Talk:Last of the Steam-Powered Trains/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ojorojo (talk · contribs) 17:58, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I'll review this. No hurry, you know what to expect. —Ojorojo (talk) 17:58, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Infobox

 * I removed some parameters that are no longer used and made a couple of minor changes (easier than listing here, change as necessary).
 * Looks good.

Lead
Will address after the rest is reviewed.
 * among the final tracks done for the album – No big deal, but "done" seems a bit awkward (maybe "completed" or ?).
 * Agreed. I went with "completed".

Background and recording

 * Davies contributed harmonica ... – Since he's mentioned, it seems that the rest of the players should also be mentioned (separate "Personnel" section optional!).
 * Unfortunately I'm somewhat stuck here due to a lack of sourcing (this will be a common theme). Ray's harmonica contribution is the only one I can independently verify, since it's mentioned in a few different books. Doug Hinman lists the personnel for Village Green as a whole and for its single – that's how I have personnel sections on "Starstruck" and "Picture Book" – but there are otherwise no listings for individual tracks. Miller writes what was typical for the band's recording practice – in particular, he says Avory on drums, Quaife on bass, Ray on keyboard and/or rhythm guitar and Dave with "guitar parts". I don't have anything specific though. I can't even tell you with a reliable source whether it was Ray or Dave playing lead guitar.
 * I figured as much, but felt I had to point out for the review.

Music

 * Davies based the distinct riff – My access to Rogan and Miller doesn't include these pages. May want to add "distinctive guitar riff". Did Ray actually decide on this? Or was it just "let's do a Smokestack-type thing" and Dave (the guitarist) pulled out the old riff?
 * Changed phrasing as you've suggested. Sources like Thomas M. Kitts (p. 120) and Andy Miller (p. 65) indicate Ray wrote the melody in direct reference to "Smokestack Lightning". As far as I'm aware, other than a few select cases, Ray did not allow his bandmates to improvise or contribute ideas for songs. (Cover this a bit at The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society and "Wicked Annabella").
 * OK.


 * Burnett a.k.a. Howlin' Wolf – Throughout his professional career, he was always known as "Howlin' Wolf"; "Chester Arthur Burnett", his legal name, was reserved for formal uses, such as copyrights. Also, "a.k.a." in prose doesn't look encyclopedic. Maybe "song by Howlin' Wolf, who usually appears in the writer's credits as Chester Arthur Burnett, his real name" or such. Up to you.
 * I've just cut it down to "song by Howlin' Wolf".
 * OK.


 * is played in E major – Maybe expand on this: Smoke stays on the I (tonic) throughout, while Last does modulate (so it isn't a complete rip-off). Last also has some non-blues elements (chorus with vocal harmonies) that Smoke doesn't. At "And I don't know" and "But I live in a museum", the band sounds like they're going into a country or country rock type 2/4 (especially the bass). Is this more parody (rockers mixing up the genres)?
 * This is another case of not having much to work with. Andy Miller writes that both songs are in E major, but he doesn't go any further than that. He's not a musicologist, but he's unfortunately the only one providing any sort of analysis on a song like this. Allan F. Moore has hardly anything to say and Walter Everett basically ignores the Kinks in The Foundations of Rock.
 * Too bad, but just mentioning the fact that both are in the very widely used key of E might might lead some readers to wrongly conclude that the songs' structures are more similar than they really are. Up to you (also see the following comment).
 * Fair enough. I'll just cut it.


 * Davies imitating Wolf around 2:21 – It's difficult to distinguish this from the preceding chorus. Nice quote though.
 * It's quite low in the mix, but I can hear what he's talking about. Did you think this ought to be removed?
 * Miller seems to be reading more into Last to bolster his idea of the "jokes and allusions" to Smoke and "the scene in general". The fact that Last makes a lot of use of the riff from Smoke should be enough to point out the connection between the two; the rest is a stretch. Up to you.
 * I disagree – even though its low in the mix, I can hear Ray doing the "woo-ooo" vocal (for comparison: & )
 * OK. On my setup it's quite low, but it's definitely there.


