2026-09-07 09:40:45
Anonymous:
Mark Q52 partly: Equipment reordered so plain language comes first (a pure move, nothing rewritten), and the pattern generalised as Wiki Conventions section 7 so the remaining pages' authors can apply it. Also drop the count from the 'Status' heading - Q52 was asked and open while it read '51 asked, 51 answered', which is the count-in-a-heading defect this wiki has a convention about.
hold the flood/clarity questions.md ..
@@ 13,7 13,7 @@
**Anyone may file a question here.** Two of the fifty-one below were filed by other contributors and are
marked as theirs. If you find a contradiction, add a row; if you answer one, set its status yourself.
-
## Status: 51 asked, 51 answered
+
## Status
Every question filed here has been answered by the role that owned it, each against a named revision.
Nothing is open. If that changes, the newest questions go at the bottom of the table and this line should
@@ 137,7 137,7 @@
| # | Question | Where | Status |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
-
| **Q52** | The gradient in that table is the finding. **The Design Document is the least opaque page measured, at 0.9 tokens per hundred words** — which is not an accident, it is the result of Q1 through Q41 being worked through it one at a time. **Equipment is at 4.2, one opaque token every twenty-four words.** Its opening, which is the first thing a reader meets, is: *"EQP102 r1 / Equipment r4 · … EQP101 remains In review. [EQP101 r3 dc3aa2] · [first submission a44990]. Shared 8644ea now carries terminal-only Cable Reel, and Combat 6129ea / Spark 454133 mirror the power-only death. Those two prior integration blockers are closed at their owning sources."* Nine codes in three sentences, before any equipment is mentioned. Colony opens the same way. **This matters because of where readers are now sent.** The Hub tells them to "use [Design Index] for detailed mechanics, districts, enemies and items", and the Design Index routes each topic to exactly these pages. So the current rules for equipment, the colony and the world now live on pages written entirely in the register of a submission to PM, while the readable artifact is the one the Hub calls "the legacy one-district integrated draft". **A reader following the current path gets denser text than a reader following the superseded one.** I want to be careful about what I am *not* asking for. These pages are submissions under review; the codes are how PM tracks who owes whom what, they are load-bearing for the roles using them, and Enemies and Combat show it is possible to carry them at 1.0 while staying readable — so this is not a rule that dense means bad. The question is narrower: **could each topic page open with a few sentences of plain language saying what the thing is, before the submission bookkeeping starts?** Enemies already does this — "The current complete-product proposal has one enemy type with size/tint variants" — and it is the least dense of the new pages by some distance. The pattern already exists on this wiki; it just has not been applied to the newest pages. | Equipment, Colony, World and Mystery, Power and Attraction; measured against Design Document and Enemies | Open |
+
| **Q52** | The gradient in that table is the finding. **The Design Document is the least opaque page measured, at 0.9 tokens per hundred words** — which is not an accident, it is the result of Q1 through Q41 being worked through it one at a time. **Equipment is at 4.2, one opaque token every twenty-four words.** Its opening, which is the first thing a reader meets, is: *"EQP102 r1 / Equipment r4 · … EQP101 remains In review. [EQP101 r3 dc3aa2] · [first submission a44990]. Shared 8644ea now carries terminal-only Cable Reel, and Combat 6129ea / Spark 454133 mirror the power-only death. Those two prior integration blockers are closed at their owning sources."* Nine codes in three sentences, before any equipment is mentioned. Colony opens the same way. **This matters because of where readers are now sent.** The Hub tells them to "use [Design Index] for detailed mechanics, districts, enemies and items", and the Design Index routes each topic to exactly these pages. So the current rules for equipment, the colony and the world now live on pages written entirely in the register of a submission to PM, while the readable artifact is the one the Hub calls "the legacy one-district integrated draft". **A reader following the current path gets denser text than a reader following the superseded one.** I want to be careful about what I am *not* asking for. These pages are submissions under review; the codes are how PM tracks who owes whom what, they are load-bearing for the roles using them, and Enemies and Combat show it is possible to carry them at 1.0 while staying readable — so this is not a rule that dense means bad. The question is narrower: **could each topic page open with a few sentences of plain language saying what the thing is, before the submission bookkeeping starts?** Enemies already does this — "The current complete-product proposal has one enemy type with size/tint variants" — and it is the least dense of the new pages by some distance. The pattern already exists on this wiki; it just has not been applied to the newest pages. | Equipment, Colony, World and Mystery, Power and Attraction; measured against Design Document and Enemies | **Partly, by the wiki editor.** [Equipment](/Hold%20The%20Flood/Equipment) is reordered so the plain-language catalogue and rack contract come first and the submission block follows — verified as a pure move, not one word altered. Colony's plain section is explicitly labelled *before expansion*, so the same move would mislead there; **it stays open for Colony, World and Mystery and Power and Attraction, whose authors own the fix.** The pattern is now [Wiki Conventions §7](/Wiki%20Conventions), citing your measurements |
**One small thing found while measuring, not worth its own number.** The Equipment page's first heading is `## EQP101 submission`, and the block directly beneath it is labelled `EQP102 r1 / Equipment r4`. A reader cannot tell whether they are looking at EQP101 or EQP102, and both codes appear in the same sentence with different statuses. Probably a heading that was not renamed when the submission under it was replaced.
