Talk:Supertramp

Under "Beginnings" we read: "The band was called Daddy from August 1969 to January 1970, at which time this was changed to Supertramp, a name taken from W.H. Davies' book, The Autobiography of a Super-Tramp, published in 1908." But in The_Autobiography_of_a_Super-Tramp we read: "The band Supertramp came up with their name independently, only learning later that a book containing this word was already in print." Citations anyone?

Jbmweb1 (talk) 05:10, 18 November 2008 (UTC) jbmweb1 The initial comment on the band naming was independent of the book by Davies was incorrect. On the bands own site under reviews and bios the band states that the name came from Davies book. [] However if refuting evidence is produced the books website should be edited back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamesinklebarger (talk • contribs) 22:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Well almost. On the band's own website.... it's only reviewer P. Robichaud who credits Davies' 1908 book for origin of the band's name. Hardly definitive. Citations anyone? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

I read "As far as anyone can remember, it was Richard Palmer who came up with the name _Supertramp_ from the book _A Autobiography of a Supertramp_ (sic) written by R.H. Davies in 1910..." in Martin Melhuish's "The Supertramp book" ^[1] Pkoppenb (talk) 21:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Is it a coincidence that W.H. Davies and Rick Davies share their last name? Are they related?75.44.29.211 (talk) 08:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The copious amount of material on Roger's solo career is misplaced -- it belongs on Roger's page, not on the Supertramp page. It's good stuff, mind you. Just misplaced. 99.254.220.44 (talk) 02:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Don't know why, but someone seems determined to revert to a rather disorganized previous version of the page. Seeing as (with the exception of the extraneous Hodgson material) no content has been added or subtracted -- just reorganized and tweaked to flow better -- what's the justification? 99.254.220.44 (talk) 01:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

81.129.84.72 (talk) 01:17, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

The timeline chart of band members is not color coordinated correctly.

the band collaborated with David Gilmour on more than one occasion, such as the saxophone on Terminal Frost as well as Gilmour's guitar on Brother Where You Bound (song), so shouldnt he be considered as an associated musician, as well as possibly Roger Hodgson's solo career?--72.71.251.182 (talk) 20:11, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Definitely an associated act. Never knew about the Terminal Frost collab. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 18:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nope, definitely not an associated act. Another editor already removed Gilmour from the list of associated acts, but just to provide the justification here: Template: Infobox musical artist explicitly says that the field should not be used for "One-time collaboration for a single, or on a single song". The only collaboration between Supertramp and Gilmour was his guitar soloing on "Brother Where You Bound"; Helliwell alone was involved with Terminal Frost, not Supertramp.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

A French website says that the band without Hodgson will reunite later this year. We should wait for an official announcement from Power Steering Management before we put it in the article. We don't wanna get people's hopes up if it's not true. FotoPhest (talk) 01:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Why was the information about Dutch millionaire Stanley August Miesegaes edited out of this article? I would say it's fairly relevant, particularly given the fact that the band reached a significant turning point after he withdrew his financial support for the band. The band basically had to reshape their sound a bit and thereby became commercially successful! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.39.99 (talk) 04:38, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

The current version of this article says: "Hodgson and Davies composed the songs while Palmer wrote the lyrics." Is there any basis for this claim? The Supertramp album itself says simply "All words and music by Richard Davies, Roger Hodgson, and Richard Palmer", so if in fact Davies and Hodgson wrote all the music and Palmer wrote all the lyrics, that statement needs a reference. I have found similar claims in Richard Palmer-James, Roger Hodgson, and Supertramp (album), and in all four articles the claim is unreferenced. I also checked the article histories, but none of the editors who added these statements provided any explanation (with the exception of Supertramp (album), where the editor notes that he got the information from the Palmer-James article). This all gives me the impression that this is just a rumor that has been making the rounds on Wikipedia. If anyone has genuine reason to believe that Palmer wrote all the lyrics and Davies/Hodgson all the music to Supertramp, please post it here; otherwise, we'll have to delete that claim.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Alright, I've found a reference which confirms that Palmer wrote all the lyrics. Anyone have evidence for the other half, i.e. that Davies and Hodgson wrote all the music?--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:23, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

