Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Order-6 cubic honeycomb

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 Paracompact uniform honeycombs#Regular paracompact honeycombs. (non-admin closure) ObserveOwl (talk) 14:43, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Order-6 cubic honeycomb

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails meet WP:NOTABILITY, neither Google Books nor Google Scholars explicitly describes this honeycomb. Thinking that redirecting it to the Cube, but not so sure for such guideline. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 06:57, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 March 6. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:47, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to one of several possible overview articles. The name "order-6 cubic honeycomb" appears to be non-standard. Searching Google Books and Scholar for "{4, 3, 6}" honeycomb returns substantially more references, though the ones I've followed up on appear to cover the honeycomb as part of Coxeter's list of the 15 regular honeycombs in

\mathbb {H} ^{3}

, rather than as a standalone object of interest. Likewise for the article sources I've been able to look up, which suggests the topic is unlikely to meet our notability criteria. Redirecting to a broader overview article such as List of regular polytopes#Tessellations of hyperbolic 3-space or Paracompact uniform honeycombs#Regular paracompact honeycombs seems appropriate to me. Preimage (talk) 15:08, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Paracompact uniform honeycombs#Regular paracompact honeycombs, where it has a table entry. Basic facts about the honeycomb, such as those listed in the table entry, are verifiable in the literature. I agree that "Order-6 cubic honeycomb" is a nonstandard name, but the article has been around for 11.5 years and has many incoming links; it seems a redirect is a reasonable alternative to deletion. Of the two target sections Preimage found, the second section has a bit more information and the article is more specific, so I would prefer it. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 19:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as above. As one of a small finite set of things of its type (regular hyperbolic honeycombs) I think it's worthwhile having some content on this honeycomb itself, but we lack the sourcing to show it to be independently notable from the others. And much of the additional content on alternated runcicantellated whatever modifications appears to be original research and not worth keeping. —David Eppstein (talk) 09:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.