Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Kinks/archive2


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 17:39, 2 March 2010.

The Kinks

 * Nominator(s): I.M.S. (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm presenting The Kinks for FAC—the article is the result of several months of extensive rewriting, copyediting, image research, and reference gathering. I nominated it for FA back in November; looking back, I realize that the article was far from ready, although certainly a good deal better than it was before—compare the current version to the revision at the start of the work. For help with this article, I would like to acknowledge the following users, who were both helpful and kind throughout the previous review process:


 * DocKino - An extremely helpful person and a fine copyeditor who helped bring the article to the point it is now. He also located some great PD photos for the page.
 * Malleus Fatuorum - His extensive copyediting (150+ edits) vastly improved the article.
 * PL290 - PL290 made some very helpful comments at FAC and even made a few edits to the article itself.
 * Shirik - Jumped in at the last moment to give the article a fighting chance at FAC.

The article has undergone several thorough copyedits and a peer review since the last nomination, and I, among others, believe that it is ready to be featured. Please express your opinions on the article, and I will attempt to respond to you promptly and address any issues raised. Thank you all for your time, - I.M.S. (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments No dab links, no dead external links. Alt text OK; I'm making a few small corrections. Ucucha 22:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments This is indeed much improved from the last time it was at FAC, but I see a few red flags:
 * No Musical style section (like, say, in The Beatles Featured Article)? I see that in the history section you often go into too much detail discussing the lyrics or musical style of a single song ("You Really Got Me", "See My Friends", "Waterloo Sunset"). All this might be better off in a Musical style and lyrical themes section, serving to trim down the History section as well as give the reader one place where he can find all this info.
 * The Legacy section can be expanded. I suggest moving the statements about the New Wave groups, Van Halen and the Britpop bands from the History section and integrating them into the Legacy. This way you also avoid duplication of info.
 * I am not sure why that Research and literature section is necessary. I mean, how are book's about the band a significant part of the group's story? Just seems very odd; I have not seen another band article with it.
 * I strongly suggest removing that Personnel timeline thing. It is rather unsightly (no offense), and redundant to a good ol' list of names.
 * A section is called "The Golden Age" (in quotes), but the quote doesn't feature in the prose at all. Who called that period specifically "The Golden Age"?
 * The captions in the sound samples should be expanded, explaining the music in the sample.
 * "Dave's second solo single, "Susannah's Still Alive", was released in the UK on November 24. It sold a modest 59,000 copies, but failed to reach the Top 10."—Any solo material of Kinks members doesn't belong in this article, especially not in this much detail.—indopug (talk) 16:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments - I'll try to address all of them. - I.M.S. (talk) 17:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Indopug, how do these changes look? - I.M.S. (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to leave the Dave Davies bit in the article, as the song mentioned features the entire band (including Ray Davies) performing on it. It also reflects the rapidly dwindling success of the group at the end of 1967. Also, I'll think about cutting the "research" bit, per your suggestion. Other than that, I believe all other issues have been addressed. - I.M.S. (talk) 01:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Media review from Charles Edward
 * All images are PD and properly sourced
 * The two music samples have proper fair use rationales.
 * Having two non-free music samples violates NFC. One sample conveys their singing style and voices, the second sample doesn't add significant additional value. You should remove one IMO.
 * Everything else looks good. &mdash;Charles Edward (Talk 20:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Sound samples: The advice to expand the captions in the sound samples (or, at least, the ones other than "Lola") is well-taken. The view that there is any policy violation here is simply incorrect. Four samples is an exceedingly modest number for a band that recorded for over three decades, released over 300 sides, recorded in a wide variety of musical styles, and was highly influential both for its lyrics and its music in multiple styles. In fact, I believe the article needs an additional sample to help fully explain the "theatrical style" to which band was committed during the early and mid-1970s. I see there is good sourcing for "Sweet Lady Genevieve" from Preservation: Act 1 as a strong "candidate for Davies' forgotten masterpiece". Or perhaps there is another song from this period that has been described as typifying the style.—DCGeist (talk) 23:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I most wholeheartedly agree with DCGeist's comments above. I'm currectly working on the captions - how do you think they're coming along? - I.M.S. (talk) 00:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Much better now. On another point, I tend to agree with Indopug that the Research and literature section is unnecessary and obviously nonstandard, and I think most of it is not of particular interest to most readers. However, a more summary version of the story of R. Davies' efforts to block publication of The Kinks: The Official Biography might fit well in the history. In addition, much of the material in the Documentation, unreleased material, and outtakes subsection might be worth keeping, if you can find a natural place or places in the rest of the article to integrate it.—DCGeist (talk) 10:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * See Comment on sound samples lower down. - I.M.S. (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments - The nominator is being modest about the previous FAC; the article was already in very good shape and aroused a lot of interest from reviewers. Support (subject to satisfactory media and source reviews&mdash;also please have a quick check for MOS:NUM compliance as I noticed a few cases where I think figures should be words, such as "the 5-song EP Did Ya" and "Gallagher declared The Kinks the 5th best band of all time") - anyway, good work&mdash;this article has seen a lot of work prior to this nomination, and after some continuing changes now appears to have settled down very nicely. A comprehensive piece. PL290 (talk) 21:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support! I'll address those points shortly. - I.M.S. (talk) 22:42, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