...No one? Okay then, I'll go delete that claim.--Martin IIIa (talk) 17:51, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Martin Melhuish's "The Supertramp book" ^[1], p. 33: "Rick would come up with an interesting chord progression, Roger would put a melody on top of the chords and Richard would put lyrics to the melody. That, with variations, was the general mode of creation these days." But the way you put it seems OK to me, Martin IIIa. Pkoppenb (talk) 21:52, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, I finally found evidence that Davies and Hodgson wrote all the music. It's a Richard Palmer interview only published on an online message board, but it seems to be authentic. Obviously it doesn't meet notable/reliable standards, but under the rationale "close enough for government work", I've added it to Supertramp (album). If anybody finds something better, please post here and/or add it to the article!--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

As stated here, Palmer's interview is not notable/reliable for the statement that Davies/Hodgson were "unwilling to write the lyrics." QuietestMoments (talk) 17:29, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Supertramp progressive? I do not agree. Peculiar is not the same thing as progressive. 192.139.122.42 (talk) 21:33, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

We have a problem. Depending on which part of the article you're looking at, either Robert Millar was the original drummer for Supertramp, Keith Baker was the original drummer and Millar came on to replace him, or the band originally had two drummers. My assumption would be that the second is correct, but I don't remember hearing of Baker's involvement with Supertramp before, and I can't seem to turn up any references that mention him being in the band(though I'm still looking). Anybody know which is the real story so that we can fix this contradiction in the article?--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:25, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

found it, in Martin Melhuish's "The Supertramp book" ^[1] again, p. 31. As drummer Daddy had Nigel Olsson for a short period, then Keith Baker for a longer one and finally Bob Millar. Pkoppenb (talk) 22:02, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Woah, I hadn't heard of that book before. I'll have to check it out; I was just about to post here inquiring if anyone knew where to find reliable information on who wrote what on the albums from Crime of the Century through ...famous last words.... There have been a ton of unsourced claims of "Roger Hodgson wrote this" and "Rick Davies wrote that" on the various Supertramp-related articles, so it would be great to have a reliable source which straightens out the facts on at least a few of these compositions.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:04, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Roger Hodgson has a comprehensive list on his website about who wrote what.

I'm surprised this article doesn't mention Andy Anderson, who Richard Palmer mentions as having playing and living with the band in the early years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.69.204.131 (talk) 18:36, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the list on Roger Hodgson's website is inaccurate, and even contradicts statements made by Hodgson himself in interviews. For instance, it lists "Even in the Quietest Moments" as purely a Hodgson composition, yet in interviews held back in the 1970s Hodgson gave detailed accounts of how he and Davies wrote it together.--NukeofEarl (talk) 16:52, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Variations on the following statement have long appeared in a number of Supertramp-related articles without citation: "Thomson has refused to take part in these reunions, out of principle, due to Rick Davies breaking his original agreement with Roger Hodgson that he wouldn't perform any of Hodgson's songs since his departure from the group." Needless to say, this is a very loaded claim, and it can't be just left on Wikipedia without any substantiation. I had hoped someone would come along with a supporting reference before long, or that I myself would stumble upon something. That hasn't happened, so I think it's time we brought these articles into line with WP rules about living persons, one way or another. I'll give it three days, and if in that time we still don't have a reliable source backing up this claim, I'm deleting it from every article it appears in. So if anyone here has been sitting on a good reference, now would be the time to share it.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Change of plans: I just stumbled on this interview with Thomson on Breakfast in Spain. Thomson gives a number of reasons for the end of his involvement with Supertramp, and not one of them has anything to do with the band playing Hodgson's compositions. Furthermore, he claims that he didn't even know that Davies and Hodgson had made such an agreement! While the source is obviously not cite-able due to its being a fan site, it casts more than a bit of doubt on the veracity of the statement. This being the case, I think WP policy dictates that it should be removed immediately. If anyone digs up anything about Thomson from a notable/reliable source, please put it up.--Martin IIIa (talk) 20:20, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

While I have no particular attachment to this word's presence in the article, Escape Orbit's reasoning for its removal is so nonsensical that it makes me suspect "It's POV" is simply his one-size-fits-all argument for his edits. If, as he claims, the word "is a POV adjective", then the following statements are all POV:

• "The sun is far larger than Earth."
• "The journey from Boston to San Francisco can be made far more quickly by plane than on foot."
• "The Beatles were far more popular than Utopia."

Which is, of course, ludicrous. Hence, I have reverted the edit.--Martin IIIa (talk) 11:38, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Your examples are flawed because generally people know something of the difference between the two, and there is a very straightforward way that it may be measured. They have no idea how Supertramp's success is being measured, and the lead doesn't help tell them. All it tells us that someone is of the opinion that they were "far" less successful with their singles. Quite what measurement or scale is being used is left for the reader to guess. If the lead is to report matters neutrally it should either leave out the imprecise and unhelpful "far", or give some actual factual figures. How far is "far"? Twice over? One and a half as successful? Ten times over? How are we measuring the success of a No.1 album against that of 4 top 40 singles?

