I like your idea of pruning tags. It’s giving me some ideas for how to adjust my link mania.
You mentioned your tags are mostly to abstract concepts. What about your links? Could you give a specific example, contrasting with “perception” or “happiness” tags?
I’m trying to think how this could apply to the history and news OP.
One thing I have in mind is links (to notes, or empty links) should be a question I want to answer, or later a question I think I’ve mostly answered. The link should resemble text I could type into Google or to a source that is readily interpretable. E.g. to use a recent event:
- How big was the explosion in Beruit, absolutely and comparatively?
- What is the impact of the Beirut port explosion on the local economy?
- Is it normal to store explosive materials in a port?
A link to this “idea or question” note would be empty to start, but I’d gradually add transcluded links for reference notes and maybe my own text there. As I answer a question note to my satisfaction, I may adjust the title from a question to a statement. Reference notes can be inputs into multiple idea notes, and small idea notes (e.g. those above) can be inputs into varying large idea notes that are closer to proper reports, e.g.:
- How does the port of Beruit explosion compare with the one in Tianjin China, in both circumstances and impact?
Whereas the tags would be far vaguer - probably not much use on their own, but they help me find obscure notes in the future. E.g.
- Beruit
- Hazardous materials shipping
- Man made disasters
I’ll keep experimenting and see what works - this discussion is very useful for my thinking.