Category talk:Logic puzzles
 | This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Restored category description
editI have restored the unexplained removal of the category description by Androstachys (talk · contribs) and left a warning on their talk page. DVdm (talk) 09:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Please do not remove essential content from category descriptions like you did here. Also, by categorizing a strictly mathematical puzzle as a logic puzzle, you inserted erroneous information into an article. I have reverted both edits and left a comment on the talk pages. If you like to discuss this further, feel free to do so at Category talk:Logic puzzles and/or at Talk:String girdling Earth. DVdm (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please do not remove essential content from category descriptions like you did here The content which I removed read "Logic puzzles are a particular type of puzzle that requires no particular knowledge as such, and can be solved using logic alone." This sentence is rich in obfuscation and redundancy viz. "Logic puzzles are a particular type of puzzle" - of course they are a particular type of puzzle and that is why they were put in that category. The phrase tells us nothing we did not already know. "requires no particular knowledge as such" - extremely obscure; what does it mean? If one had no 'knowledge as such' one could not begin to read these comments. "can be solved using logic alone" what is this quaint notion that one can separate logic from all else
(no mathematics, no physics, no knowledge of the real world?) Please post further messages on the category talk page. Androstachys (talk) 11:08, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- The full phrase was not "requires no particular knowledge as such." It was formulated as "...requires no particular knowledge as such, and can be solved using logic alone". I think that is not obsure, but very clear. I notice that you changed it to "... that may be solved using logic." It is a bit short, but I can live with that. DVdm (talk) 11:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- "Logic puzzles are puzzles that may be solved using logic" was meant to be ironic, but more accurate than the previous definition. Androstachys (talk) 11:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- I would prefer "Logic puzzles are puzzles that may be solved using logic alone.", but as I said, I can live with the shorter version. DVdm (talk) 11:58, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- "Logic puzzles are puzzles that may be solved using logic" was meant to be ironic, but more accurate than the previous definition. Androstachys (talk) 11:42, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
- The full phrase was not "requires no particular knowledge as such." It was formulated as "...requires no particular knowledge as such, and can be solved using logic alone". I think that is not obsure, but very clear. I notice that you changed it to "... that may be solved using logic." It is a bit short, but I can live with that. DVdm (talk) 11:18, 23 August 2010 (UTC)