Talk:Great disnub dirhombidodecahedron

Does anyone else see the summary table (the one that exists for most polytopes on Wikipedia) cover up much of the text, or is that just my computor? Kevin Lamoreau (talk) 04:09, 30 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Looks fine for me - Using IE7. Tom Ruen (talk) 19:24, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Fine even on IE6. 4 T C 08:14, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't get it -- what on Earth is the article talking about? --116.14.72.74 (talk) 02:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This is a stub (I think it should be). It fails to explain thoroughly what the great disnub dodo—I can't even pronounce the last part, much less what's so special about this weird spikeball thing is! Teach me like I'm four! —The Doctahedron, 68.173.113.106 (talk) 23:24, 24 November 2011 (UTC)


 * See uniform polyhedron and Nonconvex_uniform_polyhedron for more examples. This is certainly the most complex one! Tom Ruen (talk) 04:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Polyhedral or not polyhedral, that is the question
Um...is this a polyhedron? Given that edges coincide, four faces meet at an edge... 4 T C 04:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's all confusing, but it is a topological polyhedron (two faces per edge), and pairs of edges coinciding in geometry. Tom Ruen (talk) 08:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup (2011-11-24)
I added the emergency cleanup tag, because I don't understand anything in it, other than that it is (and isn't) a uniform polyhedron. There is also a severe lack of organization, and there is at least one red link (John Skilling's wiki page does not exist). It doesn't even have a Priority or Class rating!!

Suggestions

 * Do some research on this solid, then bringing it back here so that it can be added to the article.
 * Copy and paste the text of this article into a word processing document and play around with the text. Maybe one paragraph should be moved to a different section? Maybe a section should be expanded, spliced, merged with another, or deleted entirely? Submit your drafts below my signature, and lead it with a level-3 heading entitled "Draft by (your username)". If you have a comment for a particular draft, place it directly below that draft, indent it using colon syntax, and sign it by using four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ).

If you have any other suggestions as to how to improve this or any other article related to 3-D geometry, submit it at the bottom of my talk page with your signature.

Thanks for contributing,

The Doctahedron, 68.173.113.106 (talk) 23:46, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

I've already got three (3) questions about this article:


 * 1) What is the core of this solid?
 * 2) * The core is a disdyakis triacontahedron with slightly squashed pyramids. This polyhedron is the dual of a distorted grid with regular decagons, stretched rectangles instead of squares and semiregular hexagons with two alternating edge lengths. This distorted grid looks like the convex hull of idtid. Double sharp (talk) 10:48, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 3) What is the etymology of its name?
 * 4) How is it constructed?
 * 5) * Blend a great dirhombicosidodecahedron with a compound of twenty octahedra. Double sharp (talk) 06:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Please answer them if possible!

Thanks,

The Doctahedron, 68.173.113.106 (talk) 18:39, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Merger
I would like to thank whoever it was for merging that article (the dual polyhedron) into this one. However, I don't think it has helped improve the quality of this article. In fact, the second infobox might be unnecessary and just take up space there. Any suggestions as to how to rectify this situation?

Thanks,

The Doctahedron, 00:01, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I removed the dual table, retained just an image, since nothing new in the table. The image is duplicated from the main stat table, but still seems helpful as a visual marker for what's being talked about.

Euler Characteristic
I would like to see a bit more clarity about how the value of the Euler Characteristic is calculated. From what I understand, chi = F + V - E The sidebar summary says that this figure has 204 faces, 60 vertices, and 240 edges. So as I do the arithmetic, this gives chi = 24, yet the sidebar says 32. If the 4-face edges are double-counted, then the article says that the figure would have 360 edges (instead of 240). This change -- according to the article -- makes chi = -88. Yet when I do the arithmetic according to Euler's formula, I get -96. In both cases there is a discrepancy of 8.

I have tried to find other sources that would independently verify these figures, but they all seem to just quote this article.

Is there an error, or am I missing something here? (I admit that I am not an expert in this field!!)Phantor48 (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is an error, which seems to have gone unnoticed for a long time. I'll fix it. Double sharp (talk) 05:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thank you, Phantor48! Double sharp (talk) 05:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

You're very welcome!! And while I have your attention, do you know what the density of this figure is? I have not been able to find a value anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phantor48 (talk • contribs) 19:08, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The density is not defined for polytopes with elements passing through the centre, like this one. Double sharp (talk) 02:38, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you.Phantor48 (talk) 03:41, 4 March 2016 (UTC)