|
|
| (5 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| = ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW =
| | {{High priority}} |
| '''All discussion below is archived from the Wikispaces export in its original unaltered form.'''
| | {{WSArchiveLink}} |
| ----
| |
|
| |
|
| == Redundancy == | | == History section needs major expansion; this page also needs a link to the Category:People page == |
| I see an increasing amount of redundancy in the xenwiki. The content of this page, e.g., overlaps a good deal with the page "what is microtonal music".
| |
|
| |
|
| I would like to suggest, once more, the principle "DRY".
| | The History section of this page needs a MAJOR expansion. It is good to acknowledge Carrillo, but the history of microtonal music started long before that, even if you confine the scope to Western music (which we shouldn't do anyway). [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 19:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| - '''hstraub''' August 17, 2011, 12:46:30 AM UTC-0700
| | == Need link to Category:People == |
| ----
| |
| Wikipedia has both a microtonal music article and a xenharmonic music article. How's that for redundency. Anyway, I need to rescue the article from the clutches of Wikipedia.
| |
|
| |
|
| - '''genewardsmith''' August 17, 2011, 12:57:43 AM UTC-0700
| | Separately from the expansion needed for the History section (noted above), it would be useful to have some sort of link to [[People|Category:People]], since some people who contributed to microtonal/xenharmonic music could not be part of the Xenharmonic Alliance for the simple reason of their lives having been in an earlier time period. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 19:39, 8 April 2025 (UTC) |
| ----
| |
| This is not Wikipedia. So it is absolutely not relevant how redundant WIkipedia is.
| |
| | |
| I still do not see the point in having overlapping stuff (e.g. concerning terminology) on different pages.
| |
| | |
| - '''hstraub''' August 17, 2011, 01:43:33 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| It's a wiki, that's why there isn't a global concept for distributing information. Redundancy is not so bad as long as it remains within limits.
| |
| | |
| I think, The "DRY" principle wasn't designed for wikis - to just put this pointedly:
| |
| | |
| Wikis as communication platforms can hardly be more redundancy-free, as communication itself.
| |
| | |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 17, 2011, 02:28:06 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| @hstraub:
| |
| | |
| ...oh I forgot: you are fully right:
| |
| | |
| Yes, thank God, this is not Wikipedia! :)
| |
| | |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 17, 2011, 02:30:16 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| I don't give a d**n what DRY was originally designed for. This wiki has reached a size where keeping track of all the stuff in it is getting increasingly difficult. IMO, "DRY" is becoming more and more a sheer necessity.
| |
| | |
| And I still do not see what is the point of having two sections on two different pages dedicated to the various terms that are used instead of or additinally to "microtonal".
| |
| | |
| - '''hstraub''' August 17, 2011, 03:41:42 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Nobody hinders you the remove duplicated sections and build a new page from it.
| |
| | |
| One-pagers for external use can be made with the page inclusion facility that is available in the wikispaces software. try
| |
| | |
| <tt>[[include page="PAGENAME"]]</tt>
| |
| | |
| - '''xenwolf''' August 17, 2011, 03:55:24 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| But then Gene might have to rescue his article from some clutches again.
| |
| | |
| But i guess I will do so (at the risk of being called a drooling, slobbering moron, too).
| |
| | |
| - '''hstraub''' August 17, 2011, 04:13:34 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Since the Xenwiki is not written from a single point of view, I don't see how you can enforce a single source of truth. It makes sense to do so with definitions, but why with articles on topics like microtonality?
| |
| | |
| - '''genewardsmith''' August 17, 2011, 08:58:49 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Your section on terminology apparently has already the claim of covering the existing multiple points of view, mentioning the terms microtonal, micro-intervals, macro-interval, ultra-chromatic, infra-chromatic, xenharmonic.
| |
| | |
| There is a section on another page with obviously the same aim, mentioning the terms microtonal, macrotonal, also xenharmonic (with about the same definition as in your article), neoteric, non-western, alternative tuning, metachromatic, ekmelic.
| |
| | |
| What's wrong with combining these two articles into one that lists all the terms? What's wrong with that?
| |
| | |
| - '''hstraub''' August 17, 2011, 11:43:51 AM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |
| Alright, alright - I will leave your article as it is and jus tput a link to it on http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/DefineMicrotonal .
| |
| | |
| But I will fix some if the links.
| |
| | |
| - '''hstraub''' August 17, 2011, 11:32:12 PM UTC-0700
| |
| ----
| |