Thank you for taking your time to do a review! The prescriptive tone ("you should") on datatypes page doesn't really match the intent of the reference documentation (i.e. to inform), I agree.

Even if 50 vs 6-8 contrast sounds off-putting and overly sensationalist, it doesn't mean that language is more complex than its mainstream cousins. For example:

  ping @techdragon from http://www.rebol.com/docs/shell.html thread via hacker-news@techdragon.io
  today at 20:23:17 UTC
  say: your HN account was created on 11-February-2013 and has 1455 karma points 

Is a Red code (or rather data) containing 8 examples of unique datatypes (@reference, URL, e-mail, date and time, integer and flavors of symbols). One can even write a DSL that would understand it and send you a mail over SMTP or something.

I'd rather say "datatypes belong to 3-4 separate classes, each with a distinct yet simple semantics", and that "the set of their literal forms is diverse enough to count half a hundred exemplars; that makes the language simple, and the code written in it expressive". And then maybe build-up a motivation to study these classes ("to use Red effectively"), outline the studying path to take ("become familiar").

I don't follow Rust closely, is there any summary/takeaway of its history with documentation and community's lessons that I can read?