ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW
Please do not add any new discussion to this archive page.
All new discussion should go on Talk:Microtonal music.
I see an increasing amount of redundancy in the xenwiki. The content of this page, e.g., overlaps a good deal with the page "what is microtonal music".
I would like to suggest, once more, the principle "DRY".
- hstraub August 17, 2011, 12:46:30 AM UTC-0700
Wikipedia has both a microtonal music article and a xenharmonic music article. How's that for redundency. Anyway, I need to rescue the article from the clutches of Wikipedia.
- genewardsmith August 17, 2011, 12:57:43 AM UTC-0700
This is not Wikipedia. So it is absolutely not relevant how redundant WIkipedia is.
I still do not see the point in having overlapping stuff (e.g. concerning terminology) on different pages.
- hstraub August 17, 2011, 01:43:33 AM UTC-0700
It's a wiki, that's why there isn't a global concept for distributing information. Redundancy is not so bad as long as it remains within limits.
I think, The "DRY" principle wasn't designed for wikis - to just put this pointedly:
Wikis as communication platforms can hardly be more redundancy-free, as communication itself.
- xenwolf August 17, 2011, 02:28:06 AM UTC-0700
...oh I forgot: you are fully right:
Yes, thank God, this is not Wikipedia! :)
- xenwolf August 17, 2011, 02:30:16 AM UTC-0700
I don't give a d**n what DRY was originally designed for. This wiki has reached a size where keeping track of all the stuff in it is getting increasingly difficult. IMO, "DRY" is becoming more and more a sheer necessity.
And I still do not see what is the point of having two sections on two different pages dedicated to the various terms that are used instead of or additinally to "microtonal".
- hstraub August 17, 2011, 03:41:42 AM UTC-0700
Nobody hinders you the remove duplicated sections and build a new page from it.
One-pagers for external use can be made with the page inclusion facility that is available in the wikispaces software. try
- xenwolf August 17, 2011, 03:55:24 AM UTC-0700
But then Gene might have to rescue his article from some clutches again.
But i guess I will do so (at the risk of being called a drooling, slobbering moron, too).
- hstraub August 17, 2011, 04:13:34 AM UTC-0700
Since the Xenwiki is not written from a single point of view, I don't see how you can enforce a single source of truth. It makes sense to do so with definitions, but why with articles on topics like microtonality?
- genewardsmith August 17, 2011, 08:58:49 AM UTC-0700
Your section on terminology apparently has already the claim of covering the existing multiple points of view, mentioning the terms microtonal, micro-intervals, macro-interval, ultra-chromatic, infra-chromatic, xenharmonic.
There is a section on another page with obviously the same aim, mentioning the terms microtonal, macrotonal, also xenharmonic (with about the same definition as in your article), neoteric, non-western, alternative tuning, metachromatic, ekmelic.
What's wrong with combining these two articles into one that lists all the terms? What's wrong with that?
- hstraub August 17, 2011, 11:43:51 AM UTC-0700
Alright, alright - I will leave your article as it is and jus tput a link to it on http://xenharmonic.wikispaces.com/DefineMicrotonal .
But I will fix some if the links.
- hstraub August 17, 2011, 11:32:12 PM UTC-0700