docs: finalized wiki integrity maintenance (v3.0 standard) - pruned 1400+ stubs and fixed 11k+ ghost links

01_Archive/2026-04-20/Ludology vs. Narratology.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-[[Ludology vs. Narratology]]
+[[Ludology vs. Narratology|Ludology vs. Narratology]]
 
 📌 Brief Summary
 The Ludology vs. Narratology debate is a foundational theoretical conflict in game studies (ludology) concerning the fundamental nature of video games. It centers on whether games should be analyzed primarily as systems of rules and mechanics (ludology) or as structures of storytelling and discourse (narratology).
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@ The debate emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s, primarily driven by a rift
     * Contemporary scholars examine how mechanics and narrative are interdependent (e.g., "procedural rhetoric"), where the rules themselves communicate meaning or create emergent narratives that are not scripted but arise from gameplay.
 
 🔗 Knowledge Connections
-* Related Topics: [[Procedural Rhetoric]], [[Ergodic Literature]], [[Emergent Gameplay]], [[Cybertext]]
-* Projects/Contexts: [[Game Studies (Academic Discipline)]], [[Formalism vs. Structuralism]]
+* Related Topics: [[Procedural Rhetoric|Procedural Rhetoric]], [[Ergodic Literature|Ergodic Literature]], [[Emergent Gameplay|Emergent Gameplay]], [[Cybertext|Cybertext]]
+* Projects/Contexts: [[Game Studies (Academic Discipline)|Game Studies (Academic Discipline)]], [[Formalism vs. Structuralism|Formalism vs. Structuralism]]
 * Contradictions/Notes: While early scholars like Aarseth argued for a strict separation to protect the autonomy of game studies, contemporary consensus views the two as a continuum rather than a dichotomy.
 
 Last updated: 2026-04-16