Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compound of six pentagrammic crossed antiprisms


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. The question of whether similar articles should be nominated for deletion can be brought up at future AFD discussions. Liz Read! Talk! 06:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Compound of six pentagrammic crossed antiprisms

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Mathcruft; referencing only one paper and that doesn't seem to discuss any specific antiprism compounds anyway (except for the four-page long table at the end maybe). A web search mostly returns Wikipedia mirrors; no results on Google Scholar at all. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:01, 11 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:48, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:01, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * This one is UC29 at Uniform_polyhedron_compound, which uses the same 1976 reference to catalogue all such compound polyhedra. The article does contain some information that's not in the table at Uniform_polyhedron_compound. I'm open to persuasion that the additional information isn't appropriate for Wikipedia, but until persuaded, I'm going with a weak keep (for some reason, amateur/general interest maths is fascinated by polyhedra). But many of the other polyhedra in the list suffer from the same problem, for example Compound_of_five_small_rhombihexahedra. It might be helpful to extend this AfD to consider the others. Some, like Compound_of_two_tetrahedra contain much more additional information. We should definitely list these things, the question is whether all need individual articles. If we do choose to delete, we should delete a lot of the others too. Elemimele (talk) 10:20, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  11:00, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Question Is there a source for the Cartesian coordinates? I was unable to find one in my poking about, and that is all the information that the article provides beyond what's in the table at Uniform polyhedron compound. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:04, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of independent notability, separately from the list of uniform compounds. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:20, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: this has no notability independent of the broader category to which it belongs. --JBL (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.