30,354
edits
User talk:Tiddlywinks/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
→Pokemon Type Combinations
Tiddlywinks (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 1,406: | Line 1,406: | ||
I made that edit to the Type page as to completely remove any reference to permutation at all. It's unnecessary to refer to combinations and permutations and then distinguish between them when the only thing need to be made clear is that there are 324 possible ways to order types an 171 ways if you discount the same type combination in a different order. Not to mention your pretentious attitude in thinking it is a lower standard to use combination and permutation interchangeably when the difference between the is very minor and in almost all modern use of the word combination as a synonym to permutation. Instead of displaying your higher standard of vocabulary, perhaps the point should be made to get the point across in as few words as possible. [[User:Disgraced|Disgraced]] ([[User talk:Disgraced|talk]]) 14:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC) | I made that edit to the Type page as to completely remove any reference to permutation at all. It's unnecessary to refer to combinations and permutations and then distinguish between them when the only thing need to be made clear is that there are 324 possible ways to order types an 171 ways if you discount the same type combination in a different order. Not to mention your pretentious attitude in thinking it is a lower standard to use combination and permutation interchangeably when the difference between the is very minor and in almost all modern use of the word combination as a synonym to permutation. Instead of displaying your higher standard of vocabulary, perhaps the point should be made to get the point across in as few words as possible. [[User:Disgraced|Disgraced]] ([[User talk:Disgraced|talk]]) 14:08, 14 August 2014 (UTC) | ||
:In point of fact - the very point I made above, in fact - "permutation" is not mentioned on [[Type]] at all. That is ''every'' difference. That usage of "unique" is ''highlighting'' a quality of "combinations". That ''is'' brevity, economy of words. It's not important for the Type page to go to the pains that the abundance page does, so it does not, but highlighting the difference between possible ways to assign types, which may have some "repitition", and combinations is still valuable. | |||
:Your primary interest here is arguing against "unique combinations" just because it wasn't right on the abundance page. But that fails to take into account the significant differences in both pages. Language does not always follow the exact same rules for things that ''appear'' the same. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 14:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC) | |||