Why tags? Couldn't we just use "page" objects?

One of the things I really think Logseq got right, and the only ones to do to my knowledge, is treating #tags/[[wikilinks]] as a "page"/note. Even though you can still use tags they function just as a wikilink i.e. a "page".

So if you want to "tag" something you would just make a reference/wikilink to the page you want to use as a "tag" e.g. you might be writing your favourite pancake recipe and then wikilink like so [[recipe]] [[food]] [[dessert]].

[[recipe]] [[food]] [[dessert]] would then in turn (just like tags) point to all the pages/objects where they have been used. What I find interesting about this approach is that, as your knowledge base grow you might find that a page you have used as a tag deserves to be developed either by just writing (whatever) within it or potentially building it up from the objects/pages it's backlinking to.

In my screenshot example it could be that if "note-taking" was a page (instead of a tag), that I wanted to write something about note-taking in general.

Like with all the apps out there using both tags and wikilinks I feel that they are all in-between at the moment, not fully embracing that you can do without tags when you have wikilinks as they can fully function as a tag.

Furthermore, I note that it appears that every basic object in Capacities (also tags) have a description field as default which, to me, further muddies the waters - then why not just a page..?

The reason for all this is that tags have a special status in Capacities, since it's a basic object, and thus have certain positioning within the UI. I'd prefer to just link between pages as in my screenshot example (if you imagine "note-taking" and "Knowledge Management" also being pages).