m (→‎[[:Category:Energy|Energy]]: changed another link to a cat link)
(27 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
__NOTOC__
__NOTOC__
{| cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" width=100% border=1px
==Links to metatopic subpages==
|-valign="top"
I'm trying to "divide and conquer"
| width=33% |
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Water meta]]
==[[:Category:Water|Water]]<ref>Moderator: Chris! (how is this as a means of capturing moderators?</ref>==
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Food and drink meta]]
Notes for Water section<ref>Should moderators define categories in their areas?</ref><br>
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Health and safety meta]]
'''[[:Category:Greywater|Greywater]]'''
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Culture and community meta]]
:Garden box &bull; Planter box
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/ICT meta]]
'''[[:Category:Pumping|Pumping]]'''
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Energy meta]]
:Hydraulic ram &bull; Solar &bull; Rope &bull; Hand
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Materials and construction meta]]
[[:Category:Rainwater|Rainwater]]<ref>Should we add "snowmelt" to this? Or separate?  Change to precipitation?</ref>
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Transportation meta]]
:[[:Category:Flood control|Flood control]] <small>Swales</small>
*[[User:Curtbeckmann/Metaconcepts meta]]
:Rooftop catchment &bull; Stormwater catchment
'''[[:Category:Sanitation|Sanitation]]'''<ref>I opted to place Wastewater treatment under Sanitation.  Discuss</ref><br>
:[[:Category:Wastewater treatment| Wastewater treatment ]]'''<br>
:<small>Primary &bull; Secondary &bull; Tertiary &bull; Physical &bull; Chemical &bull; Biological &bull; Constructed lagoons &bull; Community scale</small>
'''[[:Category:Water conservation|Water conservation]]'''
:[[:Category:Composting toilets| Composting toilets]]
'''[[:Category:Water delivery|Water delivery]]''' (instead of transport?)
:Water jugs &bull; Aqueducts and plumbing
'''[[:Category:Water purification|Water purification]]'''<br>
:Desalination <small>Solar desalination</small>
:[[:Category:Distillation|Distillation]] <small>[[:Category:Solar distillation|Solar distillation]]</small>
:[[:Category:Filtration|Filtration]] <small>Slow sand filtration</small>
'''[[:Category:Water quality|Water quality]]'''<ref>This seems somehow below purification and sanitation.</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Water storage|Water storage]]'''
:Wells<ref>Are wells really for storage, or supply? If storage, is it still called a "well"?</ref> &bull; Cisterns<ref>How is a Cistern different from a storage tank?  Isn't it just a kind of storage tank?</ref>
:Storage tanks <small>Ferrocement &bull; Plastic &bull; Wood</small>
'''[[:Category:Water supply|Water supply]]'''<ref>Do wells belong here instead of under storage?</ref><br>
:[[Rural water supply]]<ref>Regional categories or articles beneath this</ref>
| width=33% |


