it here is a problem, but clearly we shouldn't all pile on and telephone the poor woman about this. She's being very kind to comment on the issue at all, and I'm sure she has more important work to do. Scribner, I don't suppose she mentioned any way of providing formal documentation that there isn't an official song of Memphis? Ordinarily there'd be nor call for it - you'd need the documentation to prove something is true, not that it isn't - but right now we're stuck in a 'Tis! 'Tisin't! match that could go on indefinitely. A definitive, formal 'no', preferably on city letterhead, could go a long way towards putting this to bed.

I stress that, should Ms. be unable or unwilling to provide such proof, that would not constitute proof that 'One Last Bridge' is the official song of Memphis. We'd still need solid references to it as something other than the song of a given year. -- Vary | Talk 00:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Anything the city puts in print will likely be run through the legal department. We can ask Gail Carson at the mayor's office for a letter. Let's keep in mind, it's the contributing editor's burden of proof. We don't have to disprove an unverified claim.--Scribner 00:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

You're absolutely right, and normally I wouldn't even suggest it, but this has gone on so long and caused so much drama, I'd love to see a clean resolution. -- Vary | Talk 00:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

• Mr. Saks has provided the Official City Council Documents.

Commercial Appeal has a columnist, Blake Fonenay, who covers the Memphis city government, including the city council. Apparently, the Memphis council, like most city councils, regularly adopts minor ceremonial or honorary resolutions of this kind. In May 2004, the council recognized an Ernestine Pledger-Peete for her work as a barber instructor at the Tennessee Technology Center at Memphis. And apparently early this year, the Memphis city council adopted a resolution to declare February 'direct deposit month.' The archives of Mr. Fonenay's blog are available online. Of most interest to this discussion is the section of articles tagged as City Council. It's entertaining reading.

What Scribner learned from his research was the truth - 'One Last Bridge' was adopted as the official song of 1991, yes, but not as The Official Song of Memphis. The latter is notable, the former is not, and doesn't belong in the article any more than Direct Deposit Month or Mrs. Pledger-Peete do. Please do not accuse other editors of lying, especially if you have no evidence. -- Vary | Talk 23:49, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Vary, perhaps you should remind Scribner not to accuse other editors of lying? As can be read from the previous discussion, Scribner was the first to suggest that other editors were lying. The truth was researched and revealed in February 2006 but you failed to acknowledge it. I have to question the professional ability of editors that choose to place "Voodoo Fest" (which clearly belongs in a New Orleans article) instead of Clarence Saunders, founder of Piggly Wiggly or Official Songs of Memphis in a piece on Memphis.--70.248.232.236 01:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The documents you uploaded actually prove exactly what we've suspected, the songs were named the "official song of Memphis for 1990" and "official song of Memphis for 1991" only. The documents are proof that they not named the official songs of Memphis ad infinitum. The "recognition" document is completely irrelevant to the notability of the songs. The appropriateness of the article on Saks himself has been fully discussed and hashed out in the David Saks Afd. You really shouldn't take offense at being found "not notable" for Wikipedia purposes. After all, I'm not notable, either, as are almost all other people. That doesn't mean, however, that we cannot do something that could eventually make us encyclopedic. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 00:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

---

This entire section of the discussion page has gotten very far from the policy about verifying assertions in Wikipedia:Verifiability. As Scribner pointed out, "We don't have to disprove an unverified claim."
On an unrelated note, what is the status of copyright on material created by the City of Memphis? I know that Federal US creations are public domain, but this does not apply to state, county, or municipal governments in the US. Likely those images will have to be deleted for lack of copyright release. — Saxifrage ✎ 01:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Speaking simply from my legal knowledge, you're right, Saxifrage. States and their subdivisions (including cities) are not included in the Copyright Act's "public domain" section. In particular, I know that Memphis claims copyright in its works. You can see such a claim at the bottom of the city's website, for instance. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 01:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Since I'm relatively new to this forum, you'll forgive if I mention that I didn't notice any copyright symbols on the city council resolutions. Since they belong to Mr. Saks, and he's contributed them to Wikipedia, maybe someone capable of arbitrating this should call or email him. Or the city council. His email is available on his website. I don't believe that Mr. Saks' attorneys nor the legal advisor to the City of Memphis would request that you remove the council resolution jpegs.The Official WebSite of David Saks66.239.212.25 02:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

