Ensuring high quality sources where needed, especially science/academic topics (narrow focus)

The lack of minimum sourcing hurts the outsiders perception of Wikipedia but won't bring turmoils inside it save for some contested subjects.

The weight issues are permanent headaches for the community and it's beyond the quality of the source issue. Concerned articles are often well written just that they are section that need balancing and editors gun slugging RS to see which PoV will prevail.

Slrubenstein is right by dividing article by type. A science stub and a fiction stub won't have the same evolution and needs in term of sourcing.

I think it will be necessary to make a proposal focused on "Science & technology, Expert & academic sources" while in term of rough numbers it's not the biggest chunk of Wikipedia it's critical if we really want to rally the support of educative communities which from my personal knowledge is in France neutral leaning negative with the option to whack students who copy-paste Wikipedia content.

For Fiction articles the mentioned global RS sources database would help a lot especially many, many websites/blog/others on TV shows, anime, manga, sci-fi, etc... Line of the RS not RS is more blurry in this area. Things like this person reviews comics in a well know RS website like The Comics Journal but also makes additional comments and comics reviews on its personal blog. So do we count his blog reviews as RS materials? Does this person carry its "expert" stamp outside its RS website?

A pity we don't have someone that can talk about the sourcing of BLP articles.

@Slrubenstein Thanks, i just wanted clarify while i may have "weird" reactions to some proposals but i'm still experienced & concerned by the discussed issues.