Deleting outdated/unused pages

William Lai will at
Tue Sep 2 16:15:07 CEST 2008

On Sep 2, 2008, at 6:59 PM, Minh Ha Duong wrote:

>> Brenda and I just deleted 100+ pages in the wiki, most of them  
>> related
>> to the shattered dreams of our own past :/
>> We will continue to do this, everyday until the wiki is mostly  
>> clear of
>>  unused or outdated articles.
>> BTW, is there any reason why we have 100+ categories instead of 10
>> categories with 100+ subcategories?  I have never read a book with  
>> 140
>> chapters.  There are many such cases where, for example, 'Angstrom on
>> 1973' is in the Distribution category, but also in the Angstrom
>> Category.  Then ofcourse, the 'Angstrom on 1973' is the only page  
>> in the
>> Angstrom category.
> Thanks and congratulation !
> To me it looks like we have 10 categories now:

Oh ok.  I was looking at:
How do these differ?  And is there a link that leads users to the  
categories link you provided?  I didn't see one.

> That said, a deep category
> tree is not necessily better than a broad one. Tags, which are quite  
> popular
> these days, form a category tree of depth 1. On the wiki issues  
> page, I
> suggested a facet-based categorization, with top categories and only  
> one
> level of subcategories.

I also believe this is the best way go.

>  I am not sure where Kempelen, who is spearheading the  
> recategorization
> effort, wants to go. I think he is looking for continuity with the  
> existing
> mess and purposely trying to avoid a full rewamp of the category tree.

Well, I've stated my opinion above.
I think it needs to be completely deconstructed and put back together.
To Kempelen: can Brenda or I help in any way?  We work full time :)



More information about the documentation mailing list