Template talk:Importance-s

But isn't importance completely difference than WP:N?
I am a confused that this template and its "See also" both refer to WP:N which states WP:N. Isn't importance of sections an issue of original research, sources, and undue weight? --Ronz 22:39, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I've learned that it's this way for historical reasons and that it needs updating to be in line with current policies and guidelines. NOR, SOURCE, and WEIGHT seem to apply.  NOT as well.  Others? --Ronz 23:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

(Comment below copied from Wikipedia talk:No original research)

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)