Thanks for your contributions to Bowers acronym. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources.
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Zoglophie was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bowers acronym and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, IcosaMarty343!
Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! zoglophie•talk•14:57, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Asilvering was:
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dyakis dodecahedron and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
What the article needs is basically any source that isn't editable by anyone (like wikipedia) that actually says that that is a Dyakis Dodecahedron. Anything else can be handled.Naraht (talk) 14:18, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please read Wikipedia:No original research. Wikipedia is *not* for things which are original research. Wikipedia does have articles on many types of Polyhedra see Category:Polyhedra and what they all have in common is that they were published somewhere first. Among the standard examples is Coxeter's Regular Polytopes. References in Wikipedia are to published works.Naraht (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have finally added some sources (I haven't added a lot of sources because I can't find a lot of sources), but I'm wondering, are they enough for my draft to reach articlehood, or do I need to find more? Also I used info from Wikisource as a reference as I could not find the primary reference and can only settle with a secondary one. IcosaMarty343 (talk) 18:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikisource is not a source, the source is what is indicated there. In general Primary sources would be something like including an interview with Bill Clinton on an article about him. And Primary sources are discouraged. What is needed are Secondary and Tertiary sources. and the one from Encyclopedia Britanica is Tertiary. Adding some of the other sources that I wrote on the talk page would be good. Let me take a look at what it looks like now.Naraht (talk) 20:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody has challenged it, and a few alternations that have been made that treat it like a normal article. Only thing I wonder is whether the values of the angles of the faces are known. Naraht (talk) 20:25, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Deltoidal icositetrahedron. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 22:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WikiOriginal-9 was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Dyakis dodecahedron and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
There appears to be even more in books.google.com searching on "Dyakis Dodecahedron" including what *might* be enough information to tie it to specific Pyrites.
As another note, while most of the sources are prior to 1930, this strikes me as a field that doesn't change that often, it isn't like pulling a 1915 book on the mental capacity of different races. I am curious as to why there aren't more recent books on it, is another term used in Crystallography now? Naraht (talk) 00:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
Naraht (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm having trouble picturing this polyhedron. And while I don't think there is anything written that an article on a polyhedron means that its dual is also worthy of an article, we should at least take a look.Naraht (talk) 15:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do the squares turn into, Rhombi? (actually looking at it, since there are three different types of vertex in the Dyakis Dodecahedron (at the corner of the Octahedron, on the edge of the Octahedron and in the middle of the Octahedron face, there would be three different faces in the dual. (I do own a copy of Regular Polytopes. :) )Naraht (talk) 21:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The squares that correspond to the vertices of the octahedron will become rectangles, and the other 12 squares that correspond to the edges will become trapezoids. They will then join one short edge of a rectangle to a long edge, as the rectangles will be arranged in the same way as the axial edges of the pyritohedron. IcosaMarty343 (talk) 16:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have an image? I can picture the rectangles and the triangles, but not in between. (which I guess would have modified icosahedral symmetry?)Naraht (talk) 17:36, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diploid (disambiguation) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.
Hello, GeometricExplorer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bowers acronym, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thanks for your contributions to Bowers style acronym. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability and This is a WP:IAR return to Draft because the alternative is WP:AFD. We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today..
I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Timtrent was:
This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.
If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bowers style acronym and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
Hello, GeometricExplorer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bowers style acronym, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
Please do not introduce links in actual articles to draft articles, as you did to Deltoidal icositetrahedron. Since a draft is not yet ready for the main article space, it is not in shape for ordinary readers, and links from articles should not go to a draft. Such links are contrary to the Manual of Style. These links have been removed. Thank you. - Arjayay (talk) 22:46, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
.png)
Hello, GeometricExplorer. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Bowers acronym, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.
