This is a common mistake, but you're right in that it should be should be detailed here. However, the usage you mentioned is not an origin: it is one of the earliest known uses of the word in (Middle) English. It dates back to a work from 1432-50 mention of the "arte trivialle," an allusion to the three liberal arts that made up the trivium, the lower division of the seven liberal arts taught in medieval universities: grammar, rhetoric, and logic.
It's still good information though, so I'll reformat this entry slightly to show that.
Everything but the Mathematics section is pure dictionary definition (and etymology), and would seem to belong better in Wiktionary, no?
I just saved this article with an expanded Mathematics section. However, I'm unhappy with the final paragraph (the one about proof by cases). What I'd like there is (appended to what's there now) an example! But, alas, I can't think of one in which the trivial case is not one concerning a trivial object. (An example of that nature would just confuse the two uses of trivial.) There are plenty such examples, though, I know: can someone please fill one in?
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Not moved. Clear absence of consensus for the proposed move; also an absence of consensus to move to Trivial (mathematics), although this may benefit from a discrete discussion. bd2412T 16:21, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Move to Trivial (mathematics). The article uses "trivial", not "triviality". It is wrong to use a different word form to disambiguate. It causes confusion. Laurdecltalk 08:55, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
The noun as the title is per WP:NOUN. All adjective terminologies are titled with the noun form. A quick example which immediately came to my mind: legality. GeT RiGhT (talk) 00:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
One section reads: "In mathematics, the term trivial is frequently used for objects (for examples, groups or topological spaces) that have a very simple structure". This should be the lead, not some confusing cruft about nouns and adjectives as it is at the moment to support this unnatural title. Laurdecltalk 06:17, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Support "Trivial (mathematics)" would be just as confusing. Because of the prevailing encyclopaedic tone, just "Trivial" sounds like the name of a product or company. It is not encyclopaedic to use an adjective in a title when there's a perfectly good noun. —A L T E R C A R I✍ 16:03, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Comment Another reason which I believe the move is appropriate is that the word "trivial" is really not exclusive to mathematics. The word is used in all subjects which stress abstract reasoning, chief among which are philosophy and mathematics. GeT RiGhT (talk) 00:07, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
To many people, "triviality" would be taken to mean "trivialness", and things can be trivial in many fields of experience. Keep the disambiguater. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:08, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Support as proposed. We don't name concepts after adjectives, we name them after the noun (e.g. isomorphism, not isomorphic), so "Trivial (mathematics)" would be wrong. Triviality is the best title, and it is effectively unambiguous, since we have no article for "trivialness", and triviality does not really mean the same as trivia. — Amakuru (talk) 09:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.