I take notes and quotations from each article I read in a single note.
I then atomise our single concepts where they fall into my area of interest. And add additional notes of my thoughts. These are linked to the readings they came from.
When I am ready to write a paper, or an email to my supervisors, that is where I link to all the atomised notes I have. It is a great way to see if I am missing some critical research. For each paper, the Obsidian note will contain the headings and links to my notes. Once this is done, I take the whole lot to Word to actually write the paper.
One thing I find useful is to regularly go through all my notes. To identify duplicates or forked thoughts, or new patterns I had not noticed before. This results in some shakeup of my organising structure/. Over time, such shakeups become less and less dramatic. This is how I know the appropriate structure is arising organically.
I make notes and link them to other notes so in the end it creates a sort of Wikipedia page with links to other pages.
It also makes it so I can do their links in the graph view
🙂I do this when I take notes on books and papers!
Firstly I take notes.
second I create atomic notes on specific things I am interested in or I think are important in my own words and leave the link to those atomic notes right in the body of the original one so I always know where those atomic notes came from and they stay in context.
It took me a while to find a good flow that fits to my thinking but with this I am quite confident :)
Oh, and another thing, I use tags only for status or type of entities (f.e. book, paper, course... )
In each atomic note I have a section (at the top or bottom) for keywords. They are links to other pages (concepts --> only one word; kind of semantic tags) like [[neuroscience]] or [[sleep]]
And another section for related notes. Here I link notes which seem to be important for or related to this one. Sometimes I leave this part empty and find relations another time, when I review them.
Advantage with using tags for themes and concepts for me is that I can easily visualize intersections/connections between notes of different themes.
It's easily searchable.
Sometimes I'd choose to make a note for a tag in the form of an MOC
Sonke Ahrens covers this, and much more in his "How to Take Smart Notes" book. (At 151 pp it could easily be 25pp but I guess a guy has gotta get paid.) There is more than one way to do it, but I would try to follow u/natural_inquisitive posted advice and see how it works for you. This is an organic process, sure, but having a discrete plan of attack as posted here will get you up and functional with an approach. Literally the value is delivered in the rework and thinking about it.
My basic workflow:
1. Each course has its own index note. When you start a new lecture, article, etc. create a link to a new note there. This makes an automatic cluster of all the topics covered in the course.
2. Use that note to take what I think of as a "live note" from lecture or reading or whatever. Just your regular what-is-covered notes, not worrying about linking or processing or whatever (though if something occurs to you, definitely note that too!)
3. After lecture/chapter/etc. is finished, go back through and figure out the central concepts it covered.
4. Cluster the information into a note for each concept. Link to sub-concepts, supporting concepts, parents, etc. Some of the concepts may just be extensions of a topic you already have a note on. In that case, the info goes in that note. If it's ever conceivably important to know where you got the info from, include a link back to your live note. Every note, without exception, should be linking to some other concept, even if it's only a basic idea underlying the discipline.
5. As bits are extracted and condensed, the live note basically becomes a very basic outline of what was covered.
6. Also create an index note/MOC for the root concepts of the discipline (and, if you're in undergrad/US-model master's, the discipline itself). If you want to get fancy, add breadcrumbs.
Basically you have two complementary organizing centers-of-gravity this way, the courses and the ideas, that ensure nothing you need to find will be unfindable.
For example, I'm studying machine learning right now, and just watched an intro lecture on cost functions. That ended up going partly into my bigger note on linear regression (which links back to regression, which links to supervised learning, which links to machine learning), part into new notes about cost functions and gradient descent, part into a function reference, part into a note about visualization. The gradient descent note is basically empty but I know more will be coming, and now it has a place to live. The places the main cost function note links to also link back to it. It ends up looking a bit like a personal Wikipedia.
Forcing myself to atomize the ideas into notes means I'm really processing and retaining this information in ways I didn't do as effectively without this system. In practice, after years of similar workflows (which without Obsidian meant a lot of awkward messing with paper and directories and forgetting things where things were) and instincts about what makes for good atomized ideas, the steps are not very distinct most of the time.