 * jumps an octave and plays a bassline that Miller compares to the music of rock and roll guitarist Chuck Berry – In the instrumental section beginning about 2:42, the bass and a guitar double lines that go off in another direction. Is this what he's comparing to Chuck Berry? If so, I wonder what of Berry's music he is referring to.
 * All he says is that "Pete Quaife [leaps] an octave to play a distinctly Chuck Berry-like bass line" (p. 65). Unfortunately there's nothing beyond that.
 * There is a very brief (~3 sec) Berry-type shuffle on guitar at about 3:42. But Quaife's bass line is fairly typical R&R and not "distinctly Chuck Berry-like". It's odd the things Miller focuses on.
 * I'm thinking no analysis is preferable to crappy analysis. I'll chop it.

—Ojorojo (talk) 16:07, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Lyrics

 * The song's third verse lyrically alludes to the 1951 blues song "Train Kept A-Rollin'", which the Yardbirds had covered for the 1966 film Blowup, rewritten as "Stroll On". – There are several problems with what Miller (the source) wrote:
 * The 1965 Train recording with Beck includes the title line several times, which appears to be the only partial line in the third verse of Last ("keep on rollin'"), that is similar. Miller is stretching to call these three words "a lyrical allusion to" Train. Also, Train was not released in the UK until 1977 (Russo, p. 215). The "Stroll On" rewrite with Beck and Page, was released in the UK in 1966 and is the one that most listeners there were familiar with. However, it does not contain any of the lyrics from Train (and shares none with Last).
 * Train is not a blues song per se. Originally, it used a jump blues arrangement (stylistically different from Chicago or electrified Delta blues). However, the Yardbirds based theirs on a very different 1956 rockabilly adaptation by Johnny Burnette and the Rock and Roll Trio (brought to the group by Beck, a fan of rockabilly). There is no real connection between the Yardbirds' version and older blues artists or the blues, except through the rockabilly adaptation by Burnette. Miller also attempts to show that Led Zeppelin was also trying to keep up the blues posturing with Train, but their version follows the proto-metal Stroll, so again he is stretching.


 * I'm glad you picked this review up because I don't have any the same background knowledge regarding blues stuff. I've just gone ahead and canned that bit from Miller. It's rather unfortunate that he's almost all I've had to work with in writing these song articles instead of a real musicologist or musician.  Tkbrett  (✉) 16:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, better without the Train comparison.


 * I'll wait to get some feedback on the lyrics so far, since it might effect what follows. —Ojorojo (talk) 16:07, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Responses are above.  Tkbrett  (✉) 16:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)


 * contemporary British R&B music, like John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers or the Yardbirds, which he [sic] saw as increasingly disconnected from the authenticity of the original American blues artists they were channelling, – If one is discussing the British R&B scene c. 1968 (although Rogan mentions two American bands), there are much better candidates than the Yardbirds or even Mayall. Smoke had been the Yardbirds' most popular live number with Clapton, but he quit after they deliberately began pursuing a non-blues direction with "For Your Love" (March 1965). By 1968, they were split between extended hard rock/psychedelic live shows with Page and recording schlocky pop rock for Mickie Most. After Clapton, whatever pretense they had of being bluesmen was gone. Mayall might have taken himself too seriously, but "channelling" the originals is maybe too much (his 1968 albums had almost all Mayall compositions).


 * Clapton was the blues purist and in 1968, Cream was still playing blues tunes (Wheels of Fire reached No. 1, with Robert Johnson's Crossroads, Albert King's Born Under a Bad Sign, and Wolf's Sitting on Top of the World and Spoonful). In 1968, Fleetwood Mac's first album was straight-ahead Chicago-style blues and reached No. 4. Their Jeremy Spencer was a very diligent Elmore James imitator and the most obvious case for "channeling" a blues artist. But Miller and Rogan don't seem to have mentioned them.