==[[:Category:Food and drink| Food and drink]]==
==General notes for topic categorization==
Notes for Food section<ref>"Food and drink" has 126 articles, Food has 5! I choose "Food and drink" for practical reasons! Plus it's also an okay name</ref><br>
#One major thought I've had is that we should separate the categorization issue from the navigation issue.  That might mean that clicking on "Water" on the nav bar might take you to a page that is optimized for navigating water articles.  Similar to looking at Water on Howtopedia.  This would be a departure from creating redirects from article names to the category page of the same name.  Maybe this departure would only be the case for metatopics.  This just feels like thinking out loud at the moment.
'''[[Agriculture]]'''
#Where do the meta topics belong?  Fundamental or Topic?  I argue, both! I'll work on articulating my thinking, but that's my suggestion.  Basically, "Topics" is not the root of a tree, it includes all topic cats.  Fundamental is the root for meta topics.
:Biodynamic farming?
#Policy question: Do meta-topic moderators own (moderate and arbitrate) categorization within their metatopics?  Do subcategory moderators "own" categorization decisions (hierarchy, naming, etc) in their subcategories? I would argue that, following the establishment of some basic policies around this topic categorization, that, yes, the moderators should be the arbiters of the policies.
:Companion planting &bull; Crop rotation &bull; Crop drying &bull; Crop storage
#I would like to identify the primary drivers of topic categorization.  This list is a brief start, not in order.
:Fertilization <small>[[:Category:Composting|Composting]] &bull; Humanure &bull; [[:Category:Vermiculture|Vermiculture]]</small>
#*Article management.  That is, it serves the site administrators in keeping the site clean and effective.  In this regard, topic categorization helps to for navigation, creating of links, assigning moderator boundaries, etc.
:Seed saving &bull; [[Specific crops and climates]] &bull; [[:Category:Uncommon Tropical Crops|Uncommon Tropical Crops]]<ref>existing category, noncompliant capitalization, 3 members</ref>
#*Visitor navigation.  Folks can enter a topic, get redirected to a category, which will point them at a collection of articles.  Should also have some text content that explains what fits into the category, what the main subtopics are, may have a link to Wikipedia, and may have more "see also" type links.
'''[[Agroforestry]]'''<br>
#*In a sense, Topic category pages serve as "disambiguation" pages, since a single topic may be covered by many articles.
'''[[Animal husbandry]]'''
#The above items (when the list is complete) should help us to establish some topic categorization policies.  We have started on a topic category naming policy (now where did I put that?).  I would also like to see a topic category creation policy.  That is, we should create a policy when:
:Animal health &bull; Chicken tractor &bull; Beekeeping &bull; [[:Category:Fish farming|Fish farming]] &bull; [[:Category:Livestock | Livestock]]
#*We have too many articles in a category and we need to break the category into subcategories
'''[[Aquaculture]]'''<br>
#*We have a subcategory that "half-fits" into two parent categories.  Splitting the category would help.
'''[[Composting]]'''
#**Perhaps a similar notion is that an article or subcategory seems to suggest subcategories that don't yet exist.  For example, we have a "solar distillation" subcategory, but no "distillation" or "purification" category.  (Currently the subcat is placed in Cat:Water supply)
:Vermiculture &bull; Pit &bull; Spinning barrel
#***Similarly, we have "Fish farming" and "Livestock" (which includes some articles on beekeeping and fish farming and worm farming (Vermiculture)!), but these are currently directly under Agriculture. Create "Animal husbandry" subcat?)
'''[[Food preserving]]'''<ref>Former name, Preserving and storing food, 5 members</ref><br>
#*We need to split a category for management reasons, i.e. separate moderators (this seems weak, but if a category gets big might make sense)
:Canning &bull; Dehydrating <small>[[:Category:Solar dehydrating|Solar]]</small>
#*We believe that a subcategory will ultimately include numerous how-to or project articles, or other articles, and we want to create an empty or near-empty subcategory in order to create a structure as a launching pad for content creation and promotion.
:Refrigeration &bull; Storing
#**I think this is legitimate and yet should be used sparingly (CurtB)
'''[[:Category:Food preparation|Food preparation]]'''<ref>Food processing category existsTransfer to preparationSubcategory of preparation?</ref><br>
#**If we agree on sparing use, then it would imply that most (all?) of the redlink categories in the table will not be created as category pagesWe could keep the labels of yet-to-be-created subcategories as a text marker of a future category (which might help rationalize the category structure?). Potentially we could put format those titles differently, like italicize or whatever.
:Cooking<ref>Perhaps subcategories are not required?</ref> <small>[[:Category:Cookers|Cookers]] &bull; Ovens &bull; [[:Category:Solar cooking|Solar]]</small>
#**Upon further reflection, it seems like the non-existent subcategories could fall into several buckets:
:Dehydrating &bull; Macrobiotics<ref>Does Macrobiotics belong in nutrition/diet?</ref> &bull; Raw
#***Targeted, meaning we want to get aggressive about building out this category.  Presumably, targeted subcategories come into existence instantly, though they may have few (zero?) articles for a while.  I would think that, depending on the community activity level, we might, at any given time, have 1 targeted subcategory per metatopic.
'''[[Gardening]]'''
#***Desired, meaning that we would appreciate contributions in the space, but are not yet aggressively pursuing these
:Biointensive &bull; Organic &bull; Double digging
#***Anticipated...  But this section seems like a slight.  I guess I don't see a distinction between Anticipated and Desired, unless "Desired" just means "soon to be targeted".  That would suggest a limited number of "desired" subcategories.
'''[[Greenhouses]]'''
#**Anticipated subcategories could be listed on the meta-topic page? I would like to keep track of these proposed / expected subcategories, to support planning and development, without cluttering the topic table prior to their existence.
:Pit &bull; Lean to &bull; Attached &bull; Freestanding &bull; Hoophouses
#I propose using superscripts (footnotes) to identify the moderators / experts for categories.
'''[[Nutrition and diet]]'''
#Policy question: Do we want articles directly within the metatopics?  Or will they always fall into a subcategory?
:100 mile diet &bull; Omnivorism &bull; Vegetarianism
#LARGE AND SEPARATE BUT RELATED QUESTION: what are we going to do to simplify navigation?  I don't think that's what categories are about at this point...  I like the nav approach at howtopedia and WikiGreen.  This topic table was originally meant to somehow make our categories into a useful nav tool, but I'm no longer thinking of it in those terms.  Instead, I now simply view it as a visualization and processing tool that will largely become irrelevant after we roll out the new category structure.
'''[[:Category:Pest control|Pest control]]'''<br>
| width=33% |


