Talk:List of pieces which use the whole tone scale

Simpson Theme

Im not an expert on the subject concerned, but isnt the Simpson theme based on the Lydian scale. A major scale with a augmented fourth? --Warfvinge 20:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

• No, you're right. It is based on Lydian. Shall I change it?CPRdave 18:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, I am wondering, is this a correct statement from the whole tone article: "There are only two whole tone scales" I understand they can be constructed on any note, not just b and c. Yes, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.163.125.187 (talk) 14:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

The whole tone scale can be constructed on any of the 12 pitches, but they are all covered in the B and C scales. If you look at the rest of the notes following you can find the pitch you want to start on and then simply go in order using the scale that it is already in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cquaglio (talk • contribs) 03:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge

Let’s merge this page into Whole tone scale. I see no good reason why people should have to go to two separate pages to find this information. Also this list is quite incomplete and unsourced. It doesn’t need to be a separate article, and at the moment it lacks context. If no one objects I’ll merge. --S.dedalus 20:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure; there's something to be said for the consistency of the template on the page, which provides articles on musical techniques and lists of pieces that use that technique. I think most of the lists have the same problems, sourcing and incompleteness (I'm going by memory so I could be wrong). Would you suggest they all be merged or only this topic? Rigadoun (talk) 06:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Well some of these list seems to have no real value on Wikipedia; I try to delete them. As for the usable lists, if they are small I think they would better merge with their parent articles. Longer lists may be better as a separate article. --S.dedalus 03:21, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

They have two different types of information. This is a list, which I assume ideally would at best have names, dates, titles, and instrumentation. The article, on the other hand, would have full context, history, comparison with other techniques, and would often not contain mention of pieces that would be found on the list. Is there a good reason to merge them? Hyacinth (talk) 00:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes. A list really doesn't need a page of its own. Sorry, but it wouldn't hurt to transpose this page. It would look better; more people would also look at it and remember it better. --CPGACoast (talk) 02:40, 30 November 2011 (UTC)