 * So, while Davies may be criticizing his early 1960s contemporaries, by 1968, they had pretty much all moved on to different musical styles as did the Kinks. Writers seem to be trying to extend this to the "contemporary 1968" scene, but leave out the more obvious (and popular choices). Maybe just "Commentators often regard the song as Davies's criticism of early British R&B groups for being inauthentic compared to the American blues artists who wrote many of the songs they recorded" and leave out mentioning the artists or channeling.
 * Yes, that sounds better. Ken Rayes was the one who mentioned the Yardbirds and the Bluesbreakers while Miller mentioned the Yardbirds and Manfred Mann. I've gone with your wording.  Tkbrett  (✉) 18:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , because I've cut the reference to the specific bands, I've replaced the multi-image of the Yardbirds and Manfred Mann with one of the Fifteen Guinea Special.  Tkbrett  (✉) 14:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

So far, so good. I've made some more comments for "Music" and here. ——Ojorojo (talk) 16:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * responses above.  Tkbrett  (✉) 18:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Release and reception

 * their first American tour – Are there enough reliable sources for a WP article in the near future? If unsure, maybe don't red link.
 * I've got the beginnings of an article in one of my sandboxes. I'll probably focus on a few other articles first.


 * FYI only – I think the brief instrumental parts in the studio version make more sense when they're stretched out, as in a 1970 Fillmore version. They lend themselves to jamming and build up the excitement for a live show. I wonder if these came out of their early performances of Smoke.
 * I'm not sure, as there doesn't seem to be very much extant material of the band's early live stuff. What there is though indicates they sounded pretty awful (e.g. this 1964 performance of "Long Tall Sally" at the Cavern). I've never thought too highly of them as a live act. I think I read in one of Nicholas Schaffner's books that the shows he went to in 1969 were extremely exciting at the time b/c of all the build-up, but in retrospect he acknowledges they sounded pretty shaky.

Images

 * An image or quote box would help break up the text. Nothing caught my eye on the Kinks WP Commons page, but maybe this 1969–1970 group photo can be cleaned up. [I see you added an image while I was writing this, so adding more is optional.]
 * Unfortunately that image includes John Dalton, who joined the band after Pete Quaife quit in March 1969. The latest PD ones with Quaife are from April 1967. I've been on the lookout for pictures of the band in US trade ads in 1968, but they kind of disappeared from American attention that year. I'm not sure what other image to add besides the one of the train.

I'm about ready to pass this once these last couple of points have been addressed. —Ojorojo (talk) 14:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, responses above.  Tkbrett  (✉) 18:06, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
For the details, see above.
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Good work. My comment about "done" in the lead may have been overlooked; it's a minor point, so I won't hold up this pass. I was thinking of reviewing "Berkeley Mews" (some great lyrics), but someone beat me to it. Next time! —Ojorojo (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoops, yes, I missed that one. I went ahead and fixed it per your suggestion. Thanks for the review; again, I'm glad you grabbed it since the song's origins seem related to the pages you typically work on. I'll keep an eye out for your next GAN so I can return the favour. Cheers.  Tkbrett  (✉) 14:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Good work. My comment about "done" in the lead may have been overlooked; it's a minor point, so I won't hold up this pass. I was thinking of reviewing "Berkeley Mews" (some great lyrics), but someone beat me to it. Next time! —Ojorojo (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoops, yes, I missed that one. I went ahead and fixed it per your suggestion. Thanks for the review; again, I'm glad you grabbed it since the song's origins seem related to the pages you typically work on. I'll keep an eye out for your next GAN so I can return the favour. Cheers.  Tkbrett  (✉) 14:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Good work. My comment about "done" in the lead may have been overlooked; it's a minor point, so I won't hold up this pass. I was thinking of reviewing "Berkeley Mews" (some great lyrics), but someone beat me to it. Next time! —Ojorojo (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoops, yes, I missed that one. I went ahead and fixed it per your suggestion. Thanks for the review; again, I'm glad you grabbed it since the song's origins seem related to the pages you typically work on. I'll keep an eye out for your next GAN so I can return the favour. Cheers.  Tkbrett  (✉) 14:22, 23 September 2022 (UTC)