Template:Did you know nominations/Bricard octahedron

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by HalfGig talk 12:52, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Bricard octahedron

(

)

animation of a Bricard octahedron

... that a Bricard octahedron (pictured) can change its shape without changing the shapes of its faces? Source: https://books.google.com/books?id=IiG9AwAAQBAJ&pg=PA347 — Theorem 25.3 of the link. For the hook claim in the article, see the Explanation section, and in particular the footnoted sentence "... into a single flexing motion of the whole octahedron."

Reviewed: Where in Europe Is Carmen Sandiego?

Converted from a redirect by David Eppstein (talk). Self-nominated at 08:40, 3 March 2017 (UTC).

I have to brush off my math degree for this one. New enough, long enough. Neutral, accurate, cited, no close paraphrasing/copyvios detected. Quite a good article really. The hook is accurate and short, but it needs to be clearer in the article. A fact should be easily found in the article by a random person coming from the front page. If I needed to reference back to your note, look at the citation, and then look at the page on flexible polyhedra to understand the fact, then it's too obscure in the article. A simple sentence describing what a flexible polyhedra is within this article would go a long way, I think. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 06:10, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Heh, if this one is too technical, you'll want to stay away from my other new DYK nom for Dehn invariant. Anyway, you make a fair point. I added an explanation as the new second sentence of the lead. The reference I chose for it is paywalled but I think the abstract for it that you get from the paywalled view is already enough to verify the sentence. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

@BU Rob13: Hello? This has been ready for re-review for a couple of days. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:47, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

The changes address my concerns. Apologies for the delay, David Eppstein. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 16:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)