One comment so far from a quick glance at the latest version (more to follow when possible): PL290 (talk) 09:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC) PL290 (talk) 18:07, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * "In the UK, the group had fourteen Top 20 singles on the New Musical Express chart" - why the reference to the old NME chart? Surely the point is that they had seventeen overall on the UK chart.
 * At home they were immersed in a world of different musical styles, from the music hall of their parents' generation to the jazz and early rock and roll that their older sisters enjoyed.[11] These musical experiences culminated in nightlong parties held in the front room of their house, which made a great impression on the Davies brothers. - the Davies brothers' early musical experiences hardly "culminated" in those parties, or The Kinks would never have existed.
 * The brothers attended William Grimshaw (later merged with Fortismere School), a secondary modern school, where they formed a band - the school is called William Grimshaw Secondary Modern School, so this needs rearranging somewhat. I suggest unlinking secondary modern (since details of the education system can be found if necessary via Fortismere School), allowing, "The brothers attended William Grimshaw Secondary Modern School (later merged with Fortismere School), where they ..."
 * The Davies brothers were the only permanent members during the band's 32-year run. - permanent members is not really the right term, since I don't think the others would have been considered temporary members while they were with the band during its 32-year run. I will leave you with the challenge of how to phrase the fact that only those two were with the band from start to finish.
 * The Kinks were accompanied by various keyboardists - "accompanied" seems to imply the keyboardists were not members of the band.
 * How would this sound: ...when he was replaced by Jim Rodford. Several keyboardists joined The Kinks throughout its run; most notably Nicky Hopkins (for studio sessions only, 1965–1968), John Gosling (1970–1978), and Ian Gibbons (1979–1989, 1992–1996). I'll eliminate the other use of "run" earlier in the paragraph, so that it isn't redundant. - I.M.S. (talk) 22:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm at a loss as to what to say in the "permanent members" section; the best thing I can think of is  The Davies brothers were the only members who remained in the group during it entire 32-year span. - I.M.S. (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The "only" is clear from context. How about: The Davies brothers remained members throughout the group's 32-year run. Hopkins actually has a different status from Gosling and Gibbons, yes? He certainly doesn't make it into the official band pictures. How about: From 1965 to 1968, keyboardist Nicky Hopkins accompanied The Kinks during studio sessions. Several keyboardists were later members of the band, most notably John Gosling (1970–1978) and Ian Gibbons (1979–1989, 1992–1996). DocKino (talk) 23:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you just nailed it, DocKino; very nice wording. I'll make the necessary changes to the article right now. - I.M.S. (talk) 23:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

