Already loving this thread.
@andresni - you’re right about status. I do get a weird pang of guilt having a bunch of stuff in “seedling” status. I might kill it. Just leave it as note types.
@davecan - I have also started to incorporate my metadata into naming conventions to some degree. I wrote another post here where I use the 
in note names to denote an unanswered question notes and 
for answered question while also getting around the punctuation restrictions in file names. Metadata in the naming convention would also remove the the friction of going into a note and adding a template straight away.
I also don’t like the cluttered nature of sources being linked everywhere. I kind of like the idea of literature notes hovering around as orphans like an asteroid belt, not linked to anything.
@Klaas The graph is pretty. You feel like you’ve built something and it’s a visual index of a notes content. I like to click on the big nodes and see what it is. Utility is limited but it brings me a bit of joy to see it grow and to be able to explore it. I also write out my note titles as sentences, and if you take a path through a bunch of connected nodes just by hovering over them you take this cathartic journey through the graph that feels like a high intensity, stream of consciousness download of interconnected ideas that have been written down. I’m weird though.