Talk:Half diminished scale

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 November 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	Music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Music theory, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of music theory, theory terminology, music theorists, and musical analysis on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Music theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Music theoryTemplate:WikiProject Music theoryMusic theory articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Attempt to salvage

I've attempted to salvage this page by providing factual information, and providing at least one reference. Unfortunately, I had to delete several sentences which were vague, incoherent, or irrelevant. (No offense to the original writer.)

However, I added Locrian #2 to the Locrian mode page, but I don't think it was necessary, since both names are given at Jazz scale. I don't think this page has much to say, and therefore suggest it be Redirected or Merged with the Locrian mode article, or possibly Jazz scale, or Jazz harmony, or simply be Deleted. -Prof.rick 09:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The names Locrian raised second and obvious variants are common in jazz theory, but "half diminished scale" is not and needs a citation. Also: the term half-diminished requires a hyphen. TheScotch (talk) 10:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you Google Search "half-diminished scale", you'll find some reliable references, such as Sibelius. Why not add one or two to the article yourself? (In fact, the term "half-diminished scale" is now commonly used in the jazz programs of some prominent colleges.) I don't like the name myself, and some time ago suggested merging this article with another. Since it was never merged, I simply cleaned up the article, wikifying it.

While adding references, why not add the hyphen? (I am sure you are aware of the complications which can result from changing article titles.)

Thanks for your interest in this "oddball" stub! Prof.rick (talk) 10:16, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think using Google a particularly good way to get citations, nor do I think Sibelius a good reference. In any case, I'm not likely to provide a citation for a usage of which I'm dubious. TheScotch (talk) 06:37, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

With regard to my last edit:

I might relent on the wording, "more commonly known"; I have personally come across the term "half diminished scale" in a classical context. Perhaps a better wording might then be, "The half diminished scale is a musical scale commonly known as "Locrian sharp 2"..."
To quote Weasel word#Examples:

* "People say..." (Which people? How do they know?)
"Critics claim..." (Which critics?)

This resembles very much the statement "Most musicians prefer these names...". Which musicians? If this cannot be backed by a reference, I think it should be removed. --Blehfu (talk) 12:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I must disagree. Since I had originally placed this statement in the article, I've slightly modified to satisfy your complaint. The term, "most musicians agree" has been removed in response to your statement that specific musicians are not referenced.

However, I fully support the point made by TheScotch, since the term "half-diminished" is used far less commonly that the other given names. Prof.rick (talk) 14:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my world, a half diminished scale would be based on a half diminished chord, ie. it would have a flat 2. As a jazz musician, I would say that this scale is a locrian natural 2nd, which, although fairly commonly used (on a m7b5 chord), is not what diatonically fits a half diminished chord. No? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.6.162.221 (talk) 23:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Let's just delete this one.BassHistory (talk) 07:09, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]