==[[:Category:Public health|Public health]] or [[:Category:Health|Health]] or [[Health and safety]]==
==Logistical Roll out thoughts==
Refs for public health section<ref>"Health and safety"?  Where to put various safety items? Under community? Note that "Health" already exists and has 13 members.  Public health exists and has 8 members.</ref><ref>I'm concerned about the value and liability of "treatment" articlesI would suggest a conservative policy in the treatment area, or huge disclaimers. Both, really.<br>
At this point, I'm starting to break down the roll out challengeHere are several semi-random thoughts.
:*I'm not sure how conservative you are thinking, but I'd like to major on the prominent disclaimer and restrict editing as little as possible. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] &middot; <small>[[User talk:Singkong2005|talk]]</small> 03:56, 15 January 2007 (PST)</ref><ref>What to include?  Cysts, bacteria, virus, but not broken bones, sprains, cuts, concussions, malnutrition, exposure, heat stroke, dehydration?<br>
*Create an article page for each meta-topic that includes the relevant table section below, including all the non-existent subcategories, etc.
:*Some are obviously development-related, like malaria... but I wouldn't be inclined to categorize diseases by pathogen type (Cysts, Bacterias, Viruses) - not at this stage, anyway. We're focusing on the technology and practice of treatment on prevention, not on the biology of the pathogen.
*Create a copy of this content (lower in the page?) for hacking purposes.
:*I guess the aim here is to suggest likely topics, rather than define limits? To be honest, I'm actually not sure why we need this table at all, as opposed to just relying on the category structure (which would also save a lot of work, and avoid getting out of date)...  
*For not-yet-existing subcats, see if there are many articles that belong in these subcats (do we need these?), at least for the 2nd tier subcats (directly under the metatopic).  Create the subcats that need creating.
:If we end up having pages on appropriate technology casts for broken limbs, and suitable transport for people in a delicate condition (with broken bones or internal injuries) in rough, poor situations, then we we might think about having a category for those topics. --[[User:Singkong2005|Singkong2005]] &middot; <small>[[User talk:Singkong2005|talk]]</small> 03:56, 15 January 2007 (PST)</ref><ref>Prevention and treatment are called out separately.  What else is there?  Description, diagnosis, prevalence, perhaps?</ref><ref>I dropped specific diseases under "diseases, and implicitly raised "prevention and treatement" within each category to be included with categories as, say, Cysts.</ref><br>
*When that's done, remove all the non-existent empty subcats so that you have created a template.  (Categories that have an existing subcat should be created).
'''[[Disabilities]]'''<br>
*Then start marching toward making the category changes so reality lines up with the template, first for one metatopic, then another.
'''[[Diseases]]'''
*For each page that comes into sync with the template, remove template from the "category vision" page
:[[Cysts]] &bull; [[Bacterias]]<ref>Bacteria is already plural right?  And yet, my gut says adding the "s" is okay</ref> &bull; [[Viruses]]
*Review (all?) articles and try to fit them into the new category structure (newly existing cats and subcats). Consult the "vision page" to figure out new categories for articles that don't fit well into the existing cats.
'''[[Health care by region]]'''<br>
**This raises the question of how we will generally scrub pages for categorizationI guess that's a moderator's cross to bear, but I think it would be good to propose a rough process to help new moderators.
'''[[Health paradigms]]'''<br>
*I would ask that we get consensus at least on the naming of the meta-topics.
:Homeopathy &bull; Aleopathy &bull; Herbalism<ref>I wouldn't be making a fuss if someone added pages on these topics, but are they really part of Appropedia's focus? (Did Chris leave this?)</ref>
*Roll out tentative category policies shortly after wrapping up the changes (or should this come first in order to make the process cleaner? Nah!)
'''[[Human dignity in public health]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Hygiene|Hygiene]]'''<br>
:Hand washing<ref>Moved from Sanitation as agreed with Chris</ref> &bull; [[:Category:Washing|Washing]]<ref>existing category(2)</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Medical storage|Medical storage]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Refrigeration|Refrigeration]]
::<small>Food refrigeration &bull; Vaccine refrigeration</small>
'''[[ORT]]'''<ref>What is this? Is there a better label? Does it fit under something else?</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Pest control|Pest control]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Mosquito control|Mosquito control]]
'''[[Public safety]]'''
:Ambulance &bull; Earthquake preparedness
:Fire response &bull; Tsunami alert
'''[[Sanitation]]'''<ref>How is "wastewater treatment" distinct from Sanitation?  Bigger? Smaller? Same?</ref><br>
:[[:Category:Composting toilet|Composting toilets]]<ref>Need to change the name of the current category name by adding an "S".</ref><ref>IMHO, the subcategories (bucket, double-vaulted) don't add value, can be added laterThis is a recurring theme and needs to be addressed as a policy. Do we create empty or single-article categories and hope they grow?  Meanwhile live with bunches of empty or near-empty categories, which seems annoying and seems to exaggerate gaps.  Alternatively, we are forced to regularly create and expand categories, which has its own set of issues...</ref> <small>Bucket &bull; Double vaulted</small>
:Humanure &bull; [[Pit latrines]]<ref>Merged "improved pit latrines" into </ref> &bull; [[Septic tanks]]
'''[[:Category:Waste management|Waste management]]'''<ref>Is this solid was management, different from, say, wastewater treatment and sanitation?</ref><br>
|-valign="top"
|


