True Skyeking disagrees with MAmess context box of interpreting the See Also section as something otherwhereas the See also section is actually an area to list related Wikipedia articlesuseful for Readers seeking to readincluding subjects only peripherally relatedWPALSO  outofcontext aruguments misapplication of sentences from WPPoliciesGuidelines and more  Previously I politely asked negotiation for one exception Essure to MAmess umbrella idea his Rule not Wikipedias  In addition lest we forget If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia ignore it WPIARa pillar Policy  Mitch why did you fail to list exclusion of facts or data WPPOLL Guideline vs your link straw poll merely a project page languished since year  edits  SOURCE  WPPOLL Polling may be divisive and cause factionalism polls are generally not used for article development In summary polling is not a substitute for discussion  PS I am becoming more skeptical and beginning to wonder if MAmes has a hidden agenda Regardless of good faith at this time days later I am allowed to express my personal observation My editorial judgment and common senseWPALSO remains the same about the Essure wikilinkMAmes has not persuaded me that it is vitally important to delete said wikilink  Wiki Regards