PL290 (talk) 13:51, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Legacy is rather short. Perhaps there's simply no more that can be said, although maybe deeper statements can be made about the nature and extent of the band's influence on the artists named, including quotations from members of those bands.
 * Having just said the Legacy section's short, I don't think the following sentence really belongs there: Dave Davies, on the other hand, is renowned for his guitar playing ... [with a] pioneering hard-rock style.
 * The Musical style and Charts and awards sections are currently subsections of Legacy. I would not say those things constitute legacy, so they should not be subsections thereof. Some restructuring of this area appears to be necessary.
 * How does it look now? - I.M.S. (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The three unstruck points above appear to remain unaddressed. Adding a couple more below. PL290 (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The last paragraph of the lead refers to "numerous honours":"The Kinks had five Top 10 singles on the US Billboard chart. Nine of their albums charted in the Top 40.[7] In the UK, the group had seventeen Top 20 singles on the British chart along with five Top 10 albums.[8] Among numerous honours, they received the Ivor Novello Award for 'Outstanding Service to British Music'.[9] In 1990, their first year of eligibility, the original four members of The Kinks were inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame."
 * These "numerous honours" should be detailed in the Charts and recognition section. Currently, that section simply repeats, Among numerous honours, they received the Ivor Novello Award for "Outstanding Service to British Music", adding, The Kinks were inducted into the UK Music Hall of Fame in November 2005.

PL290 (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The UK Music Hall of Fame is not mentioned in the lead.
 * I'm sorry, PL, but I've found it hard to find reliably sourced information explicitly dealing with The Kinks' influence, that isn't just repeating "they were on of the most important bands..." over and over again. I have, however, expanded the charts and recognition section. Tell me what you think. - I.M.S. (talk) 23:23, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * How does this look? - I.M.S. (talk) 04:34, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Comment - Clicking play to listen to any of the music samples forces unsightly widening of screen. Can this be looked at. I'm using Firefox 3.5 to browse, not checked with other browsers. SunCreator (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that this is not an issue with this article in particular, but with the template itself. If it's a major problem for you, I would consider taking it up with the creators of, - I.M.S. (talk) 18:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A workaround is to have it on the left. See Hey Baby (No Doubt song) for example. SunCreator (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I personally do not think a workaround would benefit the page; the layout is fine as it is. I've viewed the article on two different browsers, from both wide and square monitors, and have found no problems with page width when listening to the samples. - I.M.S. (talk) 19:47, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with I.M.S. on this point. The visual presentation of the sound sample box changes to show play controls when the sample is played, in different ways according to the browser being used. I'm used to seeing this in WP articles and I don't think of it as a problem, but if it is felt to be one, then the appropriate course of action would be to take the matter up centrally by modifying the template, rather than restricting sound sample placement in articles that use that template. PL290 (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Comment Overall a very well written and sourced article and only a few things stick out for me:
