Template:Did you know nominations/Major thirds tuning

The following discussion 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 Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Major thirds tuning

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the Russian guitar's D-G-B-D-G-B-D tuning (illustrated) approximates the major-thirds tuning D#-G-B-D#-G-B-D#?

• Reviewed: University of Freiburg Biological Sciences Faculty
• Comment: Five-fold expansion began on the 10th.

Created/expanded by Kiefer.Wolfowitz (talk). Self nom at 18:56, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

• I've not reviewed the article, but the five-fold expansion started on 10 June and finished on 22 June, and it was nominated on 22 June. I don't believe this pass the DYK rules. Mentoz86 (talk) 21:06, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

  This article was nominated on the 13th, along with augmented-fourths tuning. The correct statistics on five-fold expansion were recorded in this diff's two edit-summaries: Again, a five-fold expansion had been completed on the 20th, two days before you left your comment. Neither had been reviewed so I split the two into separate nominations, making a reviewer's task easier. (This history was declared in edit summaries here.) Sorry for the appearance of "irregularities" in the DYK nomination for a "regular tuning"! :) Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:21, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

• Well, then it's another story: Article is expanded fivefolds, nominated in time, long enough, neutral and have inline citations, and hook is backed up by a source. Only thing missing is a citation in the "Other major-thirds tunings" section. Mentoz86 (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

  Thanks for taking a second look. I understand that the separation of the two nominations caused confusion. Thanks again!Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

  I removed one sentence of OR. I put footnotes for the other stuff. Professor Griewank's paper has the tunings on pages 3-4. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 21:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

• Great, this one is good to go! Mentoz86 (talk) 20:29, 27 June 2012 (UTC)