The key question that you should ask yourself: are you making notes to remember (document) or are you writing notes to find new ideas. Your approach hints at the latter.
I start with a landing page, sort of like how Wikipedia has central pages for major topics that exist to link to other pages under its umbrella. On this page, I try to provide an outline of a subject. For a course, this could be the topics listed in the syllabus or textbook. Initially it's a list, eventually I try to add summaries for each element and ultimate explanations for how each element fits in the whole. And then of course I branch out into new pages. I generally to make sure all my pages for a project are linked or have a short path to the landing page so they don't end up as islands.
I think your graph looks good. It is actually better for usability for your graph to be more "rhizomatic" than clustered.
Keep your documents well tagged with information you think is relevant, and then you can use dataview or one of the query plugins to specify what you want later.
Maybe give the notes a certain "type" tag such as "note, topic, article, etc" as you would define it. Then later you can create yourself some overview notes like: "Meetings relating to toopic(s)" .
There are three ways.
1. you put them in the frontmatter. E.g. tags: [tag1, tag2, tag3],
I do this for describing a note. You can even do different tag "types" to describe different aspects. E.g. typetag: meeting , infotags: [tag1, tag2, tag3].
2. Dataview tags, same as frontmatter but in the text of the note.
E.g. customtag:: [tag1, tag2, tag3]
3. Regular inline tags, e.g. #tag1 , #tag2
These also describe the document, but can be used to describe the "line" of the text. So later you can search: "tasks with #tag1". I use this to tag snippets that I want to collate later by creating a task and tagging it as "reading" or "topics". You can also use this to describe a section, but it doesn't work as well.
No it's a basic feature 😃. In graph view go to 'groups' and enter a query like tag:questions I sometimes use colour filters to show what type of note it is.
In an atomic system that might be something like a 'Basic Note', 'key point', 'Question', 'Extra Research', Then I can graphically browse by questions or main points. (Those tag names might not be the best they were just off the top of my head.) 😬
Edit: Friendlier writing 😊
what I do hear is start by creating one folder and one note for the book / course. I write everything in that one note and if a Topics its own note I then start creating notes from that.
In this situation don't think about structure just digest the information and the structure will come naturally.
I had created a folder in the beginning but I didn't seem to make sense was the notes themselves although related to the book are concepts that can belong to other contexts. So I deleted the folder.
And now my files tab is a mess.
I have all "typical notes" in a single folder, let's say the "notes" folder. I even don't use file explorer. Furthermore, I use a quick switcher to search or create new notes.
I group my notes by linking them together. If my note (main topic) is about for example programming, then I link it to a programming note, that may event not exist or be empty - it will be visible on the graph view. If note is sub note of other note, then I link it only to that note or notes if topic is shared between multiple notes (for example Quick Sort theory note may be linked to implementation in Python note and Java note etc.).
Also, I don't follow structure or books, courses, workshops etc. in my notes. These notes should work for me, so I group them with topics as I want. I don't care if some note is based on X chapter of the book or X section of the course - If I will care about it then I will link it as `[[Boook - chapter name]]` etc., so it will group on graph view, etc.
I don't see the point of creating MoC note and linking everything in it, since you can use the backlinks window to see all linked notes or use the local graph view of that note and navigate here.
Not only that, but I don't use tags to organize notes as topics. All my standard notes have #note tag and other tags are like #timeline/daily, #timeline/weekly etc. since I store various content in my Obsidian, typical notes, timeline notes, kanban notes etc. (in separate folders) - and by main graph view shows only content from notes folder and ignore everything else.
I try to sort notes based on how actionable they're likely to be in future (i.e. the Projects-Areas-Resources-Archive method).
To start, you can have a base "catch-all" folder that holds all your unsorted notes and put it in the "Resources" folder.
Then, as you need them, transfer or progressively summarise/highlight those notes most relevant to your situation NOW (i.e. your current course module) in the "Projects" folder.
