Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Notability guidelines: Difference between revisions

← Older edit Newer edit →

VisualWikitext

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 :: [[User:Mschulter1325|Mschulter1325]] 00:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
+== Exclusion of theoretical systems that are practical, but not necessarily beneficial ==
+I was originally on the position these guidelines were very strict guidelines, but after properly rereading these I am convinced these are mostly reasonable. However ,there are still some areas which I would say the guidelines should perhaps be relaxed, the most important one being this:
+> Theoretical value: Theoretical systems that solves specific problems, or demonstrates a clear theoretical or conceptual benefit.
+I think that you should maybe consider if theoretical systems which can be ''practical'' (possible to apply to music and that the interpretation is not patently arbitrary / nonsensical) but not necessarily demonstrating a clear benefit over other systems, to be allowed under the notability criteria. I will give an example to make this more clear (although I can't really find any very good examples, I think I found one that is good enough to illustrate what I mean). This temperament [[Miscellaneous_5-limit_temperaments#Kangaroo]] in the 5-limit is of a high error with its ultrapyth fifth and exaggerated syntonic comma and is also moderately high complexity. I doubt it provides much of a "clear theoretical or conceptual benefit" over other temperaments with similar generators such as say the [[No-fives_subgroup_temperaments#Threedic]]. And there are no Kangaroo compositions I know of. So as far as I know this temperament would be rejected under your notability guidelines. But I don't think that Kangaroo temperament is ''useless'', 15edo supports it and there are some people who percieve that 15edo supports 5-limit, so it is probably possible to make compositions in that temperament with at least some perception of the 5-limit intervals it purports to have. This temperament probably has at least some compositional value , and deleting it from the wiki would remove potentially useful information if someone wanted to compose in that temperament.
+> Entries consisting solely of automatically generated content (e.g. interval tables, infoboxes) without context or explanation can be deleted without relocation.
+I also think this is a bit harsh of a policy, considering that even a page which is just infobox, edo intro and interval tables can have at least some value to people (although ideally of course it should be expanded). At least maybe consider moving those to userspace not outright deletion.
+ [[User:CompactStar|CompactStar]] ([[User talk:CompactStar|talk]]) 04:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)