Talk:Regular tuning

Review by KW
I am thinking of submitting this for good-article review. Some notes that may help other editors. Kiefer .Wolfowitz  21:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)16:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed the only deadlink to Weissman\s book.
 * I checked for duplications or close paraphrasing: The article does rely on Sethares, so I double checked for the appearance of paraphrase:
 * The peer-reviewer tool suggested removing articles from section headings and shortening the lead.

Opinion inserted as fact?
From the introductory paragraph:


 * Regular tunings help beginning students to learn the fretboard's notes and chords. Regular tunings also facilitate improvisation by advanced guitarists.

Regular tuning don't "help" beginning students learn fretboard notes and chords -- they must learn fretboard notes and chords regardless of what tuning is used, and they learn them only in that tuning. It's not more difficult to memorize one arbitrary set of rules than another.

Nor is it clear that regular tunings "facilitate" improvisation for anyone, "advanced" or otherwise. They provide different materials (from standard tuning) upon which to base improvisations, but there is no evidence that they make improvisation any easier for anyone.

Unless these statements can be backed up with research-based citations, they are simple matters of opinion, and not appropriate in an encyclopedic article.

And by the way, "semitone" is not a hyphenated word. See semitone.