Skip to content

Wiki Health Check — 2026-04-08

Scope of this pass:

  • structure and navigation
  • local docs build
  • project ingest integration
  • obvious link and content drift issues

Status

Overall status: healthy, with a few documented cleanup items.

Checks completed:

  • python scripts/prepare_docs.py ✅
  • python -m mkdocs build ✅
  • new projects section integrated into nav and master index ✅
  • P Project 2025 Scenario 1 ingested and publishable ✅

Current MkDocs notices:

  • wiki/log.md is not in the top nav
  • wiki/lint_2026-04-05.md is not in the top nav

These are acceptable and not build-breaking.

What was fixed in this pass

  1. Added a dedicated Projects section to the wiki.
  2. Ingested P Project 2025 / Scenario 1 with:
  3. project overview page
  4. scenario-run results page
  5. raw workbook and figure links
  6. national comparison summary
  7. Adjusted the docs build so project assets under raw/Projects/ can be published while oversized raw/inc files/ remain excluded.
  8. Removed a directory-style project-folder link that caused a docs warning.
  9. Updated wiki/scenarios/index.md so it no longer incorrectly implies that no completed result runs exist anywhere in the wiki.

Residual issues

1. Generic scenario pages are still planning stubs

Files:

Comment:

These are still useful as templates, but they are not aligned with the new project-results workflow yet.

2. Project findings are not yet propagated back into reusable synthesis pages

Examples:

Comment:

The new project ingest is documented, but its findings have not yet been used to enrich generic interpretation pages.

3. Some data-source references remain intentionally unresolved

Examples mentioned in wiki pages:

  • set_geo.inc
  • set_WGeo.inc
  • set_kw.inc
  • re_meandering_xcost.inc
  • set_kero.inc
  • set_up_lake_ero.inc
  • set_pp.inc
  • set_kpp.inc

Comment:

These are already documented as not yet ingested. This is known debt, not a new regression.

  1. Decide whether project-result pages should remain separate from generic scenario pages, or whether selected project runs should also populate the generic scenario pages.
  2. Add one project-comparison synthesis page once more projects are ingested.
  3. Periodically fold strong empirical findings from project runs into:
  4. overview.md
  5. cost_effectiveness.md
  6. measure pages where a project run clearly changed understanding

Bottom line

The wiki is now in a materially better state than before this pass:

  • publishable
  • structured for project-result ingests
  • internally navigable
  • documented with a current health report

The main remaining gap is not technical health. It is content expansion: turning project outputs into a consistent reusable body of knowledge.