A copyright symbol does not need to be on a work for it to be covered by copyright. See Copyright Act of 1976 for further explanation. Saks does not own the copyright, even if the papers are in his possession and even if his name is on the papers, as he did not create the work. Rather, the City of Memphis owns the copyright in the papers. If you want to keep the jpegs on Wikipedia, you need to get explicit permission from the relevant City authorities. I'm explaining this simply as a legal matter based on my legal knowledge; these are not opinions based on any of our prior interactions or my bias or prejudice, but legal facts. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 02:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Jersyko, if you'd noted the dates on both the recognition document and the official song of Memphis document, "One Last Bridge", you'd see that they were entered the same day, May 22, 1990, and relative to the same item, mainly the Official Song of Memphis of 1990, which may be a reference to the council session. Mr. Saks didn't include another recognition document for the other song, and I wouldn't ask him. To do so would be tantamount to abasement, depriving him of self-esteem, which Scribner has attempted. The council doesn't seek an annual song of Memphis, and the documents have relevance in substantiating the recognition and notablity of the composer by the city government which recognizes Mr.Saks with "Appreciation of Outstanding Contribution to the Community". To dismiss it as irrelevant is a ludicrous assertion. Whether they were the songs of 1990 or 1790 also has no bearing on or connection with the subject at issue, and is repetitively digressive and becoming a tiresome argument that you continue to slam that allows you to proceed to a conclusion without reason or intuition. Jersyko, have you discovered an expiration date on the Memphis City Council Official Song of Memphis resolutions ? When do they officially expire and cease being "Official Songs of Memphis" ? Could it be that the Memphis City Council has committed an error by not providing an expiration date on the resolutions? They're the cities official songs and were the only songs given this distinction by the city government in the late twentieth century, or any other century in the history of Memphis. What Scribner said about his conversation with , is a lie. What he said about there being no official song of Memphis is also a lie. This is not a personal attack on Scribner. He has the propensity to submit a statement that deviates from or perverts the truth. I'm not sure if Scribner's intent is to deceive, if he or she is being intentionally vague or ambiguous, or is trying to cover up a deliberate act of deviating from the truth. never spoke with Mr. Saks this week. She did try to call him today. Mr. Saks was at the University of Memphis with George Klein and Sam Phillips son, Jerry Phillips, for the memorial service for Elvis Presley. I'm sure there are many worthy occupations, lines of work, businesses, commercial activities and people of all concerns that deserve recognition and have been recognized by the city council. The recognition of David Saks was an honor presented to him that was of a distinctly greater degree than is commonly the nature of the Memphis City Council. It was a tangible symbol signifying approval and the distinction of this gentleman.66.239.212.25 02:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Your claims will be dismissed until you can substantiate them with reliable sources. For reference, the policy on this is at Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. If you don't follow the rules, you will be ignored and dismissed. — Saxifrage ✎ 02:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Saxifrage, the facts have been established. Read everything, from top to bottom. Must these issues be repeated over and over and over like Chinese water torture to satisfy your needs? I'm not looking for a proselyte. You do what you must. These claims have been proven and verified many, many times over the last year. It's not up to me to read the text for you. If you were thirsty, would you ask me to drink a glass of water for you? Would your thirst be quenched by my actions? I doubt it. Similarly, covering all of these issues for your benefit, once again, is ridiculous. Your tag-teaming this matter with Jersyko, Vary, Dozenist and Scribner without giving the evidence the examination it deserves on your own. Why edit as it suits you rather than try to assist the matter? Is it because you demonstrate partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation? It's starting to sound like it. Don't prove despotic without carefully examining the evidence, all of it, not just the last two or three days. There's a massive volume of information supporting Mr. Saks. Stop threatening me. BTW, calls for notability, reliable sources and verifiable sources have been requested at least fourteen times on this page alone, and, in each instance, have been provided. It's repetitively tiresome. Many, many reliable and verifiable sources have been provided, and, if you include song or music notability it ups the ante. Mr.Saks' supporters obviously won the argument a year ago, as they have this day. Devil's Advocacy is in play by the shallow tone of the editor at times and the demonstration of tribal, virulent swaggering is below the belt and foul. The compulsive deletion and tag-teaming has become personal. Most of Mr. Saks' supporters are newcomers and don't have the deletion and reversion privileges that veteran cronies tenaciously subscribe to. The integrity of any editor or writer is in question, including myself if you don't have the fortitude to admit that your wrong rather than milk the editor past the precise location of something obviously verified and reliable; it demonstrates that the challenger is spatially limited. It's just a suggestion, not a personal attack. 66.239.212.54 05:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Verifiable information would be the City of Memphis saying that the songs are "Official Songs" somewhere publicly available. They haven't done this, it seems. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