And please, if you are going to cast aspersions about the motives behind other editors' edits, at least have the decency to fully quote what is said in the edit summary, and not a misquoted few words to make it appear I had no reason and gave no explanation. What I said was; How much is 'far' exactly? It's a POV adjective. All we can say is that they were more successful. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 20:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Actually, my examples work just fine with your original argument; it's only upon the new argument you introduce here that any of them fail to apply. As I've already said, my reason for reverting your edit and posting here is that, as you've implicitly admitted above, that original argument was ridiculous. Incidentally, I have to say I'm unnerved, firstly that you took my "one-size-fits-all" comment so seriously, and secondly that you accuse me of misquoting you only to cite back, word-for-word, the same words I quoted (I'm guessing you didn't read what I wrote too carefully?).

Anyway, my third example applies to your second argument as well; if anything, the measurement of a band's overall popularity is less straightforward than the specific popularity of their albums. You're trying to apply mathematical standards of precision in an area where none exist. Popularity involves shades of grey, but like the proverbial candle in a dark room, anyone can recognize a difference if it's extreme enough. That's where Supertramp's albums vs. singles falls in.--Martin IIIa (talk) 13:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

You've got the wrong end of the stick. I'm not asking for a precise measure of "success". There are shades of grey. But using "far" cannot be verified because everyone has a different opinion of what "far" is. Consider this; What if I was of the opinion that their albums were only marginally more successful? That states something quite different from what the article says presently, but it is just as valid; it's unsupported analysis and forces on the reader an opinion in place of anything factual. How is the reader to "recognise the difference" when they are given absolutely nothing to work with?

We needn't rake over what you said, but my point was that I did not give, or have, a "one size fits all" edit summary. I addressed the issue quite specifically, do not accept my explanation was "ridiculous" and have not added any new argument. I was directly asking; how is the reader to know what "far" means? Have they no option but accepting an unsourced opinion that it applies here? I'm still asking that.

The solution is to remove "far" completely. We don't need it. Better to stick to the neutral and factual statement that their albums sold more. I'm assuming that is more likely to be cited and verified.--Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 22:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I've reverted 71.17.231.65's June additions of Canadian chart placings to the article. While I suspect that most if not all of these placings are correct, 71.17.231.65 provided no source for any of these placings, and unfortunately I don't have access to any means of confirming them. I posted a query about 71.17.231.65's source for the Canadian chart placings on his talk page well over a month ago, but have received no reply, even though 71.17.231.65 has edited on Wikipedia during that time. I can only conclude this means he does not have a reliable source for the information.

If anyone can provide a good source for Supertramp's chart placings in Canada, it would be much appreciated!--NukeofEarl (talk) 14:38, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/films-videos-sound-recordings/rpm/Pages/search.aspx This is a link to Canada album chartarchive. Trsupertramp (talk) 12:16, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

It does not seem reasonable to me to remove statements that Davies/Hodgson are the band's founders, as every band has founders (?) QuietestMoments (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

It has become widely documented that Davies/Hodgson composed their own songs separately, despite sharing writing credits. Their publisher's agreement is legally binding as to owning copyright on their respective songs. Much like Lennon/McCartney it is not unreasonable to state who the actual composers are, especially with numerous cited and reputable sources. Also, Hodgson contributed more to the band than just "playing keyboards," he'd composed and arranged many of the band's most successful songs. QuietestMoments (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Again, this is a very paraphrased statement by Melhuish; there was no apparent "personality conflict" between Hodgson/Davies - later in the article it even states there were no personal problems. It is then rational to include a first-hand account from Hodgson pertaining to their relationship, as opposed to a loosely based statement. QuietestMoments (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

It is baffling how it is not relevant to include the success of their breakout album Crime of the Century and "Dreamer" as their first hit single that essentially made them world-renowned. QuietestMoments (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Considering that 'Breakfast' is their best-selling album, it would be relevant to include background info on the recording sessions and the rigorous attention paid to the outcome of the album. QuietestMoments (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Someone go in and correct the grammatical errors in the article. Collective nouns (Supertramp, band) are singular and need a singular (linking) verb. So.... Supertramp IS and the band IS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C2:580:80E0:A022:3D03:97A0:43EE (talk) 05:11, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

We're is incorrect in English English or from anywhere else. Supertramp is a singular band.

Should there not be at least a minimal education allowed before editing? Rustygecko (talk) 08:16, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Bands are treated as plural entities in British English, so the word "were" is correct. The word "we're" is a contraction of the two words "we are", which makes no grammatical sense at all. Yes, I'd agree with your "minimal education" suggestion. Good luck with your English English Wikipedia. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:57, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

When you click on the “Crisis? What Crisis?” link, it brings you to the definition of the word “crisis” instead of the the page for the Crisis? What Crisis? album. I don’t know how to fix this. Blad514 (talk) 21:51, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

In the opening sentence of the article should the band be described as English or as British? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:22, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

British, all band members were NOT English. Such as, Bob Siebenberg - American, Dougie Thomson - Scottish, Mark Hart - American, Carl Verheyen - American etc.

It is also important to note that English members had Scottish and Irish parents.

Supertramp is a British band not English. 94.175.28.16 (talk) 11:20, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for contributing here. I don't think the nationality of band member's parents is in any way relevant. By your reasoning, Yes are not an English band because of Patrick Moraz, Trevor Rabin, Igor Khoroshev, etc? And by the same token, Stereophonics can't be Welsh because of Jamie Morrison, Simple Minds can't be Scottish because of Cherisse Osei, and The Velvet Underground were not American because of John Cale?? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:30, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

• With some members of the band being of non-British nationality, that would mean Supertramp is neither an English nor British band. Seems like we should have been calling them Anglo-American. ili (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
• On second thought, I recalled that My Bloody Valentine (band) used to be introduced as an "Irish-English band" due to the fact that it has a mix of Irish and English members. This was recently reverted by @Binksternet: who says that the place of formation dictates nationality. I'm not sure if that's an actual WP policy or just the editor's assumption. We might need an RfC. ili (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

  That sounds sensible, even if not policy. Happy to have an RfC. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

• The band was conceived in London, so the band itself is an English creation. --StellarNerd (talk) 03:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  Bingo. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:18, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  Depends. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  Excellent. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• I'd go with British, since that encompasses English. Hodgson and Davies are English, but Thomson is Scottish and was a very significant contributor to their main albums. Can't say the same for the American stagehands. - Floydian ^τ _¢ 12:22, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

  Yes, all English bands are British bands. Coldplay is described as "a British rock band formed in London"; not sure if that's because of Guy Berryman? "European" would be "more encompassing" than British, but that's hardly a good reason to use it. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

• Sources consistently refer to the band as British (Sample found at random: ) - unless editors provide sources that say otherwise anything else is Synth/OR etc. Vladimir.copic (talk) 01:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

  We agreed to hold an RFC (see link below). I think we ought to preserve the long-standing status quo until the RfC has concluded. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:30, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Please wait until consensus is established. Changing the article while discussion is on-going is not helpful. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 11:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Point taken but the RfC below is a MoS issue more generally not about Supertramp specifically. I am yet to see anyone make an actual policy or source based argument for calling Supertramp English. The MoS for musicians says Nationality should be inclusive: if there is any doubt about the nationality of an individual, use a double designation (e.g. Anglo-German) both in the introduction and in the categories. British or Anglo-American would best adhere to this. I've had a thorough look through sources and ~8/10 sources describe them as British. Not sure what the underlying issues are on this article but something smells fishy. Vladimir.copic (talk) 12:34, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Would that be English fish or Scottish fish (or maybe even Welsh fish)? A comparison with the MoS advice for musicians might be instructive - by all means suggest at the RfC. But I'm pretty sure no-one really wants to see e.g. "...is an Anglo-American-Japanese-German band." etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Some sources: "Supertramp started out like so many English bands in its day...", "the emblematic English band with Roger Hodgson in its ranks, "Supertramp was an English band that came into existence towards the very end of the 1960s.", "Crime saw the English band perfecting an ever more successful blend of their progressive rock influences..." Martinevans123 (talk) 13:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

The MoS you're referencing is for, as it says, individuals. Bands are an entirely different animal. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 13:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

As are comedy rock duos (?) Martinevans123 (talk) 14:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Why aye, mun! But they're deffo English like. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

There is currently a trial going on between the former members of the band over a royalties dispute. Might be good to add that to the current history.

https://www.phillaw.com/news/trial-begins-against-supertramp-co-founder-roger-hodgson 96.74.104.253 (talk) 17:46, 23 February 2024 (UTC)