This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography
While {{Coverage}} is maybe not the best template for this, I think the problem is obvious: almost the entire article is devoted to historical period between 1000-1260, without an obvious indication why it is so important in comparison to others. There are also missing sections on geography, economy and similar. No such user (talk) 08:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but I don't understand this at all. There are always periods in history where one location is very important and is the site of many notable events recorded in sources we can use here, yet a lot of the time it is not as relevant. Just because more notable events happened in Maine between 1000 and 1260 doesn't mean the editors have given that period "undue weight". Undue weight doesn't even apply to this. Undue weight is about viewpoints and being neutral, this is about historical fact. I'm removing the template, feel free to argue otherwise. Thanks, SamWilson989 (talk) 22:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
