User talk:Puredication

Your recent revert
A is by definition a bishop or knight. There is nothing in the definition of a minor piece that says different minor pieces must be equal in strength, just as there is nothing in the definition of a major piece that says major pieces must be equal in strength. Whether a knight is typically considered equal in strength to a bishop is irrelevant to the definition of a minor piece. So it makes no sense to say that knights and bishops are equal in strength because they are both minor pieces, in the same way it makes no sense to say that gold and silver are equal in value because they are both defined as precious metals. One has nothing to do with the other. Is the source you're citing making the same logical error you're making? Cobblet (talk) 21:08, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The source doesn't make that error, but I see your reasoning now and removed the "minor piece" part of the sentence (but left the source since it still supports the new sentence). Thanks for posting on this page, I would've hated for people to become confused since I wrote a questionable phrase. Puredication (talk) 23:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * No problem. Notice that Max fixed a couple of other situations where you also used "since" incorrectly. "Since" means "because"; it's a way of saying that one thing is the reason for another thing. Take care not to suggest that kind of relationship between two things, when no such relationship exists. Cobblet (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2020 (UTC)