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 no consensus. Given that nearly every possible option has been suggested, I can't see that this can be closed as much else but No Consensus. A Merge or Move discussion, of course, does not need AfD for it to happen. Black Kite (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Melodic percussion instrument[edit]

Melodic percussion instrument (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Melodic and Pitched percussion are the same thing. Not much use for having two articles that discuss the same thing. Why? I Ask (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Why? I Ask (talk) 09:29, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• You have yourself all of the tools that are needed for dealing with duplicate articles, you know. An administrator deletion tool does not enter into it at any stage. Uncle G (talk) 10:16, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did consider a deletion by redirect, but felt it may have been too controversial. A deletion discussion has the benefit of imput from others, too. Why? I Ask (talk) 11:11, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • A deletion discussion is for the application of the deletion tool, which a redirect is not. Using the editing tool is not deletion. Don't fall into the error of thinking that redirects are deletions. They most definitely are not. Something that I can enact with the editing tool, you can revert; something that I or another administrator can enact with the deletion tool, you cannot. It's not the same thing at all. And for soliciting third opinions, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Musical Instruments seems to be active and indeed discussing this sort of thing. Uncle G (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

      See WP:ATD-R. Articles for deletion also has the benefit of being a bit more active. Obviously, a deletion and a redirect are not the same thing, but I simply knew someone would oppose it either way, so starting a discussion seemed to be better than being WP:BOLD. Now please actually comment on the actual article rather than continuing about this trivial matter. Why? I Ask (talk) 22:45, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

      That sounds very like forum shopping to me, although it's not quite the same thing. I sympathise, some of my proposals have drawn little interest over the years too. But still not a good idea IMO. Andrewa (talk) 23:48, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

      It'a far from forum shopping as this is the only place the proposal is listed, and Wikipedia:ATD-R defines AFD as one of the suitable venues for discussion. Why? I Ask (talk) 00:03, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Timpani are classified as pitched percussion, but they aren't melodic until you have a set of timpani. The same goes for toms, cymbals, wooden blocks, etc. On the other hand, a xylophone is classified as pitched and melodic percussion. Opus88888 (talk) 16:22, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Do you have any sources directly delineating "pitched" versus "melodic" percussion, because right now, this just seems like a bit of WP:OR about your preferences in organology. And as for a singular timpano drum not being melodic, one of my warm-ups consists of playing simple tunes (e.g., Twinkle Little Star) on one drum. A single tom can have its heads pressed in to raise pitch. Heck, even non-pitched percussion instruments can be melodic (e.g., temple blocks, marching tenor drums, drumset, etc.) when used correctly. Sure there may be some percussion instruments with one note and some with multiple, but is it a widely used term that needs an article (or even mentioned on the pitched percussion page)? Why? I Ask (talk) 23:15, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Many modern tympani have a pedal to change the pitch, so you could play a melody on one and I have seen it done. But yes, in the orchestra it is usual to have a set, not just one... the only time I can recall having seen just one used in professional music was in the drum kit of Jon Bonham and I am not convinced that it was there for any reason other than to look impressive! And because he could. Tympani are interesting in that they form one of the three divisions of the percussion section of a symphony orchestra, and are normally played by the Principal Percussionist despite being in the opinion of many percussionists one of the easier instruments in the section. But conductors and composers don't seem to agree. Andrewa (talk) 10:28, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and have a formal discussion on (re-)merging with Pitched percussion. This has been a long and difficult story, and will continue, because the terminology has been in a state of flux for many years, and we percussionists tend to be a bit volatile by nature (although the best of us do make good listeners)... See the edit history of drum kit. But this is a common enough term that deleting it would be, to be blunt and perhaps percussive, ridiculous. I can't find any definitive discussion on the various merges and un-merges of this and related articles, happy to be proven wrong on this, but if not it's about time we had one. Andrewa (talk) 05:36, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The term melodic percussion is sometimes used, but I can't find any sources using it as this article does (a pitched percussion instrument with multiple notes). That's where my issue lies. Most sources simply use it as a synonym for tuned/pitched percussion, in which case it should be merged and simply noted as a synonym. And as I said above, it seems to be a bit of synthesis; it may not be entirely wrong, but no sources define melodic percussion as such. (I think looking at the mallet percussion and keyboard percussion pages would be good for the future too.) Why? I Ask (talk) 06:06, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Have you perhaps limited your search for sources to the existing article references? I get more than half a million ghits for "melodic percussion" -Wikipedia and the first few pages all look relevant. The article does need work. That's not a valid reason for deletion. Agree that those other articles should be looked at too. But melodic percussion, tuned percussion, untuned percussion, pitched percussion, unpitched percussion, keyboard percussion, mallet percussion, auxilary percussion and probably many other terms that don't come to mind are all topics worthy of an entry in the article namespace, either as an article or a redirect to an article or a section of an article. Deletion is not the right course of action for any of them, or for this article either. Melodic percussion redirects here, perhaps it should be the other way around. That's another discussion needed! Andrewa (talk) 09:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not saying melodic percussion isn't a term. The issue is the way it's defined in this article, and thus the article as a whole. This article seems to think that melodic percussion is a subset of pitched percussion, when really no such definition exists (at least not by any sources I've seen). Tuned percussion, pitched percussion, and melodic percussion are all terms for the same thing; melodic percussion isn't its own different term. Just because this is an entry at AFD does not mean we can not simply choose to make it a redirect; I'd be perfectly content with this page being blanked and redirected to pitched percussion where it is simply listed as a synonym. Why? I Ask (talk) 10:14, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  A chime bar and a triangle are both examples of pitched percussion that is not melodic. A snare drum is neither pitched nor melodic, but I can (and have) set up a row of them to play a simple tune. One day I will get around to doing a youtube on the subject. So it's partly a matter of convention, and the convention is changing.

