Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Notability guidelines: Difference between revisions
→Minor variations, overly niche pages: Qualifications for the minor variations guideline |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 89: | Line 89: | ||
:::: What you said has some merit, so I wouldn't want to get rid of it entirely, but adding some qualifiers (with examples) would be good to avoid confusion. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 22:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC) | :::: What you said has some merit, so I wouldn't want to get rid of it entirely, but adding some qualifiers (with examples) would be good to avoid confusion. [[User:Lucius Chiaraviglio|Lucius Chiaraviglio]] ([[User talk:Lucius Chiaraviglio|talk]]) 22:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC) | ||
::::: I think what's going on is that for a tuning to meet the definition of what Sintel's talking about, two separate criteria have to be met. The first is that the tuning in question can't be noticeably different from something else on the wiki- this is something that Sintel's first example does well. However, the second is that the tuning in question should not offer anything substantially new compared to a previously existing tuning. Is this right? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 22:37, 8 May 2025 (UTC) | |||