Talk:Exceptional object

message: :It's not clear from the [snark] page that snarks are indeed exceptional objects as described here.  Perhaps more explanation is needed? 130.102.158.15 (talk) 00:37, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree that snarks do not quite fit the article.  I just put a citation-needed tag on the snark section, but given that the parent comment was made four years ago, I'll just be bold and move snarks to the 'see also' section. –Jérôme (talk) 18:58, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just moved snarks to the 'see also' section.  I couldn't find references linking them to the other exceptional structures, and please also note that snarks are not related to sporadic groups / exceptional Lie groups, as do all other cases. –Jérôme (talk) 19:03, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed snarks completely, because after researching a little bit more they do not represent anything exceptional (in the sense of the article) at all.   –Jérôme (talk) 19:16, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snarks: are they exceptional? 

message: 24 also appears in the recently-discovered finite algebraic formula for the partition numbers. 
I don't actually understand the subject, so I'll refrain from adding it in, but the formula is related to modular forms and the Dedekind eta function (and is rather important, I'm told) so it probably can be added to the 'connections' section. 
Anyone know more about the topic?
Vladimirdx (talk) 06:52, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ken Ono's partition formula 

message: In the mind map, F4 is shown as "26-dimensional". The fundamental irreducible representation is 26-dimensional, but F4 itself is a 52-dimensional algebra.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:1205:C694:F520:36F3:9AFF:FE64:286E (talk) 22:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open Issues 

message: This is very interesting material that does not waste much time with generally accessible discussion before launching into expertspace. That's OK in isolation, but I haven't been able to identify an elementary article that covers much of the lower-hanging fruit there is that interests generalists.
I identified an article whose basic structure seems to me that it could provide the scaffolding:
:Matthias Goerner, 2017. A census of hyperbolic Platonic manifolds and augmented knotted trivalent graphs. New York Journal of Mathematics 23:527–553.
In case editors familiar with this article are unfamiliar with precedents around other mathematical topics, we have a gaggle of articles around Boolean algebra that fulfil the encyclopedic needs of classes of reader with quite different background. I'm hoping we can do something a bit like that here, and I wonder if Platonic manifold might be a good hook on which to hang such a more accessible article? — Charles Stewart (talk) 11:35, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "Platonic manifold" would have to meet the wiki-notability standard to qualify for an article unto itself. It seems a bit too niche for that, but I could be mistaken. You could always try gathering a few more references and starting an article in draft space. On the whole, it seems difficult to write a generalists' introduction to the topic of "exceptional objects", since it concerns relations between multiple types of thing, all of which require considerable background to understand. XOR'easter (talk) 03:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Platonic manifold