Xenharmonic Wiki talk:Notability guidelines: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 92: | Line 92: | ||
::::: 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) | ::::: 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) | ||
:::::: Sintel, I do think you were barking up the right tree with your second example, but we just need to find a better example along those same lines. First example that comes to my mind is 31edo versus other quarter-comma meantone temperaments with only 31 | :::::: Sintel, I do think you were barking up the right tree with your second example, but we just need to find a better example along those same lines. First example that comes to my mind is 31edo versus other quarter-comma meantone temperaments with only 31 notes and pure octaves. --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 22:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC) | ||