Talk:Self-dual polyhedron

This redirect 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

Polyhedra

This redirect 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

Table of polyhedra

What is the table of polyhedra doing here? Most of them are not self-dual. If nobody replies by next time I visit (whenever that may be), I'll delete it. Hope that's OK. Steelpillow 19:28, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The table was meant to be a sort of "control panel" to link to other types of polyhedra. I didn't make it and I accept it is too intrusive (large) and unclear meaning. My judgement is that a cross-reference table like that belongs at the bottom of a page, like a "see also" section of links. Tom Ruen 08:33, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I always forget how to access the templates, but figured it out again: Template:Polyhedron types. I'll start a talk page there. Tom Ruen 13:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is so unrelated to the present topic that I think it should not be on this page at all. Also, it is a bit wrong-headed. There is no absolute class of "dual polyhedra" - duality is a relationship between pairs, not a property of a single figure. So there is no reason to the heading "dual polyhedra" as a subheading for a set of rows - if present at all it should be a separate column, to show the relationships between classes (for example Archimedeans <-> Catalans, or Platonics <-> Platonics). I am really not sure what this table is trying to achieve - but I don't think it has quite managed to. Steelpillow 11:45, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page title and content

Self-dual figure was a bad name for this article, so I have moved it back to its old name for now.

"Figure" is a general term for all kinds of geometrical construction, and there are many kinds of duality. If one wanted to discuss this, then "Self duality" would be a better title. However here we are restricting ourselves to polytopes and related constructions: as it stands the page might be titled "Self-dual polytope".

However I think it more appropriate to move the discussions of individual dimensionalities to sections within their respective discussions on dualitiy generally, such as Dual polyhedron. Likewise any general discussion can move to Dual polytope. There is then nothing left behind and this page can become a redirect.

-- Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 20:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I favor polytope. —Tamfang (talk) 19:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's a redirect now, and Self-dual tessellation as well. Tom Ruen (talk) 19:42, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]