Talk:Heptagram

See also?

Why does this page have a see also to Week? The two subjects don't seem connected on any level other than dealing with groups of seven, and we don't have a link to the seven dwarfs either. Vashti 07:53, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I took it out. --Abdull 17:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Obtuse/acute heptagram?

I have never heard of these terms. They are misleading, as there are no obtuse angles in the "obtuse" one. Google of "Obtuse heptagram" returns this WP article and ones like http://hpathy.co.uk/Seven.html, http://www.crystalinks.com/numerology3.html, etc - hardly authoratitive. Got a better reference? Otherwise we should refer to these labels as non-mathematical. Andrew Kepert 07:40, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Should we perhaps refer to them as "narrow" and "broad" heptegrams? I think we need to come up with some way to distinguish between the two.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 14:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no loyalty to the terms, not seen them any where else. Whatever name is used, best to me to use the Schläfli symbols {7/2}, {7/3} with them. Tom Ruen 15:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I changed them in the article to first and second. I see better terms, more verbose might be "first stellation", "second Stellation", at least by a stellation process of extending facets of a regular polytope. The terminology is used for polyhedra, like Magnus_Wenninger#Stellations_of_dodecahedron. Tom Ruen 15:21, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I like the term "nth Stellation", and Stellation contains sufficient (if untidy) mathematical explanation for the interested reader to save it being explained here (e.g. what the Schlafli symbol means in this restricted case). So I would use these terms in the bullet list.

Oh yes, and s/authoratitive/authoritative/ above. 8-P

Andrew Kepert 08:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)