Module talk:Infobox interval: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Created page with "I think color notation should be removed from this template which appears on basically every interval page, or at least be marked as idiosyncratic, because i haven't seen anyone actually use it instead of just using the interval name. ~~~~" Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
Add topic heading, reply |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Color notation == | |||
I think color notation should be removed from this template which appears on basically every interval page, or at least be marked as idiosyncratic, because i haven't seen anyone actually use it instead of just using the interval name. [[User:Squib|Squib]] ([[User talk:Squib|talk]]) 17:55, 14 September 2025 (UTC) | I think color notation should be removed from this template which appears on basically every interval page, or at least be marked as idiosyncratic, because i haven't seen anyone actually use it instead of just using the interval name. [[User:Squib|Squib]] ([[User talk:Squib|talk]]) 17:55, 14 September 2025 (UTC) | ||
: While I agree that not that many people use color notation (even considering that xenharmonics itself is a niche), those who do use it tend to use it very regularly. While it's a small group, I wouldn't go as far as calling color notation "idiosyncratic", especially since many more people recognize it even though they don't use it a lot. Also, it makes it more convenient for them to have it displayed on all infoboxes as a quick resource, and since it's a one-liner, it's not like it takes that much space. As such, I support keeping color notation in the infobox. For that matter, I don't consider idiosyncractic terms as a problem in itself, but rather as a symptom that helps identify problems which might need attention, such as abandoned pages, poorly written pages, badly designed concepts, and so on. Color notation has none of these issues, although of course each system has its flaws and it may be enough that it will stay niche, or it might eventually turn out to be more common. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 01:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 01:16, 15 September 2025
Color notation
I think color notation should be removed from this template which appears on basically every interval page, or at least be marked as idiosyncratic, because i haven't seen anyone actually use it instead of just using the interval name. Squib (talk) 17:55, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
- While I agree that not that many people use color notation (even considering that xenharmonics itself is a niche), those who do use it tend to use it very regularly. While it's a small group, I wouldn't go as far as calling color notation "idiosyncratic", especially since many more people recognize it even though they don't use it a lot. Also, it makes it more convenient for them to have it displayed on all infoboxes as a quick resource, and since it's a one-liner, it's not like it takes that much space. As such, I support keeping color notation in the infobox. For that matter, I don't consider idiosyncractic terms as a problem in itself, but rather as a symptom that helps identify problems which might need attention, such as abandoned pages, poorly written pages, badly designed concepts, and so on. Color notation has none of these issues, although of course each system has its flaws and it may be enough that it will stay niche, or it might eventually turn out to be more common. --Fredg999 (talk) 01:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)