 * In the Commercial breathrough... section the sentence "The band had recruited session musician Nicky Hopkins to play keyboards on the recording sessions." seems a bit stubby and out of place. Could anything be said about why Hopkins was recruited?
 * There seems to be an awful lot of commas, which rather spoil the article's flow. Could just be a personal thing, could be that British English tends to use less commas than its transatlantic cousin... won't stop me eventually offering my support but think it's worth flagging anyway. Cavie78 (talk) 16:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the comments, Cavie78. Do these changes look satisfactory? - I.M.S. (talk) 01:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Support Much better. Cavie78 (talk) 10:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC) Comment on sound samples - would "Mirror Of Love" be suitable for a sample illustrating their theatrical incarnation? Here's an idea for the caption: "'Mirror Of Love' (1974), incorporating aspects of dixieland and New Orleans jazz, is typical of The Kinks' theatrical period, with Ray Davies singing in character. The version released on Preservation Act 2 and UK single was a remixed demo recording, featuring Ray Davies playing guitar, piano, and drums, accompanied by the regular horn section and Dave Davies playing the mandolin. It was re-recorded later in the year with the full band, and re-released in the US and UK." There's simply more commentary on the song; it was widely publicized in the UK by RCA, and received "rave" reviews in MM, NME, etc. It's also interesting to readers that the demo version was released, and Dave Davies took up the role of mandolin. Any ideas? -- I.M.S. (talk) 18:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Seems like a strong choice. I'd tighten the caption a bit: "'Mirror Of Love' (1974), incorporating aspects of dixieland and New Orleans jazz, is typical of The Kinks' theatrical period, with Ray Davies singing in character. The UK single version, also released on Preservation: Act 2, is a remixed demo recording, featuring Ray Davies on guitar, piano, and drums, Dave Davies on mandolin, and the band's regular horn section." I really like the Dave Davies quote you're considering, just make sure it's clear which record he's talking about. DocKino (talk) 20:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've added the quote to the text; I'll get to work on a sound sample. - I.M.S. (talk) 04:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone have any opinions on this article? - I.M.S. (talk) 22:09, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Conditional support: Much like Joan Jett, I love rock and roll and the Kinks rock out. Kudos for taking on this article. I have some suggestions, however:
 * This sentence I find distracting in the lead: Albums such as Face to Face, Something Else, The Kinks Are the Village Green Preservation Society, Arthur, Lola Versus Powerman and the Moneygoround, and Muswell Hillbillies, along with their accompanying singles, are considered among the most influential recordings of the period. You've already said they're one of the most influential bands of the era, and lists are generally unnecessary, especially if your readers have no idea what the list is comprised of. Assume main page readers have never heard The Kinks before, or are aware of their albums.
 * Thank God they got rid of Rod Stewart. Because damn.
 * Any information on the meaning of the band's name?
 * "'See My Friends was the next time I pricked up my ears and thought: close quote on the song title?
 * I found this a very detailed and well-written account of the band. I learned quite a bit, and I have to return to it because I am unfamiliar with some of the songs the article describes. I will, however, have "Picture Book" stuck in my head for the rest of the day. Let me know if you have questions. --Moni3 (talk) 16:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the support, Moni! I'll get to work on the issues raised. - I.M.S. (talk) 01:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * How would this work:

