Uh I meant as the latter sorry. And I also think that people asking a new question could benefit more from reading it than the generic "how to ask" page anyway

I believe that the how to ask page should be replaced by the old one you link to. That was removed after the move to the stackexchange network, but it is far superior

@Sergei People usually don't read the IKEA manual either, this doesn't change that those of us who do get to have more solid tables and beds. Complaining that "rules of using should be intuitive" is just not how things work.

@FedericoPoloni (abstract-nonsense) is a little different, in that it has become essentially acceptable terminology in category theory: you find it in papers, maybe even titles of papers. "Simplicial stuff" is definitely used in seminars, but I don't think people write it down, usually.

@ManfredWeis To be clear: it is an informal name, and I would (probably) not use it in a paper. It's just that to people familiar with the field brings a set of connotations that I would struggle to convey with a more formal name.

I don't understand the downvote on the question. It is true that the OP misunderstood completely the meaning of the "simplicial-stuff" tag, but this is possibly even more an indication that there is a problem, not the converse.

Good names could be "simplicial-objects" or "simplicial-homotopy-theory" (depending on where to put the focus). I kind of like "simplicial-stuff", and I have to say I don't really understand the objections