Talk:Index of sustainability articles

EXPLANATION OF THIS PAGE
Wikipedia Projects, listed on the Community Portal has appealed for compilation of a ‘’list of basic topics’’ (see wikiproject. Here there is the following box and statements:

Wikipedia's goal is to provide knowledge. But knowledge is only useful if you can find it. The main limitation of a search box is that it can only help you find what you already know exists. Our mission is to show what exists and provide easy access to that knowledge.The system is far from complete. So keep in mind that recruiting more people to join this effort is currently as important as the effort itself. If you know anyone who loves Wikipedia, please tell them about the importance of this project!

There is only one featured list candidate given as an example: Featured list candidates/List of basic geography topics

On that page is the following template:

This template is useful because it presents a compilation of topics in alphabetical order. There is no rule to make you click on one of the letters of the alphabet. Small lists to do with the topic can be accessed in all sorts of other ways. Many people would prefer small digestible lists and for quick and simple reading this is clearly desirable. However, comprehensive (or, say, much more extensive lists) have many advantages as an extended contents list for the topic, not least of which is that they constitute a fabulous research tool.

. it overcomes searching endlessly using the search box

. it means that similar topics can be compared

. it greatly aids checking for duplication of similar topics so that articles can then be merged and/or deleted.

. it allows a quick assessment of weak areas that need to be developed.

There are probably many more advantages. In other words, short lists and long lists both have their place and with a massive computer we can have the best of both worlds.

The Wikiproject page suggests the following for formatting these long lists: Most of the lists are presented in single-column, and this makes the pages long. These should be converted to a multi-column format, as has been done in List of basic geography topics, or as dash-separated lists, as has been done for some of the lists, or a combination of both, or some other scheme that looks good and is easy to use (see basic concepts section of List of basic painting topics).

The list on this page is the very beginning of a list of topics akin to the basic list of geography topics. At present (July 2008) it is little more than an extension of articles that are listed elsewhere in Wikipedia under categories and subcategories (see category:sustainability). However, this is just a small tip of the iceberg of knowledge available in Wikipedia on this topic. I shall develop this list here and hope that at a later date I shall be permitted to put it under a template like the Geography one above. Granitethighs (talk) 05:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not understanding the usefulness of alphabetical lists. If someone knows the letter that their topic starts with, they most likely will search for it. Topical lists centered around a category seem much more user-friendly. Perhaps you can explain how alphabetical lists present an advantage? II  | (t - c) 02:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

List length reply
I feel that lists on WP should be of one page length only. Having 26-27 pages listing topics in each alphanumerical division is unwildly and means that users must click through to each page and wait for it to load. A better way is by having tighter boundaries on what topics are included. For instance List of sustainability topics can have related pages of List of renewable energy topics, List of sustainable development topics, List of sustainable living topics etc. Some overlap may occur but it keep the lists to a nicely palatable length. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Contents and alphabetical list template reply
The template illustrated above and the one on Lists of environmental topics are for cases where there are WP categories that are alphanumerical lists. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 02:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Three levels of inclusiveness
I like the availability of three levels of inclusiveness which we have for Wikipedia's vital articles. We can follow a similar pattern for the collections of topics discussed here. I, for one, can benefit from all three levels of inclusiveness at various times.
 * Vital 100
 * Vital articles
 * Vital articles/Expanded
 * -- Wavelength (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I said "similar pattern" in regard to there being three levels but not in regard to the number of pages. Each of the three lists of vital articles is on one page, but there can be advantages in a list of sustainability topics being large enough to require 27 pages, as Granitethighs explained above.
 * -- Wavelength (talk) 21:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)