Talk:Wage unit

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
	This article was accepted from this draft on 14 December 2017 by reviewer Jcc (talk · contribs).

Economics Mid‑importance

	Economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics 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.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Multiple issues

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The above template appeared in the article. I have removed it.

I don’t see what is gained by repeating in the article information which is already present in the lead para.
I don’t see the need for a summary given that the contents box is an effective summary in itself.
Maybe there’s some context which could usefully be added; maybe the person who added the template had arrived at a random article, and wasn’t ideally placed to judge.
The existence of a template for alleging a fault is no evidence that anything’s wrong.

Colin.champion (talk) 08:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Multiple issues