"...reaching the Top 10 in the United States.[3][4] Between the mid-1960s and early 1970s, the group released a string of commercially and critically successful singles and LPs, culminating with The Village Green Preservation Society in 1968, and gained a reputation for songs and concept albums reflecting English culture and lifestyle, fuelled by Ray Davies' observational writing style.[2][3][5] The subsequent theatrical concept albums..."


 * Yeah, that'll do it nicely. --Moni3 (talk) 12:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Source comments What makes this reliable? RB88 (T) 02:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * http://www.kindakinks.net/discography/showsong.php?song=50

Why I believe www.kindakinks.net is a reliable source:


 * University backed: The website was formerly located at www.kinks.it.rit.edu, as a subpage for www.it.rit.edu., website of Rochester Institute of Technology
 * Mentioned in published sources: Firstly, its editor, Dave Emlen, in mentioned in several sources: link. Next, his website is mentioned in Doug Hinman's All Day And All of The Night (see Bibliography), Andy Miller's The Kinks Are The Village Green Preservation Society (see Bibliography), and many more publications (see link).
 * Mentioned in national news services: See here for New York Post article.
 * Linked to on both Ray and Dave Davies' websites. See here ("packed with information"), here ("Kinks Unofficial Website")

- I.M.S. (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Comment Just did a top-to-bottom copyedit pass, and it's looking in great shape in terms of both prose and substance. I have just two things: and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame website states that "Ray Davies is almost indisputably rock's most literate, witty and insightful songwriter.
 * In "Commercial breakthrough", the reference to the effect on Ray of "ongoing legal squabbles" is likely to leave readers searching to figure out what those squabbles related to. The addition of just a brief phrase of description here would solve the problem.
 * I see this was discussed above with PL, but I still feel the "Legacy" section is a bit thin. For instance, none of the bands mentioned is a core punk group, yet the Kinks are generally recognized as one of the primary antecedents of punk. Here's two refs that would, at least, allow the Ramones and The Clash to be added to the list. Harrington's "predecessors of the whole three-chord genre" might be worth using:, . I think the links between The Kinks and heavy metal could also stand to be fleshed out a tad. Here's a couple possible sources , : There's also a little quote/citation problem here:
 * I assume an end quote is supposed to appear there, along with a cite to the website (the surrounding passage cites only Erlewine's Allmusic article). DocKino (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Those are some very nice quotes/opinions. I'll try to incorporate them into the "Legacy" of "Musical style" section. Also, it might take me a while, but I'll add a bit on the Kassner/Denmark/Belinda court case. - I.M.S. (talk) 17:15, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * "Legacy"'s already looking better. In checking on a minor passage in "Theatrical incarnation" that seemed factually dubious (and was), I discovered that the Amazon Search Inside gremlin had got its clutches into the sourcing. Here's what the gremlin does with certain books: it shows you the correct page in the main viewing field, but gives the wrong page number in the left-hand results column--and that's often the number that winds up in the citation here. For instance, what the reference said was on page 168 of Hinman is actually on page 174. I corrected both the substance and the ref. Then I checked a couple of other examples of Hinman refs at random: one was fine--spot-on; the other (currently ref 77, accompanying the "Lola" sound clip) was not--the article gave p. 137, but the actual page number is 140. In correcting this, I discovered that the ref name actually gave the correct 140, so this may have been a simple typo...but I also discovered another small factual error. At any rate, there seems to be enough basis for concern here that all of the Hinman refs should be double-checked to make sure that we're reporting the right page numbers (and, of course, the right information). DocKino (talk) 12:05, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Back in November, I did indeed use book search for Hinman (however, it was through Google). Since then I've acquired a print copy of All Day. I'll go through the article and check the refs against it. - I.M.S. (talk) 14:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Done - I've checked all Hinman citations against my print copy; if you notice any mistakes that I've missed, please tell me and I'll run through all of the refs again to be doubly sure. - I.M.S. (talk) 22:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent. DocKino (talk) 00:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Source review I'll give current ref numbers to make finding them easier, though of course these numbers can change. One substandard source: Two serious citation problems: There were 52 issues of Melody Maker in 1973. I'm not familiar with Show Guide, but I suspect it wasn't an annual. If accurate dates for these articles can not be identified, the refs will have to be dropped. Two other citation issues: Most liner notes worth citing are credited to an author. Are either of these? If not, are you sure they are (a) of reasonably high quality and/or (b) necessary? The Kinda Kinks liner provides a Ray Davies quote that can and should be retained in any event, but the other two refs to it are accompanied by refs to other sources. Both refs to the Schoolboy liner are accompanied by refs to other sources. DocKino (talk) 00:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * [151] Icon Group International. Elaborating: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases. All of these Icon books are essentially hardcopy Wikipedia clones.
 * [31] article in Show Guide, dated only 1969
 * [97] article in Melody Maker, dated only 1973
 * [39] Kinda Kinks CD liner notes
 * [102] Schoolboys in Disgrace CD liner notes
 * Done - I've fixed, replaced and/or removed the useless and faulty refs. Both of the liner notes citations were in the article before I began work on it; it's interesting they've survived so long. I've eliminated the Schoolboys one, but kept Kinda Kinks—author and publication info has been added. Date fixed for Melody Maker; Show Guide ref removed. Thanks for the review! - I.M.S. (talk) 02:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Support This article has come such a long way over the past three months thanks to I.M.S.'s tireless efforts. And again, a great attitude has made pitching in a pleasure, rather than a chore. Well done.—DocKino (talk) 04:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words. It would not have come so far if it wasn't for you. - I.M.S. (talk) 17:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.