Thank you for your comments. I think different people experience things in different ways, based on who they are. What their background, training, experience are. One person's precision is another's pedantry.
An aside. Babbage and Tennyson: https://www.uh.edu/engines/epi879.htm
in a section called "The standard type hierarchy", this reads to me as referring to a type, informally named as "None".
When I read the same text, I don't see an informal name. I see a false statement. By the way, here's why I see a false statement:
type(int), type(dict), type(str)
(<class 'type'>, <class 'type'>, <class 'type'>)
(<class 'NoneType'>, <class 'type'>)
My (pure mathematics research) background leads me to dislike precise statements that are not true. That's the way I am. Rhodri James doesn't like sentences that begin with 'But'.
An aside. Reading further in https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html, I see three times "This type has a single value." The informal names are None, NotImplemented and Ellipsis. And there are only two Booleans.
I'd like to take this to bugs.python.org, if only to provide another route to discovering this (very useful) conversation. Perhaps one day, we'll have here harmony between informality and precision. Perhaps every popular computer language has this as a goal.