==[[:Category:Culture and community|Culture and community]]==
Okay, let me see where that leads!
Notes on "C and C" section<ref>Category:Community exists with 51 members!</ref><ref>Category:Corruption belongs here (1 article) and Poverty (1)</ref><ref>"Culture and development" has 8 articles.  Need to figure out where they fit</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Activism|Activism]]'''<ref>New proposal:Active citizenry? Maybe that's different from Activism?</ref><br>
:Accounting practices &bull; Microfinance
:Sustainable accounting &bull; Triple bottom line
'''[[:Category:Cities|Cities]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Commerce|Commerce]]'''<ref>Economics?</ref><br>
:[[:Category:Banking|Banking]] or [[:Category:Finance|Finance]]<ref>Although I had originally suggested Banking as a category, commerce is a better meta term, and the category exists (1 member).  For example, there are a variety of manufacturing articles that would seem to be supportive of sustainable development; they could fit under commerce along with banking.  Another discussion might be licensing, permits, cap-and-trade, etc.  Not all are applicable to 3rd world</ref><ref>Finance already exists also.  Seems broader than banking, so perhaps drop banking?</ref><br>
::<small>[[:Category:Microfinance|Microfinance]]</small>
'''[[Community organizing]]'''<br>
:[[Building partnerships]]
:[[Collaborative meeting tools]] &bull; [[:Category:Cooperatives|Cooperatives]]
'''[[Decision making techniques]]'''<ref>Do we have techniques and structures reversed?</ref><br>
:Pugh diagrams &bull; Delphi method
'''[[Decision making structures]]'''<br>
:Consensus &bull; Democratic &bull; Hand clasp
:Majority rule &bull; Minority rule &bull; Unanimity
'''[[Effective lobbying]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Environmental justice|Environmental justice]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Gender and development|Gender and development]]'''<br>
:[[Equal rights for women]] &bull; [[Male contraception]]
:[[Separate facilities]]
'''[[Intentional communities]]'''<br>
:Communes &bull; Ecovillages
'''[[Legal systems]]'''<ref>I don't know if this is the top category?  Maybe "Governance"?</ref><br>
:[[:Category:Justice|Justice]] &bull; Rule of law
'''[[Multiculturalism]]'''<br>
'''[[Social artistry]]'''<br>
|
==[[:Category:ICT|ICT]]==
Notes for ICT section<ref>I now prefer ICT as a name, as longs as it's abbreviated.  I've seen it everywhere...</ref><where would satellite go? web connection?Email?<br>
'''[[Computers]]'''<ref>If we have a category for repeaters, seems like computers deserve a slot</ref><br>
:Laptops &bull; Servers
'''[[:Category:Education|Education]]'''<br>
:Curricullum development &bull; Computer based education
:Education paradigms <small>Piaget &bull; Montessori</small>
:International programs &bull; Intereducation
:Service Learning &bull; School construction
:Teaching materials <small>Copyleft materials</small>
:Teacher training
'''[[GIS]]'''<br>
'''[[Networking]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Internet|Internet]]<br>
:<small>Blogs *&bull; Email &bull; Instant messaging</small>
:[[:Category:Wikis|Wikis]]
'''[[Repeaters]]'''<br>
'''[[Short wave radio]]'''<br>
'''[[Software]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Open source|Open source]] &bull; Shareware
'''[[Telephony]]'''<br>
|


