Talk:Trivial temperament: Difference between revisions

(5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)

Line 7:

: What I can tell at a glance from this Wikipedia article is that this Hindu sense of "Om" is typically capitalized, but ''not'' in all caps. So if this xenharmonic object's name is meant as a reference to this Hindu sense of Om, then it should match its capitalization, unless there's some other consideration. If there is, then ''that'' consideration should also be surfaced, as well as explained in the article itself. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:14, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

:: Yeah, a lot of temperament and comma names are in-jokes made by the original creator without explaining and it can be very hard to find out when and why they were called that, and if it has any deeper significance or a backronym attached. I've been irritated trying to track down info like that in the past as well. Looking at the revisions list, Keenan Pepper would be the person to ask in this case, as it's present right from the first version of the article and he created it. --[[User:Yourmusic Productions|Yourmusic Productions]] ([[User talk:Yourmusic Productions|talk]]) 21:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

:::Exactly, the "syllable encompassing the entire universe" thing is spot on. I just called it Om temperament because there's only one temperament-distinct pitch in the whole system, kind of like "Om" is the only word you need to create the whole universe. —[[User:Keenan Pepper|Keenan Pepper]] ([[User talk:Keenan Pepper|talk]]) 22:09, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

:::: Yourmusic: Thanks for the advice. As you can see, I've alerted Keenan to this discussion.

:::: Keenan: Thanks for explaining. Okay, word, well, I can get down with nondualism. It's sort of sad that it ended up on a page with "trivial" in the name, but I suppose that's part of it, huh, accepting the triviality of it all. Or maybe now I'm just conflating things with existentialism... :-P

:::: Anyone: So, I think that's enough information to explain things on the page. But my question about the capitalization still stands. Shouldn't it be "Om" everywhere, not "OM"? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 23:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

:::: Also, otherwise, "OM" looks like two variables, O and M being multiplied together perhaps. I don't think two-letter all-caps variables are common, for that reason. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 20:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

:::: Thanks for the fix, Keenan! There's actually one other page on the wiki where it's still "OM" though: the [[Meet and join]] page, which I no longer have sufficient privileges to edit. You might, though, if you have a minute to fix it there, too. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 06:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

:::: I see the "OM" is still there on the [[Meet and join]] page. Can anyone update please? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 05:37, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 : What I can tell at a glance from this Wikipedia article is that this Hindu sense of "Om" is typically capitalized, but ''not'' in all caps. So if this xenharmonic object's name is meant as a reference to this Hindu sense of Om, then it should match its capitalization, unless there's some other consideration. If there is, then ''that'' consideration should also be surfaced, as well as explained in the article itself. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:14, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
+:: Yeah, a lot of temperament and comma names are in-jokes made by the original creator without explaining and it can be very hard to find out when and why they were called that, and if it has any deeper significance or a backronym attached. I've been irritated trying to track down info like that in the past as well. Looking at the revisions list, Keenan Pepper would be the person to ask in this case, as it's present right from the first version of the article and he created it. --[[User:Yourmusic Productions|Yourmusic Productions]] ([[User talk:Yourmusic Productions|talk]]) 21:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
+:::Exactly, the "syllable encompassing the entire universe" thing is spot on. I just called it Om temperament because there's only one temperament-distinct pitch in the whole system, kind of like "Om" is the only word you need to create the whole universe. —[[User:Keenan Pepper|Keenan Pepper]] ([[User talk:Keenan Pepper|talk]]) 22:09, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
+:::: Yourmusic: Thanks for the advice. As you can see, I've alerted Keenan to this discussion.
+:::: Keenan: Thanks for explaining. Okay, word, well, I can get down with nondualism. It's sort of sad that it ended up on a page with "trivial" in the name, but I suppose that's part of it, huh, accepting the triviality of it all. Or maybe now I'm just conflating things with existentialism... :-P
+:::: Anyone: So, I think that's enough information to explain things on the page. But my question about the capitalization still stands. Shouldn't it be "Om" everywhere, not "OM"? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 23:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
+:::: Also, otherwise, "OM" looks like two variables, O and M being multiplied together perhaps. I don't think two-letter all-caps variables are common, for that reason. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 20:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
+:::: Thanks for the fix, Keenan! There's actually one other page on the wiki where it's still "OM" though: the [[Meet and join]] page, which I no longer have sufficient privileges to edit. You might, though, if you have a minute to fix it there, too. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 06:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
+:::: I see the "OM" is still there on the [[Meet and join]] page. Can anyone update please? --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 05:37, 23 November 2022 (UTC)