User talk:FloraC/Sandbox: Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

VisualWikitext

Revision as of 08:48, 3 February 2021 view source FloraC (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Sysops 18,318 edits →EDOs vs. Vals: re ← Older edit		Revision as of 17:15, 3 February 2021 view source Xenwolf (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, confirmaccount-notify, Interface administrators, Sysops 8,705 edits →EDOs vs. Vals: re Newer edit →
Line 16:		Line 16:

	:: So new template for sure, but where will it be linked to? [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 08:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)		:: So new template for sure, but where will it be linked to? [[User:FloraC\|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC\|talk]]) 08:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

			::: Maybe in a way like this: <code><nowiki>[[Val\|Vals]]: [[24edo#Vals\|24p]], [[135edo#Vals\|135p]], [[159edo\|159]], [[183edo\|183]], </nowiki></code> etc.? <br> Or maybe better with <code><nowiki>[[Val\|EDO vals]]:</nowiki></code> before the list? However, it seems to me that the val article we want to link to doesn't really welcome newbies, this is especially true for the "defining" section (''A val is a <u>map</u>? <u>representing</u><sup>?</sup> how to (<u>view</u> the intervals)? in a ((<u>single</u>)<sup>?</sup> <u>chain</u>)? of <u>generators</u>? as the <u>tempered</u>? versions of intervals in <u>just intonation</u>?'' -- I tried to give an impression of the known-to-unknown ratio in the first sentence. This is what I hate about the writing style of mathematicians: you are given the impression that you have to know all the parts of a concept before you can understand any one of them.). So there is still something to do. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 17:15, 3 February 2021 (UTC)