Difference between revisions of "Talk:Simon's Favorite Factoring Trick"
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The thread posted is not the original SFFT thread. It should be from June 2003 (I think).--[[User:MCrawford|MCrawford]] 12:20, 20 June 2006 (EDT) | The thread posted is not the original SFFT thread. It should be from June 2003 (I think).--[[User:MCrawford|MCrawford]] 12:20, 20 June 2006 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | This method is a lot like completing the square, except instead of a square it's a rectangle. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | As it currently exists, the main article (specifically [[Simon's Favorite Factoring Trick#Problem 1|this problem]]) has a lot of user comments about editing the article (which would normally be posted on this discussion page), including disagreement about whether the problem should be included at all. I would like to resolve the situation, but I'm not quite sure how to do so properly. --[[User:Orange quail 9|Orange quail 9]] ([[User talk:Orange quail 9|talk]]) 12:50, 12 March 2022 (EST) | ||
Latest revision as of 12:50, 12 March 2022
How is this a factoring "trick"? Isn't that the definition of expanding two binomials? Why would something like this even need to be quoted in a math contest?
The author of that last comment is clearly not familiar with the history behind the name of the factoring method (or is aware of the fact that it's easier to expand than factor by a nontrivial degree), nor the reason for naming it. It might be best to begin with the brief history of the name, including a link to Simon's post in which he proclaims it his favorite factoring trick.--MCrawford 01:47, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
The thread posted is not the original SFFT thread. It should be from June 2003 (I think).--MCrawford 12:20, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
This method is a lot like completing the square, except instead of a square it's a rectangle.
As it currently exists, the main article (specifically this problem) has a lot of user comments about editing the article (which would normally be posted on this discussion page), including disagreement about whether the problem should be included at all. I would like to resolve the situation, but I'm not quite sure how to do so properly. --Orange quail 9 (talk) 12:50, 12 March 2022 (EST)
