Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compound of three square 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 23:50, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Compound of three square antiprisms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
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 23:54, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:54, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Wikipedia contains articles about many geometric schemata but not of everyone, for the simple reason that not everyone is noteworthy enough to merit an independent article. All these "articles" should be bundled off to Uniform polyhedron compound. What in Gauss Princeps has caused this wave of mathcruft is anyone's guess. -The Gnome (talk) 15:34, 15 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.