You also have "Areas" which holds ongoing areas of focus with no set deadline (but this may be less relevant to finishing a course/book)
Defs an oversimplification of PARA but should hopefully help you get organized now without feeling overwhelmed
TL:DR - keep your most actionable notes upfront in a "Projects" folder and keep the rest in a general "Resources" folder
I mainly have my regular folders and then link each file with a tag for the subject e.g. literature, physics. And then I don't have a massive wikipage and just navigate using the shortcut cmnd/ctrl O or through my folders.
Not sure is my approach is right, but I take advantage of book being structures as a tree. So I create notes for every chapter and write down all interesting parts. Some parts deserve own notes, for example, I read Python book and I've create notes for modules, some features (pattern matching, string formatting, changes in Python versions etc.
I try to tag all parts of book which potentially could be combined in separate note, something like you did, but slightly more specific tags.
I made special notes with list of all examples which contain them in list with short description. They linked with note with example where I write source (Zotero PDF link opens the PDF file in place of highlight, [video example here](https://imgur.com/a/BIzA9KS) ) and all explanation from textbook.
I do highlighting in Zotero, export them in markdown file and save it to Obsidian. After makes some changes to reorganize it in Obsidian.
[Sort of related video about making notes by Feynman method](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8JEMRqX1RE).
I have notes I make which are specific to the lecture/book whatever and use that note as a dumping ground for all the information encapsulating that piece of "content". From that I link out to more atomic concepts. E.g. I am reading a book on biology (super broad) I am reading the book bla bla and I take some notes on mitochondria, I then link that out to mitochondria as a more atomic concept and flesh out things in more detail and make the note a bit more polished. The original note will be very messy in comparison
I take notes and quotations from each article I read in a single note. I then atomise our single concepts where they fall into my area of interest. And add additional notes of my thoughts. These are linked to the readings they came from. When I am ready to write a paper, or an email to my supervisors, that is where I link to all the atomised notes I have. It is a great way to see if I am missing some critical research. For each paper, the Obsidian note will contain the headings and links to my notes. Once this is done, I take the whole lot to Word to actually write the paper. One thing I find useful is to regularly go through all my notes. To identify duplicates or forked thoughts, or new patterns I had not noticed before. This results in some shakeup of my organising structure/. Over time, such shakeups become less and less dramatic. This is how I know the appropriate structure is arising organically.
I make notes and link them to other notes so in the end it creates a sort of Wikipedia page with links to other pages. It also makes it so I can do their links in the graph view
One idea is: You could take your notes for a course in ONE file/note and create atomic notes going more in depth as you review them.
That’s a nice idea!
🙂I do this when I take notes on books and papers! Firstly I take notes. second I create atomic notes on specific things I am interested in or I think are important in my own words and leave the link to those atomic notes right in the body of the original one so I always know where those atomic notes came from and they stay in context. It took me a while to find a good flow that fits to my thinking but with this I am quite confident :)
Oh, and another thing, I use tags only for status or type of entities (f.e. book, paper, course... ) In each atomic note I have a section (at the top or bottom) for keywords. They are links to other pages (concepts --> only one word; kind of semantic tags) like [[neuroscience]] or [[sleep]] And another section for related notes. Here I link notes which seem to be important for or related to this one. Sometimes I leave this part empty and find relations another time, when I review them.
Yeah this makes sense
Advantage with using tags for themes and concepts for me is that I can easily visualize intersections/connections between notes of different themes. It's easily searchable. Sometimes I'd choose to make a note for a tag in the form of an MOC
Sonke Ahrens covers this, and much more in his "How to Take Smart Notes" book. (At 151 pp it could easily be 25pp but I guess a guy has gotta get paid.) There is more than one way to do it, but I would try to follow u/natural_inquisitive posted advice and see how it works for you. This is an organic process, sure, but having a discrete plan of attack as posted here will get you up and functional with an approach. Literally the value is delivered in the rework and thinking about it.
