I study this page in order to make some comments on web links and pedagogy.
For context I took a course with good grades which taught the use of Lagrangian methods.
I have used Hamiltonians successfully.
Yet I feel that I do not understand Lagrangian mechanics.
Wikipedia generally comes closer as a source where you can learn about something than any other site, with occasional exceptions for specialized sites.
In a web article technical terms are often used.
Some of the audience will not know the meanings of these terms.
It is common practice and good practice to include a link to an authoritative description of the term with enough information to proceed with the current page.
In the case of Wikipedia these links are frequently to a Wikipedia article.
The common use of such links often fails in one of two ways:
An article may need passing reference to the notion of mathematical group.
The need may require only the leanest understanding of a group.
The article on groups may have category theory as a prerequisite.
(Wikipedia does not.)
Guidance is usually missing as to how much you need to know before you return to the referring page.
Occasionally is it possible to refer to a particular subsection of a page with implicit or explicit instructions that you need to understand that one ‘sub-notion’.
The student may discover prerequisites in the referred page as defined in that page.
- The linked article demands even more prerequisite than the current article.
- The student does not know which concepts from the linked article are necessary for the current article.
There is a vague notion of ‘parasitic’ that relates these ideas.
Establish some sort of clue easily accessible to the reader about the nature of this link—perhaps link color.