This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polyhedra, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of polygons, polyhedra, and other polytopes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolyhedraWikipedia:WikiProject PolyhedraTemplate:WikiProject PolyhedraPolyhedra articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
I added the cleanup tag because this article needs more work. I like the examples added at the end, but they should be cleaned up, and data tables (pasted from elsewhere) removed as redundant and messy.
Please remove the cleanup tag. I see no point for it. Please note that "because this article needs more work." is not a good reason -- 99.8% of all articles on WP need more work. linas04:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)Reply
User:peterd1911:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
The statement
"The group contains 5 versions of Th with 20 versions of D3 (10 axes, 2 per axis), and 6 versions of D5"
is erroneous and should be corrected to
"The group contains 5 versions of Th with 30 versions of D3 (10 axes, 3 per axis), and 30 versions of D5 (6 axes, 5 per axis)"Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
In subgroups/polyhedron stabilisers, the article seems to claim that there is a subgroup of I isomorphic to O. As I understand it, I has order 60 and O has order 24, which would contradict Lagrange's theorem. Surely this can't be right? --81.96.219.197 (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
This article starts directly in mathematical language. For instance, the word "symmetry" is used with no link or explanation.
I think that it is in order to begin with a paragraph that introduces the subject in common terms (known to people who haven't taken university courses in the subject). Thereafter, any technical term should be explained and/or linked to an explanatory article.
I'm not sure what to like "symmetry" to however. The main (math) article is much too general. I haven't found a simple explanation is what is meant by a geometric symmety in Wikipedia yet... Am I missing this?
@100.36.106.199: For a start, the lead should include the subject of the article and describe it (e.g., "Icosahedral symmetry is ..."), instead of jumping into an explanation about sets of symmetries and orders. Per WP:LEAD, "[t]he lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents." When I read this lead, I do not learn what icosahedral symmetry is and I don't get a summary of the article; it is presenting specific points about symmetries, some of which appear to be in the body and some that don't. They may make more sense in the lead if there were a proper introduction to the topic. —Ost (talk) 16:49, 30 November 2022 (UTC)Reply
@JayBeeEll: Yes, I think that is a good improvement that introduces the subject. There is likely an opportunity to further expand the lead to summarize more of the page, but your edit addresses my major concern. Thank you for the help. —Ost (talk) 17:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)Reply