User blog:PsiCubed2/Are We Inadvertently Encouraging Salad Numbers?

Let's think for a moment about how the mainspace of this wiki looks to the average newcomer:

1. The vast majority of articles are about specific numbers with very strange names and very strange notations.

2. Both the names and the notations seem to be a random combination of other names and notations (like "Terrible tethratoth or "Dustaculated-terrisquared-tethracubor").

3. There's usually no attempt to explain why that specific name was chosen for that specific number, or even hint at the fact that this name is part of consistent and well-thought-out system (saying that "terrible tethratoth" is a combination of "terrible" and "tethratoth" is hardly helpful)

4. The approximations given for the numbers (if they are given at all) are written in a cryptic language that the hewcomer doesn't understand. There's no attempt to explain why the approximations given for a given number are correct, or how these approximations are connected with the number's name.

5. Most naming components don't have articles of their own, so there's no way for a newcomer to even realize that they have meaning (it took me, a seasoned googlogist, many months to realize that Saibian's "-carta-" is equivalent to ordinal addition in the FGH).

6. The only criteria for whether a number is to be included, is whether it appears on some list outside the wiki. Usually those "references" say absolutely nothing about the said number, other than its name and notation. This makes the whole thing look like a catalog of random stuff (my first thought was a list of pokemon) which has no rhyme or reason.

So I ask both the experts and the beginners here: What is a newcomer to this wiki supposed to think about how googology works? It is really a surprise that they think we're just handing out ridiculous random names for even more ridiculous random numbers? And how would you expect such a person to respond, when we react poorly to their random musings?

Food for thought.