==[[:Category:Energy|Energy]]==
Refs for Energy section<ref>there's some inconsistency here. A mix between sources of energy and forms of energy.  Sources may be: human, animal, wind, water, solar, etc.  Forms might be mechanical, thermal, electrical, light, etc.  We have human and wind under electrical, but windmills can be used for, yep, mills, or for pumping, with no electricity involved.  Solution?  A more complete subcategorization by energy form, or by source, or possibly both</ref><ref>"Power and energy" was the former name. 6 members</ref>
'''[[Efficiency]]'''<br>
*[[Energy auditing]]
'''[[Electrical energy]]'''<ref>We have "electricity" as an existing category...what to do?</ref><br>
:[[Batteries]] &bull; [[:Category:Electric lighting|Electric lighting]]<ref>Highlights the categorization problem. Need a "lighting" section</ref> &bull; [[Fuel cells]]<ref>Use the broader term, most are hydrogen anyway</ref>
:[[Grid intertie]] &bull; [[Microcapicitors]]
:[[:Category:Human power|Human power]]<ref>Subcategories may not be needed</ref> <small>[[:Category:Pedal power|Pedal power]]</small>
:[[:Category:Microhydro|Microhydro]] &bull; [[:Category:Photovoltaic|Photovoltaic]]
::<small>Solar pumping &bull; Solar vaccine refrigeration</small>
:Wave power &bull; Wind power
'''[[Heat]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Cooking|Cooking]]<ref>Replaced "cookstoves" (new) and "Cookers" (4) with "Cooking". Inclusive of stoves and ovens, and consistent with policy, existing "Solar cooking" category, "heating" (not heaters) and "refrigeration" (not "refrigerators")</ref> <small>[[:Category:Solar cooking|Solar]]<ref>We have conflicting original category names.  "Cookers" but "Solar cooking" (1)</ref> </small>
:Hydronic radiant heating<ref>This can also be done in the lower part of walls, right?</ref>
:[[Insulation]] <small>[[:Category:Strawbale|Strawbale]] &bull; Fiber board &bull; Fiberglass</small>
:Passive solar design &bull; [[:Category:Refrigeration|Refrigeration]]
:[[:Category:Solar hotwater|Solar hotwater]]<ref>Even if, technically, there are thermal and nonthermal version of solar hotwater, Chris and I agree that "solar thermal" is overly pedantic and not natural.  In any case, choose the larger label that can include both thermal and non-thermal solar hotwater</ref> &bull; Thermal mass &bull; Thermodynamics
'''[[:Category:Fuels|Fuels]]'''<ref>Category:Biofuel already exists...</ref><br>
:[[:Category:Biodiesel|Biodiesel]]<ref>IMHO, these subcategories shouldn't exist for a while...Just bundle the small number of articles under the "Fuel" or "Biofuel" category.</ref> &bull; Biogas &bull; Ethanol &bull; Hydrogen
(Legacy categories)<br>
'''[[:Category:Renewable energy|Renewable energy]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Solar| Solar]]'''<br>
*[[:Category:Parabolic| Parabolic]]
|-valign="top"
|
==[[Materials and construction]]==
'''[[:Category:4Rs|4Rs]]'''<ref>Inconsistent subcategory names...may be okay?</ref><br>
:Reduce &bull [[:Category:Material reuse|Reuse]] &bull; [[:Category:Recycling|Recycling]] &bull; Rethink
'''[[:Category:Alternative building | Alternative building]]''' or '''[[:Category:Construction|Construction]]'''<ref>The category "Construction" also already exists, and presumably the two categories need to be merged.  Given the name of the meta-category, would Construction be the better choice? Yes, IMHO.  Earthquake safety may not just fit under alternative.</ref><br>
:Bamboo &bull; Cordwood &bull; [[:Category:Earthquake safety|Earthquake safety]] &bull; Earthship<ref>Huh?</ref> &bull; Ferrocement &bull; Living roof &bull; Papercrete &bull; [[:Category:Strawbale|Strawbale]] &bull; Tires
:[[:Category:Earthen construction|Earthen construction]]
::<small>[[:Category:Adobe|Adobe]] &bull; Bajareche &bull; [[:Category:Cobb|Cobb]] &bull; Earth bags &bull; Earthen oven &bull; Earthen plaster &bull; [[:Category:Living roof|Living roof]] &bull; Rammed earth &bull; Stone and brick &bull; Wattle and daub</small>
'''[[Alternative materials]]'''<br>
:Bioplastic &bull; Hemp &bull; Lechugilla &bull; Smartwood
'''[[Bioremediation]]'''<ref>This seems more like agriculture</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Composting|Composting]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Vermiculture|Vermiculture]]<ref>Not here? But in ag?</ref>
'''[[Material science]]'''<br>
:Fluid dynamics &bull; Solid dynamics &bull; Solid statics
'''[[Natural capital]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Supplies|Supplies]]'''<ref>I have some trouble with this category being here.  To me, this belongs in User resources.  Reasoning: Supplies are not just materials, but more complex things like computers, switches, pumps, motors, solar panels.  Also, "Services" (well drilling, cement delivery, translation, towing) seem closely related (potentially the same providers in some cases)</ref><br>
'''[[Surveying]]'''<ref>seems related to Land Use...Community?  Transportation with land use in community?</ref><br>
|
==[[:Category:Transportation|Transportation]]==
