Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decagonal trapezohedron


 * 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 redirect to Trapezohedron. Liz Read! Talk! 02:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Decagonal trapezohedron

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

Trivial content, nothing new compared to the general trapezohedron article (which for some reason is not even linked in the lead). No significant coverage of this special instance of the class of polyhedra online I can find either. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to trapezohedron. Trapezohedra are notable, and the trigonal and pentagonal trapezohedron (because of its use as D10 dice) may also be. Beyond that there is little to distinguish them from each other, little basis for independent notability, and none demonstrated in this article in particular. But redirects are cheap. WP:BLAR could reasonably have been attempted, but now that we've started a full discussion I suppose we should continue it and settle the matter more definitively. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect. There is no information in the article that is not of the form "here is a general rule about a certain class of polyhedra, instantiated at a particular number of sides". This is reflected in the sources in the article, which do not have anything content that suggests that 20 faces is special, and (after doing a very small amount of searching) I see no reason to believe better sources exist. --JBL (talk) 20:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Probably redirect, but can one of our mathematician friends look at this paper (arxiv preprint) before this finally closes? The figure is talked about in the paper, but I don't think it is significant.  The only other thing I found that was not just a name on a list of solid shapes was this book, but again I don't know if that can add anything to the article. The book is looking at structure of molecules, but as far as I can see, this is not one of the structures they have identified as corresponding to a fullerene (or any other molecule). SpinningSpark 23:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That application (a difficult example for hexahedral meshing) is the main reason for notability for the tetragonal trapezohedron. But I don't think there's any depth of coverage to its treatment of the decagonal trapezohedron. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree -- that is a trivial mention in the sense of WP:SIGCOV. --JBL (talk) 23:50, 31 December 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.