Template:Did you know nominations/Three-gap theorem


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Gatoclass (talk) 11:55, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Three-gap theorem

 * ... that the three-gap theorem explains both the spacing of leaves on plant stems and the intervals between adjacent tones in certain musical tuning systems? Source: Plant leaf spacing: ; music:
 * Reviewed: Amanda Swimmer

Created by David Eppstein (talk). Self-nominated at 05:52, 13 April 2018 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg copyvio clear, written neutrally, size and age ok, QPQ done. hook cited to two sources and faithful. good to go. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:23, 18 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Symbol possible vote.svg I pulled this from the queue as half a paragraph is unsourced in the "Applications" section. Gatoclass (talk) 11:42, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * WTF? (1) You pulled it from the queue but appear not to have put it back anywhere else, causing a bot to complain on my talk page that the nomination is incomplete because it is not linked anywhere.(2) There is no rule in DYK that every part of every paragraph needs a footnote, only that every paragraph itself needs a footnote. (3) The part you are complaining about being unsourced consists in its entirety of a single worked example, describing the figure in a little more detail than the figure caption. This sort of material is important to the reader (since otherwise we can only present the mathematics as a mysterious abstract fact devoid of any connection to how it might apply to any particular instance), cannot be sourced (if we copied a different worked example from a source it would most likely be a copyvio), does not need to be sourced (per WP:CALC), and would not be helpful to source. Please reverse this bad decision and in any case fix your failure to re-link the pulled nomination. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:16, 28 April 2018 (UTC)