Notes on Transportation section<ref>Distinguish between human focus and freight?</ref><ref>Lots of oddball possibilities, seems almost like you need some kind of "alternative" category for things like Hovercraft</ref><ref>Where would tractors belong? Here, or agriculture?  Are they a tool?  Where are tools categorized?!?</ref><br>
'''[[Air transport]]'''<br>
'''[[Animal transport]]'''<ref>Is this legitimate?  Seems like?</ref><br>
'''[[Automobiles and Trucks]]'''<br>
:[[Multi-person vehicles]] <small>Buses</small>
:[[Single person vehicles]]'''<ref>Is this skateboards and Segways? Is this meant to include motorcycles /scooters /mopeds?  They carry about 4 people in many parts of the world.  Should we say 2 wheels, 2 axles, multiaxle? These don't seem natural...  Perhaps we need to capture some article titles and see where the potential content takes us.</ref>
'''[[:Category:Bicycling|Bicycling]]'''<ref>Consider "Human powered" section, to include bicycling, skating, rollerblading, skateboarding, skiing, walking etc?</ref><br>
:Bicycle parking  &bull; Bicycle towing
:Critical mass bike rides &bull; Electric bicycles
:Recumbent &bull; Rickshaw
'''[[Fuel]]'''<ref>Do hybrids and plug-in hybrids go here?</ref><br>
'''[[Greenbelts]]'''<br>
'''[[Mass transit]]'''<ref>This was not brought forward.  If it was intentionally dropped, then remove this...</ref><br>
'''[[Rail transport]]'''<br>
*[[Light rail]] &bull; [[Trains]]
'''[[Rideshare]]'''<br>
'''[[Roads and bridges]]'''<ref>Is it fair to merge these?</ref><br>
'''[[Rope and cable transport]]'''<ref>Two tech briefs at Practical Action on Ropeways</ref><br>
'''[[Water-borne transport]]'''
*[[:Category:FerroBoats|Ferrocement boats]]<ref>([[User:Yamaplos|Yamaplos]])</ref>
|
==[[:Category:Metaconcepts|Metaconcepts]]==
'''[[Appropriate technology]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Biomimicry| Biomimicry]]'''<br>
'''[[International development]]'''<br>
:[[:Category:Principals of development|Principals of development]]<ref>1 member</ref>
'''[[:Category:Natural capital| Natural capital]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Permaculture| Permaculture]]'''<br>
'''[[Poverty Reduction]]'''<br>
'''[[:Category:Sustainability|Sustainability]]'''<br>
:[[Sustainable development]]
'''[[:Category:Triple bottom line| Triple bottom line]]'''<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
==Where to put these?==
==Where to put these?==
'''[[Clothing]]'''<ref>This seems similar to shelter in terms of human need.  Buildings are not really essential...The larger term might be shelter, including buildings and clothing.  But what about non-shelter structures like antenna towers and greenhouses, etc?  Okay, so maybe clothing, as protection, belongs in "Health and safety"...along with Laundry...</ref><br>
'''[[Clothing]]'''<ref>Where to put clothing? This seems similar to shelter in terms of human need.  Buildings are not really essential...The larger term might be shelter, including buildings and clothing.  But what about non-shelter structures like antenna towers and greenhouses, etc?  Okay, so maybe clothing, as protection, belongs in "Health and safety"...along with Laundry...</ref><br>
'''[[Land use]]'''<ref>Options like, construction, transportation, community all seem to make sense.  My personal bias is toward community, since it feels like a "city planning" question.  But perhaps Transportation is also :-)</ref><br>
'''[[Land use]]'''<ref>Where to put Land use? Options like, construction, transportation, community all seem to make sense.  My personal bias is toward community, since it feels like a "city planning" question.  But perhaps Transportation is also :-)</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Rant|Rant]]'''<ref>Only 1 member</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Rant|Rant]]'''<ref>Only 1 member in RANT</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Tools|Tools]]'''<ref>existing name is singular</ref><ref>Interesting.  Tools are not an inherent human need, but a means to an end.  Getting more philosophical, all technologies are tools, and so the whole site is about tools, but many tools are highly specialized. So the more general tools fall into the "tool" bucket.  One could argue that Tools is a meta-topic, and that ICT belongs under tools.  If we were to pursue that method (fine by me), then Education might belong under Community. I would also be fine with that.</ref><br>
'''[[:Category:Tools|Tools]]'''<ref>existing category name is singular ("tool")</ref><ref>Interesting.  Tools are not an inherent human need, but a means to an end.  Getting more philosophical, all technologies are tools, and so the whole site is about tools, but many tools are highly specialized. So the more general tools fall into the "tool" bucket.  One could argue that Tools is a meta-topic, and that ICT belongs under tools.  If we were to pursue that method (fine by me), then Education might belong under Community. I would also be fine with that.</ref><br>
:[[:Category:Knots|Knots]]<ref>Currently, Knots is a subcategory of How_to</ref>
:[[:Category:Knots|Knots]]<ref>Currently, Knots is a subcategory of How_to</ref>
|}


