Talk:Archimedean solid

message: "semi-regular" should be defined; right now it is not clear what the difference between Johnson and Archimedian solids is. Furthermore, I take it that the platonic solids also count as Archimedian? --Axelboldt
The first graph is wrong it is nt the largest   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.166.157.122 (talk) 18:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I think not being face-uniform just means there are more than one kind of regular polygon used. And I guess that being vertex-uniform means that there is a rotation that can move any one chosen vertex to the place of any other chosen vertex, while also mapping all other verticies to the place of either itself or another vertex. I hope so, because if I guessed wrongly, then my pictures and coordinates probably aren't of Archimedean solids. Ксйп Cyp 20:24, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

text: Hey, that was a reply in less than 2 years... How's that for wiki-fast replies? Ксйп Cyp 23:16, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

text: Suppose to the above comment on rotation, mirroring also counts, since otherwise I can't see how a truncated cuboctahedron or truncated icosidodecahedron would count. Ксйп Cyp 10:13, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)

text: Not quite.  Vertex-transitivity means that the solid has a symmetry group under which any vertex maps to any other.  The congruency of vertex figures follows from this, but not the other way around.  The elongated square gyrobicupola (aka "false rhombicuboctahedron") has a triangle and three squares at each vertex, but the sixteen vertices of its octagonal prism are not in the same symmetry class as the eight vertices of the 'tops' of the cupolae.  —Tamfang (talk) 04:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Jovo [] is a toy that is ideal for constructing Archimedean solids. Can such a link be in the Wikipedia, or is it too commercial? --80.162.63.207 17:01, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Educational toy 

message: NOTE: This text for a new and uncompleted section was removed from article! 
: Edit here as you like and move back when it's done! 
: Tom Ruen 21:43, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope someone who has the percentages will add them here. I was attempting to make the Archimedean article include some of the same things that are in the Platonic article. Unfortunately, removing the list to the discussion page instead of leaving it on the article page means that it will probably languish here, and not get finished, but we'll see. Jimaginator 13:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inscribed Archimedean polyhedra 

message: Hi,
I've just created the following table, and I think the bottom line would look much more logical with blue and yellow exchanged. The trigons and hexagons, which are blue at the moment, correspond to the yellow trigons in the two big files above. The squares (or trigon pairs in the snubs), yellow at the moment, have no corresponding faces in all the files above. They just correspond to the vertices in the two big files. Thus I think, these "new" faces should have the "new" color. Any thoughts? Watchduck (talk) 23:33, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blue and yellow 

message: Could someone add a section on why there are only 13 Archimedean solids please, and explain it well?
Thanks,
please do it asap
Akhi666 (talk) 18:55, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why are there only 13 Archimedean solids? 

message: Just as platonic solids have formulas for generating figurate numbers Figurate_number, are there any formulas for generating numbers of Archimedean solids?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by R3hall (talk • contribs) 05:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Figurate numbers? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Archimedean solid. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050403235101/http://ibiblio.org/e-notes/3Dapp/Convex.htm to http://ibiblio.org/e-notes/3Dapp/Convex.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:56, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Extended Archimedean solid table
What do you think? I think that it helps to show underlying pattern and definitely belongs somewhere, but not necessarily here. Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 03:44, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: [[User:The Nth User/Extended Archimedean solid table]]

message: In the "Classification" data table for the 13 solids, the Volume shown for Snub Cube, 7.889295, is incorrect. The correct value, 7.8894774, is available at various websites. My own calculation with standard precision Excel comes to 7.88947739998, so 7.8894774 is a deceptively nice approximation. The Sphericity value, =(pi*(6V)^2)^(1/3)/A, appears to have been calculated with correct surface area, A, and the incorrect volume listed. Consequently, the Sphericity listed, .9651814, is also incorrect. I have snub cube area as 19.85640646 and sphericity as .96519625.
I am confident of this errata but would prefer one of the primary authors confirm and make the change.
Change Snub Cube volume, was 7.889295, to 7.8894774.
Change Snub Cube sphericity, was .9651814, to .9651963.
JFSather (talk) 19:15, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snub Cube Errata 

message: :
Oh?  Usually the latter are defined as strictly convex polyhedra with regular faces that are not uniform. —Tamfang (talk) 04:45, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnson