Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Graphical comparison of musical scales and mathematical progressions


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. Unless sources are provided, we consider this original research. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 08:11, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Graphical comparison of musical scales and mathematical progressions

 * – ( View AfD View log )

The substance of this article is a proposal for a "double linear progression" system of just intonation, which appears to be OR. Melchoir (talk) 22:55, 20 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  —Melchoir (talk) 23:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 11:38, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: Clearly an OR essay. This may be an interesting subject, and I appreciate that a lot of work went into it, but there is no encyclopedic content here.--RDBury (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep while we look for sources. I'm not qualified to examine them in this subject, but I find it difficult image this sort of analysis has not be previously proposed.    DGG ( talk ) 04:28, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't be averse to relisting the AfD as necessary. But for what it's worth, I already looked for sources. Here's a couple queries I ran just now:
 * "double linear progression" Google Books Scholar
 * "double linear scale" + tuning Google Books Scholar
 * "double linear" + intonation Google Books Scholar
 * In fact, the "double linear progression" isn't the only painfully naive idea in the article; it's just the most prominent. The whole thing... it's... it's just best to nuke it from orbit. Melchoir (talk) 05:12, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep An expert would know, and we don't. I slapped a 'needs attention from an expert' tag on it and they can nominate it if it is bogus. Anarchangel (talk) 20:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Surely, not a format of an encyclopedia. May be, some content will fit to Equal temperament article (BTW I do not see accurate information on so much various "musical scales" in this essay). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete per WP:OR, WP:NOTDIR #7, WP:NOTTEXTBOOK and WP:NOTESSAY. We don't have to wait interminably for an "expert" to show up. If the article doesn't demonstrate through references that it is accurate and not original research, then it has to go. We don't retain potentially misleading and unsourced articles on the off-chance they may be correct. I see no valid keep rationales here. --Pontificalibus (talk) 14:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - very interesting, but also very obviously OR. Yaksar (let's chat) 00:24, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.