Talk:Ed7/3

Anybody know what this is about? I propose we delete it, or else someone should really break it down and explain what this is. Keenan Pepper (talk) 23:35, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Request for deletion

Since the comment above was never adressed, I will just say we rewrite this current page (I'm willing to take a shot), and delete these:

As they are all nonsensical tables with no practical use. If someone wants to replace them with a simple templated table that generates the intervals (as on the EDO pages) that'd be fine too.

EDIT: signed -- Sintel (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

I do not like all these mentioned tables in any way, and for me personally their value is not evident, at all am against trying to prove hypotheses by handmade tables. But since users have spent time on these tables, I am against simply deleting the pages in question. I would rather move them to the main editor's username space, where they will have time to elaborate them so that they are ready for the article namespace from the other users' point of view as well. I am doing the necessary work for this right now... --Xenwolf (talk) 13:43, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Deletion, again

Almost all ed7/3 pages are completely devoid of information, and this page itself is filled with what is clearly nonsense. Since MMTM has been banned, and apparently nobody cares about any of this, I think we should revisit this.

– Sintel🎏 (talk) 00:36, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

What about ed5/3? —FloraC (talk) 09:27, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Probably same story. Honestly I think we should be somewhat careful in applying XW:NG retroactively, but the part about:

Entries consisting solely of automatically generated content (e.g. interval tables, infoboxes) without context or explanation can be deleted without relocation.

Can be enforced without much issues, since we don't lose anything.

– Sintel🎏 (talk)

I'm in support of deleting most of the ed5/3 and ed7/3 pages based on that guideline. I think this page itself should be considered under a different standard, and we'll have a clearer idea if we clean it up from MMTMisms (like "Middletown Valley" etc.).

Regards. -- Lériendil (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Using this thread for a wider discussion about the proliferation of various edX pages.

Another complaint by users is the pollution of search results for common edos. For example, the search string "31ed" brings up:

31ed4

31ed5/2

31ed5/4

31ed6

31ed7/3

31ed7/4

31ed8

31edf

31edo

When presumably most users are looking for 31edo. Now, some of these might actually be useful, but surely not all of them.

– Sintel🎏 (talk) 13:39, 14 May 2026 (UTC)