You cite the late Powers article when he became arrogant and annoyed with too extended notion of modality Check his NGD 1980 widely disseminated 90 pages article Mode where he completely supported the common view of modality and in his large article Tonal types and modal categories and another large one about offertories with pretty evident attempt to reconciliate modal categories with his tonality especially see his batches of analytical tables It was me who added the section Tonality outside common practice period in the current WP page and trust me I invested much time in fruitful discussion in refining this section see above on this Talk page The tonality in Powers usage applied to thed 16th century polyphonic sacred music has nothing to do with the most common usage of tonality hierarchical pitch system with tonal center as reference pitch he translated German Tonart with tonality which is the shortage of English language Russian music theory uses two different words for what an English scholar calls with one word tonality but here is not a decent place to explain these complications That s the secion is rightly located as marginal addition to the artice designed as an instance of encyclopedic genre But you don t hear me so I don t think I should develop the evident things I outlined above once more