Talk:Tetrahedral hypothesis

Notes on my Rewrite

This page began as a result of my fumblings with Platonic Solids (see the discussion in Tetrahedron in July 2009), in an attempt to understand Holmes's reference. I felt the subject deserved a more sympathetic treatment. I'd appreciate a hand with the references, and maybe the removal therefrom of Qazi, whose work is maybe a bit dodgy and ill-presented. Thanks very much to the fellows who supported my fumblings, without whom I'd never have understood the matter. John Wheater (talk) 10:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to Talk:Tetrahedron#Minimum Volume property? —Tamfang (talk) 00:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Using inline citations

However one was mentioned in the body: (see Nature magazine, June 1920) which I cannot find in the Nature index. It did not give the title of the article (left as an exercise to the next editor?) I will cite the actual article on continental drift unless someone comes up with a 1920 source. W Nowicki (talk) 23:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Steiner and Moreux references

Steiner: read more on link below

I want to explain something that is little spoken of today but which is nevertheless true. You hear it said everywhere, don't you, that the earth is a globe, has formed itself as a globe. Now actually it is not true that the earth is a globe! I will explain to you what the earth really Is. It is only fantasy that the earth is a globe. If we picture the earth's true form as a regular solid, we come to what in science is called a tetrahedron.

Lecture 18-Sep-1924 http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA354/English/RSP1987/19240918p01.html

Moreux: extracts on http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/boe/boe34.htm