'Has anyone discovered an expiration date on the Memphis City Council Official Song of Memphis Resolutions ? Of course not. That's preposterous. When do they officially expire and cease being the "Official Songs of Memphis" ? Ask Ms. if the Memphis City Council assigned an expiration date to each of Mr. Saks' songs ?'66.239.212.54 05:55, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

We have no idea or evidence for how the City of Memphis operates internally. Perhaps they need expirations dates, perhaps they don't, perhaps the Resolution means something in particular, perhaps it means something else. Without evidence that they are currently Official Songs (evidence which has not surfaced, and which seems to have been refuted informally by an editor in good standing) we have no basis for putting them in the article. Your protestations to the contrary are notwithstanding, since WP:AUTO takes your opinion out of the equation. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:19, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the "Official Song" status expired at the end of 1990 and 1991.--Scribner 13:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The city council spokespersons have reaffirmed recently, and several times earlier this year, that the two songs will always stand as Official Songs of Memphis, and never placed any restrictions or expiration dates on them. Because they were adopted for a particular year doesn't rob them of their status as Official Songs of Memphis any more than recognizing the trombonist of the year award would rob a musician of this achievement. The Official Song of Memphis award is a notable and prominent musical accomplishment and deserves a category under the article, perhaps in 'The Arts'. The other councilmen that can attest to this fact are councilmen Sammons, Lowery and Councilwoman McCormick. Former council chairman Jimmy Moore would speak with you. Why don't you and Mr.Saks meet at the council chamber next Tuesday for their session and request a hearing during their call for adjournment and recognition of visitors? His office number is 901-278-8008. He's extremely cordial and as polite as anyone you could imagine. I've known of him as a broadcaster, when he was a student at Rhodes College and the University of Memphis, and as a notable Memphis Musician. Your judgement is imperfect in a faulty way and it robs you of the fortitude to retract or disavow your formerly held attestation, in rather poor taste, that there was never an official song of Memphis. Scribner, I find it extremely difficult to provide or furnish a mental attitude regarding anything from you at this point because of my suspicion that your input consistently possesses the quality of being fraudulent. I don't intend for this to appear personal. Only a calm, intent consideration of the collection of facts by which your conclusions are established through intentional misrepresentation.Reneec 14:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Did the City Council approach you, David Saks?--Scribner 15:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Problems in Memphis (2)

Sorry, I have to bring people's attention back to the problems, which so conveniently seem to be omitted from this article.
Here are some that were mentioned before:

Out of control urban sprawl, i.e. Memphis is more of an isolated suburb than a city, resulting in a terrible public transportation system. A car is an absolute necessity in Memphis, so teenagers are never able to develop the kind of independance associated with urban living until after they start driving. Tourism is also difficult especially for people visiting from outside the United States. The city streets look deserted (except Beale street at night)because the sprawl makes walking unfeasible. Most east memphis residential neighborhoods don't even have sidewalks. Area shopping malls thrive at most a few years before a new one opens further east drawing away all the bussiness.
I also have an objection to the sentence: "Memphis is also a literary mecca." Graceland is certainly a Mecca of sorts and Memphis may be for some styles of music. But to suggest it is a "literary" mecca in such a broad sense is, to quote my annoying Memphis high school teacher, a gross hyperbole! Many of the authors listed have cursory connections to Memphis and the list is not much longer than that of many other cities.
I want to mention that I know lots of Memphians get annoyed with repetitive criticism of their city. But Memphis has a strong reputation, in part quite negative, and to simply paint a rosy positive picture of a city with such a reputation makes residents (or for the more enlightened, the writers of this article) look close-minded and dishonest. All cities have problems, so admit them. This isn't a travel brochure.
Also, the contemporary racial issues should be addressed to update people on the situation, especially those people whose perception of Memphis is still stuck in the civil rights era.
Some positives that weren't explicitly mentioned in the article:

cheap affordable housing 

and low cost of living
  lots of trees (trust me, this is a big plus)

--Dba5 19:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC) dba

Generally, I think your ideas are good ones. Scribner had some similar ideas, which are expressed in a subsection above. Perhaps you could collaborate in this regard? · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 19:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm....Let's close our eyes for a minute and replace the name of Memphis with the names of Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, to name a few. How can you collaborate without expressing your own personal opinions, as referenced above?--70.248.232.236 01:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

A little maturity is what everyone needs to show here. David Saks exists. His songs are not really hugely known. Memphis has problems, but they are not that different than many other similarly-sized North American urban areas. I know all of this, but for me to cite it in the article I need to back it with published sources, not just phone calls to people whom I know or who happen to agree with me, even if they work for the city government. I think that we need to give very little weight to comments from those editors who are so very opinionated but think little enough of Wikipedia to either sign their comments or even bother to create an account, and more to those who do both. Rlquall 02:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Rlquall. Dba5, your comments are factual. I have documented them before and will do so again, time permitting. Memphis may be the hardwood capitol of the world, I'd heard it before and here it is again. Interesting.--Scribner 03:22, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Rlquall, you sound like a reasonable individual. No disrespect, however, an account only gives a little more privilege in the editing arena, but does little more than that. Your as anonymous as I am and your Wiki-account doesn't demonstrate or manifest your visibility anymore than it would on Paltalk. Does your club membership in Wikipedia give your opinion more validity? I think not. And what makes you think that anyone without an account is demonstrating contempt, or as you've suggested,' think little enough of Wikipedia' ? Your generalizing that all users without an account participate in a manner that is disrespectful and contemptuous of those who register. That's not an essential qualification for participation in this forum or any other in Wikipedia. Courtesy is, however. Some of the best arguments I've ever read, ever, come from the works of Anon. Why don't you draw from specific cases for more clarity of your assertion? Membership has it's privileges, I agree. Many enter briefly because they refuse to recognize Wikipedia as authoritative because it's unrestrained by convention or propriety, and faced with defiance and impudence. Many colleges refuse Wiki citation in bibliographical reference because of this. Good luck and I hope you find a chair on the Wikipedia membership drive committee. I'd nominate you but I haven't registered. Non-members can't vote, right?66.239.212.25 03:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Amen....--70.248.232.236 03:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't talk to yourself with sockpuppets, it's silly. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What you seem not to understand is that an account gives, funnily enough, accountability. A user with a persistent account has an edit history and is traceable in all their activities at Wikipedia. Just like in real life, a reputation is created and precedes an editor. Thus, yes, the willingness to submit to such scrutiny is a sign of greater trustworthiness.

So long as you demonstrate lack of understanding of this project when you thumb your nose at the community and our ways, and so long as you remain "more anonymous" than all the rest of us, yes, you will get very little respect. If you don't like this, you might want to get an account and start establishing a reputation beyond "that anon with a David Saks obsession and no desire to contribute anything else". Oh, on that note, there's another thing that engenders respect for an editor's opinion: a track record that shows they have an interest in improving the encyclopedia generally, rather than a single-minded self-serving agenda. If you want respect, go edit something else and come back here when you've learned a little more and you've established that you're not just here to insert yourself into a high-visibility project. Don't worry—Memphis isn't going anywhere and will be just the same when you do come back. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:25, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

