Get our free book on rainwater now - To Catch the Rain.

Appropedia talk:CategoryTree

From Appropedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Hey, all:

I was searching for what I assumed would be named 'classification system' or 'organizational outline' in order to understand the arrangement of Appropedia's information. Call me 'thick-headed' but "All categories" doesn't express the idea very well. I suggest one of the names I had assumed it was, or other expression. "All categories" does not imply classification or outline, but a simple list.

In any case, I now can see better how things are organized.

David Messages done with sustainable energy, with Wind and Sun! 21:27 9 Aug 2008

Hi David,
I changed it to just Categories. I think that this is a little less confusing. Please let me know if you thing that Categorization would be clearer. Whatever we pick, it must fit in the space provided. Community portal is about as long as we can go.
Thanks, --Lonny 02:52, 10 August 2008 (PDT)


  • Move this page to the top of Areas menu.
  • Include all the elements of Areas, even if you have more than those.
  • Maybe include an Engineering page, for things that might not fit quite well in the other categories.
  • An index list with description of the current page and the descriptions of each element of the list might be better than "selected page", "selected topics" "highlighted project" (You can still have those highlighted in the list, somehow, like being a different color, or something).
  • Use colors easier on the eyes (especially shades of bright grey green, like #C5D5C7, #B2D6B7, #E1F0DE, #C9EEC3), and maybe also not using borders for the tables.
  • Mobile compatible, without using the mobile view (which removes things like the menu with Project Page, Discussion, Read, Edit, Add Topic, View History).
  • Better indexing might be needed (in case there are pages not easy to find, or not linked internally. Those could be easy to find by sorting the pages by the least amount of internal links pointing to them to the most amount of internal links pointing to them).
  • Maybe simplify your logo, to be easier to recognize and be more iconic (it looks like a logo from the early 2000s, at most 2010).
  • A good example for a wiki is this one. Clear categories, subcategories, well indexed, colors easy on the eyes, easy to read text, descriptive images for categories, great lists with not-too-big images (including if you click "Tools", for example_, clearly defined category lists (like the tables in the Tools page), the description linking to adjacent/related categories, and the bottom of the page shows the category and subcategories the page is listed under. The downside is that the whole wiki might need a major revamp, with the upside being a much easier time finding things and much better organization of the content.

- Sapioit