Talk:Lydian dominant scale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Substitution of flat and sharp signs for "b" and "#".

Hallo, "Pfly"; glad you appear to like the article.

I noticed that you substituted flat and sharp signs in place of "b" and "#" which I had used, partly because they were the only way I knew for approximating these signs. But I have a question about this. While the signs you've put in may look closer to the real signs than the characters I used, I do recall reading somewhere (probably in a "Talk" page for another musical article) a suggestion that these signs *not* be substituted, because in some browsers they are not readable, and appear instead as question marks or incorrect and incomprehensible characters; at least the characters I used are recognizable for flats and sharps, even if not quite correct - and they will be readable on pretty well any browser.

Do you know if there is any Wikipedia policy on this? Unfortunately, even today, standardization on the way computers display more obscure characters is hopeless, almost Stone-Age in character, and I think there is a strong argument for using basic characters as much as possible until decent and reliable standards evolve, even if it's at the cost of having characters that don't look quite right.

If you get to read this, what do you think? Should we keep the correct characters you've put in, or revert to the more basic ones I originally used. I don't care a lot myself, as it so happens I can read either - but I was thinking about the possible situation of people who can't read the characters you changed to at all. M.J.E. (talk) 23:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hullo -- I recently stumbled across this at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (music)#Accidentals, which suggests (it's a guideline rather than a policy) not using b and #, and mentions the "music" template. Some of the issues about the topic are discussed on the talk page, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (music). It seems like people have hashed this out for some time now. I don't know whether this template fails to display correctly on some browsers. I got the sense from reading the discussions, and the stuff over at Template:Music, that it works well and browser issues resolved (mostly?). I thought it was a pretty cool template, so I started using it -- just a few days ago. But I'm not particularly attached to it and would never insist on sticking with one style or another. Anyway, I'd say a little more but I gotta run! Pfly (talk) 03:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] neutral pov

this article is written in a not-so-neutral manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.92.155 (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redirect to acoustic scale

Can we just redirect this article to the "acoustic scale" entry, which has pretty much the same content and is written in a nice, neutral point of view, with references? I'd do it myself, but don't know how. Njarl (talk) 21:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I propose a merge on this one, see Talk:Acoustic scale. ArdClose (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)