Talk:Vertex-transitive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mathematics Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, which collaborates on articles related to mathematics.
Mathematics rating:	Stub Class	Low Priority	Field: Geometry
Please update this rating as the article progresses, or if the rating is inaccurate. Click to show/hide comments. Please add to or update the comments to suggest improvements to the article. Close to start. Needs more structure and explanation. Geometry guy 20:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Poll to move contents from vertex-uniform

Vertex-transitive is a standard term for polytopes. Vertex-uniform was an incorrect term from uniform polytopes which are are vertex-transitive.

• Yes - Tom Ruen 22:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Yes and no. I would prefer to move it to Isogonal because it's shorter and has been around longer, and redirect from Vertex-transitive. Steelpillow 13:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm... no other opinions offered. Isogonal isn't as clear to me. I have to vote for clarity over compactness. I suppose it means "equal angles". A concave polygon can have equal angles and not be vertex-transitive. Tom Ruen 05:38, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

+---+
|   |
|   +--+
|      |
+------+

That figure has five interior angles of 90 deg and one of 270 deg. Those are not all equal!

Isogonal does also imply that the vertices are transitive, i.e. they lie within the same symmetry orbit, something like this:

     o---o
    /     \
   /       \
  /         \
 o           o
  \         /
   o-------o

'Isogonal' is the longest-established of the alternative synonyms we are discussing, and its meaning is beyond question. But OK, I can accept the main heading as the clearer one, with other pages reditrecting to it. Let's go with vertex-transitive. Steelpillow 18:30, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Whoa! Just found that Vertex-transitive is a disambiguation page. We can't call ours that. 'Vertex-transitive polyhedron or tiling' is a bit of a mouthful. Best ideas, anyone? Steelpillow 19:12, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

What I'd propose is:

1. Take over Vertex-transitive
2. Add two sections, one for graphs, one for polytopes
3. Put the graph one first with a short summary and a "For more information see: Vertex-transitive graph.
4. Then move this content there. If the polytope content got large enough, a Vertex-transitive polytope article could be created with more detail, and return Vertex-transitive to a short version.

Tom Ruen 21:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Hopefuly a fair job, I moved them all, and relinked to new names. Tom Ruen 02:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)