I disagree with the last statement, see great disnub dirhombidodecahedron.
Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 03:09, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
- The great disnub dirhombidodecahedron exception might be worth expressing, but doesn't negate the definition. You might equally call this
a polygon (decagon) with 4 facets/ridges (edges/vertices). To do that you have to imagine double vertices, so there's actually 10 topological vertices, overlapping into 5 geometric positions. Then the topology is still a valid 2 facets/ridge. Tom Ruen (talk) 03:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