  But I am not convinced that we should even try to conclude that discussion here. The important thing here is, we should look at some of the alternatives to deletion to address your valid concern, not deletion. Andrewa (talk) 04:30, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  As I've mentioned, a redirect would suit my fancy. And as for the convention, as logical as it may be (I agree to some extent), it is just not something referenced in any sources. The way the article defines and differentiates melodic percussion leads me to believe that WP:NOTESSAY would apply here. Sure, there are changing conventions, but where are your sources for them? Why? I Ask (talk) 05:26, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  If I were proposing that my view of this convention should be included in the article namespace, I would certainly need sources (and I'd be grateful for them). But I mention it here only for the purposes of this discussion, to explain some of the controversy in the world of percussion. Frankly, everything they say about we drummers is true... and I referred to the chronic instability, most of it good faith editing not deliberate vandalism, of the drum kit article as evidence if this. The widely-believed claims of many cymbal makers to have secret alloys more than a hundred years after these were made a fiction by materials science is another case in point. See my other-wiki essays starting perhaps with nothing could be dumber for more on this.

  The instability of this article, with undiscussed merges and splits, is a result of this. That's what makes it relevant here. And this discussion will hopefully lead, indirectly, to some stability, if you and other contributors here will stay the course and contribute to this further discussion.

  But the main purpose of the discussion here, and of my posts to it, is simply to decide whether it would improve Wikipedia to delete this article and its history, losing content in the process.

  As that has nothing to recommend it, I suggest you stop raising side issues and withdraw the nomination. Andrewa (talk) 23:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I feel like I have to keep clarifying that I would not be opposed to simply making this page a redirect, preserving the page's history in the process. (AFD can be used for that process, from what I know.) Furthermore, I actively think this article may even be potentially damaging to Wikipedia and for percussion academia as a whole. By directly defining melodic percussion as something it may not be, viewers may get the wrong perceptions (especially considering that the definition isn't supported by any sources). Why? I Ask (talk) 23:46, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  That is because you are ignoring the point. You have raised a valid and complex concern (and one that I'd very much like some help in addressing) but in the wrong forum. Simple as that. Andrewa (talk) 23:53, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Move it's a list article, rename to 'List of pitched percussion instruments' Acousmana 13:30, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and have a formal discussion on the subject.

Searching for "melodic percussion" musicology, and "melodic percussion" percussive arts, various results are obtained. --Opus88888 (talk) 18:58, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd read above, you'd see that I note that melodic percussion is a real term. However, no where is it defined as the way the article presents; it is only used as a synonym for more common terms. That's my issue with the article. Why? I Ask (talk) 23:31, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then it sounds like a move and/or rescope request rather than deletion. You yourself have suggested that merge and redirect might be a better solution than deletion. So again, you are simply in the wrong place. We all make mistakes. Your help in improving the several affected articles would be appreciated. Andrewa (talk) 02:25, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a merge is worthy, because there's nothing worth to merge. Only a a redirect and a cleanup of the target page is needed. The latter, a redirect discussion, can fall under the scope of AFD per WP:ATD-R. Why? I Ask (talk) 03:49, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Did you check the article history? Yes, there are many alternatives to deletion. And my point all along has just been, deletion is not the best way to improve Wikipedia in this case. The article and related articles have a complex history. If we delete this one, we also lose the attribution of text that has ended up elsewhere. Let us improve the articles. That's what is needed. Andrewa (talk) 13:37, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why? I Ask: You mentioned that "Melodic and Pitched percussion are the same thing", but they are different. Here is an example of two pitched instruments, one is non-melodic, the other is melodic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpl28We0p24 --Opus88888 (talk) 19:19, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't need examples; I need sources. I understand what the article is trying to convey (that some instruments can only play one pitch while others can play multiple), but I'm worried that this is simply WP:OR. No sources define melodic percussion as such, so this remains at best someone's own classification. Why? I Ask (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Melodic percussion instruments are not primarily used to create rhythmic structures, but melodies." Melodische Schlaginstrumente.[1] --Opus88888 (talk) 02:19, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That source still doesn't differentiate it from pitched/tuned percussion, just that melodic is different from non-pitched. I'm talking about sources that clearly delineate the two. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Melodic percussion is a combination of a knowledge of the piano keyboard and the technique used on the timpani." [2] --Opus88888 (talk) 19:59, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with pitched percussion instrument. Stifle (talk) 10:59, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:22, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Pitched percussion instrument. Both articles cover effectively the same topic, creating an unnecessary WP:CONTENTFORK. I don't see anything of value to merge, but if others disagree, a merge can be made from the page history. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:00, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Redirect to Pitched percussion instrument as Qwaiiplayer. Springnuts (talk) 20:36, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.