Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heptagonal tiling honeycomb

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Heptagonal tiling honeycomb}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Heptagonal tiling honeycomb}})

Subject is a random hyper-compact tessellation. Nothing to establish notability. Of the sources in the article the only one that mentions this particular hyperbolic tessellation is the Nelson & Segerman preprint, which uses it as an example.

I could not find any coverage on this particular tessellation in specific anywhere (Google scholar and JSTOR come up with zero results, TWL has nothing useful). I really suspect the title for this article is WP:NEO which does confound the search a little bit.

It would be shocking if this was notable, since the article fails to provide anything other than a generic description. Pretty much everything here could be said about any hyper-compact hyperbolic tessellation, with only the specific numbers changed. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 03:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

:Comment. There are many polytope articles we could do without, such as truncations (and cantellations and runcinations ...) of polytopes of dimension 5 and higher. —Tamfang (talk) 06:57, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

:: I unfortunately do not have the time to devote to a campaign of sorting through these and determining which are supported by the given sources, salvaging what can be salvaged, and nominating what cannot. I just take a look at one page every so often. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 15:29, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

:::{{small|Nor do I expect anyone to. —Tamfang (talk) 03:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)}}

• Comment There's a little more to go on than with most polytope/tessellation cruft. I'd consider [https://blogs.ams.org/visualinsight/2014/08/01/733-honeycomb/ {7,3,3} Honeycomb] and [https://blogs.ams.org/visualinsight/2014/08/14/733-honeycomb-meets-plane-at-infinity/ {7,3,3} Honeycomb Meets Plane at Infinity] to be reliable sources; they're written by John C. Baez and hosted by the American Mathematical Society. Two items by the same author generally count for less when evaluating wiki-notability, however, than two items by different authors. So far, I haven't found enough to warrant a whole page on the {7,3,3} honeycomb, but there's a decent case for mentioning it in a related article and redirecting there. XOR'easter (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

:

:

• Weak delete. I don't think the two Baez extlinks are enough for individual notability (separate from the general concept of a tiling of this nature) and those are the only sources that single it out. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:08, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Leaning redirect to the article heptagonal tiling. This is the only thing I could think of. I would say many misused infoboxes are manually converted to the table, and the exhibitions. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 00:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.