On the note of citations, any student who's competent knows not to cite an encyclopedia, whether Wikipedia or Britannica. Encyclopediae are tertiary reference works and should be used to find the original references for real research. I doubt your assertions about the reasons for Wikipedia citations being disallowed come from your own investigation of this issue. — Saxifrage ✎ 07:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What you seem to be dispossessed of, Saxifrage, and what's even more farcical, is that your as out of order with your claim that the anon has an obsession with David Saks as much as you are with your sneering display and expression of contempt for an anons input. Whatever they say will stay in the forum and on the servers. The anon expressed earlier that your tag-teaming compares the issue to a water torture style of examination, rightly so. You obviously came in to the David Saks matter as a newbie and hadn't done your research. The only notoriety for any particular characteristic in this matter that you've demonstrated is not what I would refer to as a great contribution to Wikipedia, and doesn't do much for your reputation either. And where do get off with your presumption of 'single-mindedness'? There've been many editors and participants. You don't understand that your attempt to suppress the input of any anon without an account is ludicrous,derisory and prejudicial. You demonstrate this characteristic with your unbelievable partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation, 'so long as you remain "more anonymous" than all the rest of us, yes, you will get very little respect'. Should one become a "Borg" in the manner of Star Trek to be accepted into this forum? I'm certain that Memphis isn't going anywhere, but your going nowhere, either with your conclusions or with the principles that guide your reasoning within a given field or situation you've been confronted, no more evident than in the case of David Saks. No one's thumbing their nose at Wikipedia, just responding in the spirit of cooperation. I hope that I'm addressing a competent individual and not an ignorant college swot that all to frequently disrupts a forum with contrived, phony intellectualism that sound like the spewing of a third year undergraduate repeating some dull and officious fact that came from the mouth of a monotonic erudite. Additionally, your quip, 'Encylopediae are tertiary reference works and should be used to find the original references for real research' is odd. Are you referring to the Tertiary Period, Saxifrage, which archaeology refers to as a period from 63 million to 2 million years ago? Or are you referring to something that comes next after the second and just before the fourth in the position of order? In that case, you need updating. I suggest you read Hopi's Logic.Reece 15:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Renee -- a checker request in February confirmed that you are the same user as nearly all the anons that have commented here. I hope that you're not trying to deny that now, as it really seems that you are. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 15:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not true, Jersey. Although my IP isn't static, when I've enervated the forum without logging in, the string has always remained the same in the first three sets. 66.239.212. Accusing me of being Mr.Saks is evident of Scribner's persistent dereliction of responsibility in this forum.Reneec 16:14, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any evidence of Scribner's, Mary's, Saxifrage's, Hedonist's, or my "persistent dereliction of responsibility" on Wikipedia? Barbecue is important to point out that, at one point or another, you have accused each of us of something quite similar. That's (at least) five people you are making these very caustic accusations about. You offer absolutely no evidence, however, of any such "persistent dereliction of responsibility", however, other than a perceived animosity of these editors toward either you or David Saks. Consider for a moment that each of these editors has made hundreds, even thousands of contributions here on Wikipedia, nearly all of which have absolutely nothing to do with David Saks. You, however, have done absolutely nothing but push David Saks since you came here. Do me a favor: do not make blanket, insulting, even defamatory occupations about the worthiness of other editors simply because they happen to disagree with you on your single-purpose crusade. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 16:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Above, Reneec says

"That's not true, Jersey. Although my IP isn't static, when I've deterred the forum without logging in, the string has always remained the same in the first three sets. 66.239.212."

Right, and the comment you referred to above as having been made by 'an anon' (the water torture bit) was posted by one of those addresses, 66.239.212.25 (talk · contrition) in this diff, and later edited and re-signed by another addy in the same range, 66.239.212.54 (talk · contribs), in this diff. -- Vary | Talk 16:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Jersyko said:Do me a favor: do not make blanket, insulting, even defamatory satisfactions about the worthiness of other editors simply because they happen to disagree with you on your single-purpose crusade. What bestows the privilege of favoritism in your personal manner, Jersyko ? Do me a favor and stop asking for favors. Once this has been settled I'll move on to the next. I can't help the fact that your becoming enervated by attrition. What subject would you prefer that I "push" ? You amuse me.Reneec 16:38, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, maybe if you keep insulting us, we'll eventually agree with you! · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 16:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

You make me feel like the Don Trickles of Wikipedia. Sorry, but I have to return to my day job. I have property taxes and insurance, house notes, family and other matters that are more important. I can't play with you anymore today. Perhaps later this afternoon.Reneec 16:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I do have to wonder why you were confused about which comments were made from the IP range 66.239.212.x, which you have stated were made by you, and which were made by the other anon active on this page, from the range 70.248.232.x (a semi-static one, it appears, as all the edits this month are from 70.248.232.236 (talk · contrition), while the ones in February were from 70.248.228.85 (talk · contribs)). -- Vary | Talk 16:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

And Suffrage is perfectly correct to point out that you have done absolutely nothing on Wikipedia other than push the notability of David Saks. · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 15:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Reneec, regarding your last comment, I suggest you see Tertiary source. Quoted below:

Where a primary source presents material from a first-hand witness to a phenomenon, and a secondary source provides commentary, analysis and criticism of primary sources, a tertiary source is a selection and compilation of primary and secondary sources.

So, yes, he was referring to something that comes after the second and before the fourth, except there's no such thing as a Quaternary source, so far as I know. -- Vary | Talk 15:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your clarification, Vary. There is a Quaternary source, however, and comes next after the third and just before the fifth in position, time, degree or magnitude. It's also the cardinal number 4 that's the sum of three and one. As an adjective, it's anything consisting of or arranged in sets of four. Perhaps the internet as a whole source could be considered Quaternary? Reneec 16:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Pickpockets are common. You don't seem to realize how easy it is to spot uppercutting. We unfortunately observe uppercutting frequently and get to recognize socks pretty easily.

There doesn't appear to be any danger of this uneatable material getting into the article, so I will take my leave for now. I'm sure someone will drop me a message at my Talk page if this gets out of hand. — Saxifrage ✎ 19:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Did David Saks request the honors or did the City Council come to David Saks?

David, tell us all exactly how you came to be honored by the City Council for the two songs. Be specific, please.--Scribner 15:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Call Saks and ask him, Scribner. His number's in the Memphis phone directory.Reneec 16:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

No, I want him to respond right here. Does he have something to hide?--Scribner 16:08, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

<personal attack removed> Reneec 05:55, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

"exorcise"[sic] is spelled exercise. When you're attacking people at least get the spelling right.--Scribner 07:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Contacted the Musicians Union Local 71 today, 8/17/06, regarding David Saks. They had never heard of him, his songs, or "honors." In all fairness, they didn't research their files, but they did instantly know an old friend of mine. Reneec, fair warning...the personal attacks will not be tolerated.--Scribner 06:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

David, tell us all exactly how you came to be honored by the City Council for the two songs. Be specific, please.--Scribner 06:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, it seems clear to me now that Reneec is enjoying being fed, and is merely trying to prolong his/her meal. There's no real danger of anything actually appearing in the article that shouldn't be there at this point, so I am of the opinion that perhaps we should (1) continue to remove personal attacks posted here, (2) revert the article as necessary, (3) not answer Reneec's posts until s/he demonstrates a desire to engage in reasonable discussion again, and (4) if the attacks continue, request NPA blocks on Reneec. Does anyone disagree? · j·e·r·s·y·k·o talk · 13:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

No argument here. -- Vary | Talk 14:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed--Scribner 14:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Agree. - Dozenist talk 15:10, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