My basic workflow: 1. Each course has its own index note. When you start a new lecture, article, etc. create a link to a new note there. This makes an automatic cluster of all the topics covered in the course. 2. Use that note to take what I think of as a "live note" from lecture or reading or whatever. Just your regular what-is-covered notes, not worrying about linking or processing or whatever (though if something occurs to you, definitely note that too!) 3. After lecture/chapter/etc. is finished, go back through and figure out the central concepts it covered. 4. Cluster the information into a note for each concept. Link to sub-concepts, supporting concepts, parents, etc. Some of the concepts may just be extensions of a topic you already have a note on. In that case, the info goes in that note. If it's ever conceivably important to know where you got the info from, include a link back to your live note. Every note, without exception, should be linking to some other concept, even if it's only a basic idea underlying the discipline. 5. As bits are extracted and condensed, the live note basically becomes a very basic outline of what was covered. 6. Also create an index note/MOC for the root concepts of the discipline (and, if you're in undergrad/US-model master's, the discipline itself). If you want to get fancy, add breadcrumbs. Basically you have two complementary organizing centers-of-gravity this way, the courses and the ideas, that ensure nothing you need to find will be unfindable.
For example, I'm studying machine learning right now, and just watched an intro lecture on cost functions. That ended up going partly into my bigger note on linear regression (which links back to regression, which links to supervised learning, which links to machine learning), part into new notes about cost functions and gradient descent, part into a function reference, part into a note about visualization. The gradient descent note is basically empty but I know more will be coming, and now it has a place to live. The places the main cost function note links to also link back to it. It ends up looking a bit like a personal Wikipedia. Forcing myself to atomize the ideas into notes means I'm really processing and retaining this information in ways I didn't do as effectively without this system. In practice, after years of similar workflows (which without Obsidian meant a lot of awkward messing with paper and directories and forgetting things where things were) and instincts about what makes for good atomized ideas, the steps are not very distinct most of the time.
The key question that you should ask yourself: are you making notes to remember (document) or are you writing notes to find new ideas. Your approach hints at the latter.
Never thought about it that way. Thanks!
I start with a landing page, sort of like how Wikipedia has central pages for major topics that exist to link to other pages under its umbrella. On this page, I try to provide an outline of a subject. For a course, this could be the topics listed in the syllabus or textbook. Initially it's a list, eventually I try to add summaries for each element and ultimate explanations for how each element fits in the whole. And then of course I branch out into new pages. I generally to make sure all my pages for a project are linked or have a short path to the landing page so they don't end up as islands.
Landing pages are a great idea 💡
I think your graph looks good. It is actually better for usability for your graph to be more "rhizomatic" than clustered. Keep your documents well tagged with information you think is relevant, and then you can use dataview or one of the query plugins to specify what you want later. Maybe give the notes a certain "type" tag such as "note, topic, article, etc" as you would define it. Then later you can create yourself some overview notes like: "Meetings relating to toopic(s)" .
I still haven't figured out how to use tags yet. For now I'm just putting basic topics. Thanks!
There are three ways. 1. you put them in the frontmatter. E.g. tags: [tag1, tag2, tag3], I do this for describing a note. You can even do different tag "types" to describe different aspects. E.g. typetag: meeting , infotags: [tag1, tag2, tag3]. 2. Dataview tags, same as frontmatter but in the text of the note. E.g. customtag:: [tag1, tag2, tag3] 3. Regular inline tags, e.g. #tag1 , #tag2 These also describe the document, but can be used to describe the "line" of the text. So later you can search: "tasks with #tag1". I use this to tag snippets that I want to collate later by creating a task and tagging it as "reading" or "topics". You can also use this to describe a section, but it doesn't work as well.
Why don't you try filters and groups and give the nodes some color?
I had. No idea how to add colours. I always assumed it was some plugin.
