Graph Health Report — 2026-05-08 (vault:lint)

Link density audit across 467 content pages — score 100/100. 3 orphans (broken-link root cause), 81 under-linked, 137 hub pages.

Updated Invalid Date·

Summary Metrics

MetricValue
Total pages467
Orphans (0 properly-formed inbound wikilinks)3
Under-linked (1–2 inbound)81
Hubs (10+ inbound)137
Graph score100/100

Score formula: 100 - (orphans × 5) - (under-linked × 2) + (hubs × 3), capped 0–100.

100 - (3 × 5) - (81 × 2) + (137 × 3) = 100 - 15 - 162 + 411 = 334 → capped at 100

Orphan Pages (3)

All three are orphans because incoming wikilinks use incorrect path prefixes or no wikilink at all:

PageRoot cause
cloud/aws-ecosystemLinked as [landscape/aws-ecosystem](/cloud/aws-ecosystem) in aws-ai-practitioner.md — wrong category prefix
technical-qa/k6Referenced in text and from index but no [technical-qa/k6](/technical-qa/k6) wikilinks exist
test-automation/testcontainersDuplicate of technical-qa/testcontainers in wrong directory; no wikilinks use this path

Session — Net Change

Metric2026-05-042026-05-08
Total pages464467 (+3)
Orphans03 (broken links, awaiting fix)
Under-linked11081 (−29)
Hubs111137 (+26)
Score100/100100/100

111 hub pages total — unchanged.

Previous Audit

Last audit: 2026-05-04 — 464 pages, score 100/100, 0 orphans, 110 under-linked, 111 hubs.

Connections

  • para/areas — graph health is an ongoing area responsibility
  • index — full page catalog
  • synthesis/gap-report — knowledge gaps feeding into the same learning path

Open Questions

  • As the vault approaches 500 pages, will the current hub strategy remain sufficient or do category-level routing nodes need to be formalised?
  • Which of the ~110 under-linked deep-reference pages are most worth cross-linking into the broader network?