Talk:Regular skew polyhedron

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Uniform Polytopes (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Uniform Polytopes, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Uniform PolytopesWikipedia:WikiProject Uniform PolytopesTemplate:WikiProject Uniform PolytopesUniform Polytopes

Polyhedra

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polyhedra, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of polygons, polyhedra, and other polytopes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolyhedraWikipedia:WikiProject PolyhedraTemplate:WikiProject PolyhedraPolyhedra
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Problem with missing definition

This article has at least one extremely serious problem: It never defines what a regular skew polyhedron is.

For instance, one picture caption reads as follows:

"A ring of 60 triangles make a regular skew polyhedron within a subset of faces of a 600-cell."

But if we don't know exactly what the term "regular skew polyhedron" means, how can we tell if this "ring of 60 triangles" actually forms one?

(Also: There is a problem with grammar: The subject (ring) and verb (make) are mismatched in number.)50.205.142.50 (talk) 17:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A regular polyhedron (skew or not) is edge-transitive. The structure shown in the recently-deleted image is not. Proof: some of its edges must be common to at least three tetrahedra (otherwise you can't build anything bigger than a bipyramid) and some of them have only two (as seen from the image). Ok, this proof is WP:NOR, but it trumps an unreferenced claim. Maproom (talk) 20:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Holes

The article uses the term "hole" but never defines it. I would add a wikilink; but as far as I can tell, this sense of "hole" is not defined anywhere in Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 07:43, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A definition for hole can be found in McMullen. The polytope wiki has an article on them as well. I don't think that this is defined or used anywhere else on Wikipedia. Maybe a definition should be reproduced on this page. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 15:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]