Talk:CET: Difference between revisions

Line 168:

::::: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

: I believe we should document related (stretched or compressed) tunings under the same article as we are doing with most edo pages. Also, the degree of precision in 88cET, for example, is arbitrary--why 88cET rather than 87.9 or 88.1--and the degree of precision cannot be consistent across similar articles, as precision up to the cent is too precise at very large step sizes and too imprecise at small ones. It is also more likely that the tuning is conceptualized as 8ED~3/2 or 41ED8 anyway, so I think calling the page 8ED3/2 or 41ED8 is superior to 88cET. More generally, I don't think the page title of any equal tuning should be XcET or APSXc. --[[User:Hkm|hkm]] ([[User talk:Hkm|talk]]) 18:17, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

== Merge CET pages ==

I believe we should document related (stretched or compressed) tunings under the same article as we are doing with most edo pages. Also, the degree of precision in 88cET, for example, is arbitrary--why 88cET rather than 87.9 or 88.1--and the degree of precision cannot be consistent across similar articles, as precision up to the cent is too precise at very large step sizes and too imprecise at small ones. It is also more likely that the tuning is conceptualized as 8ED~3/2 or 41ED8 anyway, so I think calling the page 8ED3/2 or 41ED8 is superior to 88cET. More generally, I don't think the page title of any equal tuning should be XcET or APSXc. --[[User:Hkm|hkm]] ([[User talk:Hkm|talk]]) 18:17, 5 August 2025 (UTC)

:: By the logic of merging 88cet with 8edf or 41ed8, we would also need to merge Carlos Alpha with 9edf, Carlos Beta with 11edf, Carlos Gamma with 20edf, and BP with 13edt. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

: By the logic of merging 88cet with 8edf or 41ed8, we would also need to merge Carlos Alpha with 9edf, Carlos Beta with 11edf, Carlos Gamma with 20edf, and BP with 13edt. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

: I think we should be careful when applying systematic thinking to merging and splitting discussions. Some tunings may be notable enough to justify having their own pages despite their similarity with other tunings. At the moment, I think it's safer to start with merging less commonly used tunings. Similar tunings should be mentioned on each page's lead section when they're not merged, and it's already the case most of the time. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 16:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

@@ Line 168: / Line 168: @@
 ::::: [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
-: I believe we should document related (stretched or compressed) tunings under the same article as we are doing with most edo pages. Also, the degree of precision in 88cET, for example, is arbitrary--why 88cET rather than 87.9 or 88.1--and the degree of precision cannot be consistent across similar articles, as precision up to the cent is too precise at very large step sizes and too imprecise at small ones. It is also more likely that the tuning is conceptualized as 8ED~3/2 or 41ED8 anyway, so I think calling the page 8ED3/2 or 41ED8 is superior to 88cET. More generally, I don't think the page title of any equal tuning should be XcET or APSXc. --[[User:Hkm|hkm]] ([[User talk:Hkm|talk]]) 18:17, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
+== Merge CET pages ==
+I believe we should document related (stretched or compressed) tunings under the same article as we are doing with most edo pages. Also, the degree of precision in 88cET, for example, is arbitrary--why 88cET rather than 87.9 or 88.1--and the degree of precision cannot be consistent across similar articles, as precision up to the cent is too precise at very large step sizes and too imprecise at small ones. It is also more likely that the tuning is conceptualized as 8ED~3/2 or 41ED8 anyway, so I think calling the page 8ED3/2 or 41ED8 is superior to 88cET. More generally, I don't think the page title of any equal tuning should be XcET or APSXc. --[[User:Hkm|hkm]] ([[User talk:Hkm|talk]]) 18:17, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
-:: By the logic of merging 88cet with 8edf or 41ed8, we would also need to merge Carlos Alpha with 9edf, Carlos Beta with 11edf, Carlos Gamma with 20edf, and BP with 13edt. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
+: By the logic of merging 88cet with 8edf or 41ed8, we would also need to merge Carlos Alpha with 9edf, Carlos Beta with 11edf, Carlos Gamma with 20edf, and BP with 13edt. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 11:31, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
+: I think we should be careful when applying systematic thinking to merging and splitting discussions. Some tunings may be notable enough to justify having their own pages despite their similarity with other tunings. At the moment, I think it's safer to start with merging less commonly used tunings. Similar tunings should be mentioned on each page's lead section when they're not merged, and it's already the case most of the time. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 16:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)