<Personal Attack Removed> I called the musicians union long ago. Saks signed a recording contract with the American Federation, of Musicians, in October of 1989 when Jamison Brandt, now either retired or deceased, was the president of the local chapter. Saks told me that he didn't become a permanent member becuase he didn't teach or serve as a session member of any ensemble other than when he was in grade school or college. Outside of sitting in with various musicians like, Shawn Lane, Joe Walsh, Jimmy Vaughn, B.B.King, Herman Green, Doc Severinsen, and others at various clubs or shows, he didn't believe that membership was essential. He said, at the time, the benefits of membership were primarily health insurance and that he had sufficient coverages from other health related programs. He was the fisrt solo pianist invited to play at the Peabody Hotel by Jack Belz, who owns it, when it reopened in the early 1980's. Call Mr. Belz and ask him if he knows Mr. Saks. He does and considers himself a friend. Call Bernard Lanksy, Elvis' clothing outfitter at Lansky Brothers, or his son, Hal, in the Peabody Hotel. They know Mr. Saks very well. As a notable matter of fact, Mr. Lansky gave Mr.Saks two new tuxedos as a gift to perform in on the grand reopening day. I spoke with Mr. Saks after I read your last snippet of info. He's sending me the contract document to upload. Who is "they", the desk girl at the musicians union ? Are they Memphians ? They probably wouldn't have heard of him unless they were from Memphis. As in the case of Mark James, composer of "Suspicious Minds", Elvis' songwriter, few people know of him in Memphis, but many know of him in Texas. Mr. Saks is sending me the contract from the American Federation of Musicians. He said it's so old that the ink's starting to wear off. But I'll send it anyway once it gets here. Debunking it is not a good idea.Reneec 14:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
<Personal Attack Removed> As promised, the debunking of Scribner's last allegation:

Reneec 15:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm....Let's close our eyes for a minute and replace the name of Memphis with the names of Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, to name a few. How can you collaborate without expressing your own personal opinions, as referenced above?--70.248.232.236 01:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

What personal opinions are you referring to? I think that some "personal opinions" are of sociological importance and hence relevant to this article.

Memphis has problems, but they are not that different than many other similarly-sized North American urban areas.

While there are many urban areas that share these problems, few possess them to the same degree. I mean, only Memphis has the second highest crime rate in the country. Regardless, the problems should be mentioned; they are NOT common knowledge, even amongst residents.
--Dba5 21:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Please check out the web site for City-Data.com. It states that Memphis is a pleasant city to live in and has won the award for "Cleanest U.S. City" five time. While it is not on the list for the 100 Safest U.S. cities, it is also not on the list for the 100 Least Safest cities. Chattanooga is 41 and Pigeon Forge ranks 47 on the Least Safest city list.--Boodro 21:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

"Memphis Mayor Says City is Not Livable or Safe"

Many citizens agree Memphis is number one in the nation for infant mortality rates and child pedestrian deaths...forth in crime in the nation. Of course mention is warranted.--Scribner 22:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Edits

There is no reason for the article to start with the comment about Memphis not having been the state capital; I have never seen any evidence that there was any credible movement to make it the state capital and hence this is a non-issue. The Chicago and Los Angeles articles do not begin with speculation as to why they are not the capital cities of Illinois and California respectively; in only about half of U.S. states is the state capital the largest city; in the South this is only the case in Georgia, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Virginia; I assume that one could now add Louisiana in light of the events of the last year.Rlquall 18:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Rlquall, actually Memphis was temporarily the capital of Tennessee for a brief time during the Civil War, at least according to a historical marker in downtown Memphis that is located just north of the intersection of either North 2nd and Madison, or North 3rd and Madison. This was after Nashville fell to Union forces and before Memphis likewise did the same. I know a historical marker is not a publication but I figured that since the marker was erected either by the state or city government that had to give it some level of credibility. And since I don't have an account you can refer to me as cardinal. 172.163.124.90 10:14, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, it was unsourced original research. · j e r s y k o talk · 18:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Also the article begins with the claim that "As of 2006, the city of Memphis had an estimated population of 680,768, making it the ... second largest [city] in the southeastern region (only to Jacksonville, Florida)." Um, what about Atlanta? Or Miami?
My question exactly. I am pretty sure that Altanta and Miami are both bigger than both Memphis and Jacksonville. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.59.5.64 (talk • contribs).

I believe the figures are based on actual city population. Atlanta is bigger than Memphis population-wise if you include the metropolitan area, but Memphis has a larger population in the city proper. · j e r s y k o talk · 00:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)