==References==
==References==
<references/>
<references/>

Revision as of 14:07, 1 February 2007

Links to metatopic subpages

I'm trying to "divide and conquer"

General notes for topic categorization

  1. One major thought I've had is that we should separate the categorization issue from the navigation issue. That might mean that clicking on "Water" on the nav bar might take you to a page that is optimized for navigating water articles. Similar to looking at Water on Howtopedia. This would be a departure from creating redirects from article names to the category page of the same name. Maybe this departure would only be the case for metatopics. This just feels like thinking out loud at the moment.
  2. Where do the meta topics belong? Fundamental or Topic? I argue, both! I'll work on articulating my thinking, but that's my suggestion. Basically, "Topics" is not the root of a tree, it includes all topic cats. Fundamental is the root for meta topics.
  3. Policy question: Do meta-topic moderators own (moderate and arbitrate) categorization within their metatopics? Do subcategory moderators "own" categorization decisions (hierarchy, naming, etc) in their subcategories? I would argue that, following the establishment of some basic policies around this topic categorization, that, yes, the moderators should be the arbiters of the policies.
  4. I would like to identify the primary drivers of topic categorization. This list is a brief start, not in order.
    • Article management. That is, it serves the site administrators in keeping the site clean and effective. In this regard, topic categorization helps to for navigation, creating of links, assigning moderator boundaries, etc.
    • Visitor navigation. Folks can enter a topic, get redirected to a category, which will point them at a collection of articles. Should also have some text content that explains what fits into the category, what the main subtopics are, may have a link to Wikipedia, and may have more "see also" type links.
    • In a sense, Topic category pages serve as "disambiguation" pages, since a single topic may be covered by many articles.
  5. The above items (when the list is complete) should help us to establish some topic categorization policies. We have started on a topic category naming policy (now where did I put that?). I would also like to see a topic category creation policy. That is, we should create a policy when:
    • We have too many articles in a category and we need to break the category into subcategories
    • We have a subcategory that "half-fits" into two parent categories. Splitting the category would help.
      • Perhaps a similar notion is that an article or subcategory seems to suggest subcategories that don't yet exist. For example, we have a "solar distillation" subcategory, but no "distillation" or "purification" category. (Currently the subcat is placed in Cat:Water supply)
        • Similarly, we have "Fish farming" and "Livestock" (which includes some articles on beekeeping and fish farming and worm farming (Vermiculture)!), but these are currently directly under Agriculture. Create "Animal husbandry" subcat?)
    • We need to split a category for management reasons, i.e. separate moderators (this seems weak, but if a category gets big might make sense)
    • We believe that a subcategory will ultimately include numerous how-to or project articles, or other articles, and we want to create an empty or near-empty subcategory in order to create a structure as a launching pad for content creation and promotion.
      • I think this is legitimate and yet should be used sparingly (CurtB)
      • If we agree on sparing use, then it would imply that most (all?) of the redlink categories in the table will not be created as category pages. We could keep the labels of yet-to-be-created subcategories as a text marker of a future category (which might help rationalize the category structure?). Potentially we could put format those titles differently, like italicize or whatever.
      • Upon further reflection, it seems like the non-existent subcategories could fall into several buckets:
        • Targeted, meaning we want to get aggressive about building out this category. Presumably, targeted subcategories come into existence instantly, though they may have few (zero?) articles for a while. I would think that, depending on the community activity level, we might, at any given time, have 1 targeted subcategory per metatopic.
        • Desired, meaning that we would appreciate contributions in the space, but are not yet aggressively pursuing these
        • Anticipated... But this section seems like a slight. I guess I don't see a distinction between Anticipated and Desired, unless "Desired" just means "soon to be targeted". That would suggest a limited number of "desired" subcategories.
      • Anticipated subcategories could be listed on the meta-topic page? I would like to keep track of these proposed / expected subcategories, to support planning and development, without cluttering the topic table prior to their existence.
  6. I propose using superscripts (footnotes) to identify the moderators / experts for categories.
  7. Policy question: Do we want articles directly within the metatopics? Or will they always fall into a subcategory?
  8. LARGE AND SEPARATE BUT RELATED QUESTION: what are we going to do to simplify navigation? I don't think that's what categories are about at this point... I like the nav approach at howtopedia and WikiGreen. This topic table was originally meant to somehow make our categories into a useful nav tool, but I'm no longer thinking of it in those terms. Instead, I now simply view it as a visualization and processing tool that will largely become irrelevant after we roll out the new category structure.

