I am a confused that this template and its "See also" both refer to WP:N which states WP:N#Notability_guidelines_do_not_directly_limit_article-content. Isn't importance of sections an issue of original research, sources, and undue weight? -- Ronz 22:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
(Comment below copied from Wikipedia talk:No original research [1])
I like the idea of WP:WEIGHT being the relevant policy for importance related issues, but again, I don't know what to do about it. If I was king of Wikipedia, I would deprecate these importance templates, and create undue weight template "This section or article lacks reliable sources justifying the weight given to it." or something like that. -- Merzul 16:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC) -- Merzul 16:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I am a confused that this template and its "See also" both refer to WP:N which states WP:N#Notability_guidelines_do_not_directly_limit_article-content. Isn't importance of sections an issue of original research, sources, and undue weight? -- Ronz 22:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
(Comment below copied from Wikipedia talk:No original research [1])
I like the idea of WP:WEIGHT being the relevant policy for importance related issues, but again, I don't know what to do about it. If I was king of Wikipedia, I would deprecate these importance templates, and create undue weight template "This section or article lacks reliable sources justifying the weight given to it." or something like that. -- Merzul 16:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC) -- Merzul 16:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)