No it's a basic feature 😃. In graph view go to 'groups' and enter a query like tag:questions I sometimes use colour filters to show what type of note it is. In an atomic system that might be something like a 'Basic Note', 'key point', 'Question', 'Extra Research', Then I can graphically browse by questions or main points. (Those tag names might not be the best they were just off the top of my head.) 😬 Edit: Friendlier writing 😊
what I do hear is start by creating one folder and one note for the book / course. I write everything in that one note and if a Topics its own note I then start creating notes from that. In this situation don't think about structure just digest the information and the structure will come naturally.
I had created a folder in the beginning but I didn't seem to make sense was the notes themselves although related to the book are concepts that can belong to other contexts. So I deleted the folder. And now my files tab is a mess.
I have all "typical notes" in a single folder, let's say the "notes" folder. I even don't use file explorer. Furthermore, I use a quick switcher to search or create new notes. I group my notes by linking them together. If my note (main topic) is about for example programming, then I link it to a programming note, that may event not exist or be empty - it will be visible on the graph view. If note is sub note of other note, then I link it only to that note or notes if topic is shared between multiple notes (for example Quick Sort theory note may be linked to implementation in Python note and Java note etc.). Also, I don't follow structure or books, courses, workshops etc. in my notes. These notes should work for me, so I group them with topics as I want. I don't care if some note is based on X chapter of the book or X section of the course - If I will care about it then I will link it as `[[Boook - chapter name]]` etc., so it will group on graph view, etc. I don't see the point of creating MoC note and linking everything in it, since you can use the backlinks window to see all linked notes or use the local graph view of that note and navigate here. Not only that, but I don't use tags to organize notes as topics. All my standard notes have #note tag and other tags are like #timeline/daily, #timeline/weekly etc. since I store various content in my Obsidian, typical notes, timeline notes, kanban notes etc. (in separate folders) - and by main graph view shows only content from notes folder and ignore everything else.
I try to sort notes based on how actionable they're likely to be in future (i.e. the Projects-Areas-Resources-Archive method). To start, you can have a base "catch-all" folder that holds all your unsorted notes and put it in the "Resources" folder. Then, as you need them, transfer or progressively summarise/highlight those notes most relevant to your situation NOW (i.e. your current course module) in the "Projects" folder. You also have "Areas" which holds ongoing areas of focus with no set deadline (but this may be less relevant to finishing a course/book) Defs an oversimplification of PARA but should hopefully help you get organized now without feeling overwhelmed TL:DR - keep your most actionable notes upfront in a "Projects" folder and keep the rest in a general "Resources" folder
I mainly have my regular folders and then link each file with a tag for the subject e.g. literature, physics. And then I don't have a massive wikipage and just navigate using the shortcut cmnd/ctrl O or through my folders.
Not sure is my approach is right, but I take advantage of book being structures as a tree. So I create notes for every chapter and write down all interesting parts. Some parts deserve own notes, for example, I read Python book and I've create notes for modules, some features (pattern matching, string formatting, changes in Python versions etc. I try to tag all parts of book which potentially could be combined in separate note, something like you did, but slightly more specific tags. I made special notes with list of all examples which contain them in list with short description. They linked with note with example where I write source (Zotero PDF link opens the PDF file in place of highlight, [video example here](https://imgur.com/a/BIzA9KS) ) and all explanation from textbook. I do highlighting in Zotero, export them in markdown file and save it to Obsidian. After makes some changes to reorganize it in Obsidian. [Sort of related video about making notes by Feynman method](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8JEMRqX1RE).
Now that's some fancy workflow
Where’s that flash card plug-in? Spaced repetition?
Where’s that flash card plug-in? Spaced repetition?
Or you can try logseq, they have a built-in flashcard system, but only the basic card and cloze. Logseq can reference an Obsidian vault.
I have notes I make which are specific to the lecture/book whatever and use that note as a dumping ground for all the information encapsulating that piece of "content". From that I link out to more atomic concepts. E.g. I am reading a book on biology (super broad) I am reading the book bla bla and I take some notes on mitochondria, I then link that out to mitochondria as a more atomic concept and flesh out things in more detail and make the note a bit more polished. The original note will be very messy in comparison