Logistical Roll out thoughts

At this point, I'm starting to break down the roll out challenge. Here are several semi-random thoughts.

  • Create an article page for each meta-topic that includes the relevant table section below, including all the non-existent subcategories, etc.
  • Create a copy of this content (lower in the page?) for hacking purposes.
  • For not-yet-existing subcats, see if there are many articles that belong in these subcats (do we need these?), at least for the 2nd tier subcats (directly under the metatopic). Create the subcats that need creating.
  • When that's done, remove all the non-existent empty subcats so that you have created a template. (Categories that have an existing subcat should be created).
  • Then start marching toward making the category changes so reality lines up with the template, first for one metatopic, then another.
  • For each page that comes into sync with the template, remove template from the "category vision" page
  • Review (all?) articles and try to fit them into the new category structure (newly existing cats and subcats). Consult the "vision page" to figure out new categories for articles that don't fit well into the existing cats.
    • This raises the question of how we will generally scrub pages for categorization. I guess that's a moderator's cross to bear, but I think it would be good to propose a rough process to help new moderators.
  • I would ask that we get consensus at least on the naming of the meta-topics.
  • Roll out tentative category policies shortly after wrapping up the changes (or should this come first in order to make the process cleaner? Nah!)

Okay, let me see where that leads!

Where to put these?

Clothing[1]
Land use[2]
Rant[3]
Tools[4][5]

Knots[6]

References

  1. Where to put clothing? This seems similar to shelter in terms of human need. Buildings are not really essential...The larger term might be shelter, including buildings and clothing. But what about non-shelter structures like antenna towers and greenhouses, etc? Okay, so maybe clothing, as protection, belongs in "Health and safety"...along with Laundry...
  2. Where to put Land use? Options like, construction, transportation, community all seem to make sense. My personal bias is toward community, since it feels like a "city planning" question. But perhaps Transportation is also :-)
  3. Only 1 member in RANT
  4. existing category name is singular ("tool")
  5. Interesting. Tools are not an inherent human need, but a means to an end. Getting more philosophical, all technologies are tools, and so the whole site is about tools, but many tools are highly specialized. So the more general tools fall into the "tool" bucket. One could argue that Tools is a meta-topic, and that ICT belongs under tools. If we were to pursue that method (fine by me), then Education might belong under Community. I would also be fine with that.
  6. Currently, Knots is a subcategory of How_to
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.