User talk:Eliora/2592edo: Difference between revisions

Line 2:

I don't think this page meets the [[notability guidelines]]. I understand that this edo is the optimal patent val of one particular temperament (whose notability is either tenuous or insufficiently explained) and has a lot of divisors. Unfortunately, the first aspect is most likely the case of a very large number of edos in the thousands, and the second aspect, as far as I know, isn't a particularly notable aspect, especially in edos of that size (for the vast majority of musicians, should I specify). I believe it's sufficient that this edo figures in the optimal patent val list of windrose temperament, but otherwise I'll consider deleting this page per [[XW:NG]]. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 04:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

: +1 Delete – [[User:Sintel|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel|talk]]) 15:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:29, 3 August 2025 view source Fredg999 (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, Interface administrators, Sysops 6,129 edits →Notability: new section		Revision as of 15:29, 3 August 2025 view source Sintel (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 1,547 edits No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 2:		Line 2:

	I don't think this page meets the [[notability guidelines]]. I understand that this edo is the optimal patent val of one particular temperament (whose notability is either tenuous or insufficiently explained) and has a lot of divisors. Unfortunately, the first aspect is most likely the case of a very large number of edos in the thousands, and the second aspect, as far as I know, isn't a particularly notable aspect, especially in edos of that size (for the vast majority of musicians, should I specify). I believe it's sufficient that this edo figures in the optimal patent val list of windrose temperament, but otherwise I'll consider deleting this page per [[XW:NG]]. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 04:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)		I don't think this page meets the [[notability guidelines]]. I understand that this edo is the optimal patent val of one particular temperament (whose notability is either tenuous or insufficiently explained) and has a lot of divisors. Unfortunately, the first aspect is most likely the case of a very large number of edos in the thousands, and the second aspect, as far as I know, isn't a particularly notable aspect, especially in edos of that size (for the vast majority of musicians, should I specify). I believe it's sufficient that this edo figures in the optimal patent val list of windrose temperament, but otherwise I'll consider deleting this page per [[XW:NG]]. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 04:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

			: +1 Delete – [[User:Sintel\|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel\|talk]]) 15:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)