If it's incorrect several bad things happen, some of which may not be important to you:
One, since you're listing nameservers that aren't authoritative as authoritative for your domains, anyone who needs to trace or troubleshoot bad dns performance won't be able to.
Two, anyone who looks up your dns in dnsreport.com (for example your customers or prospective customers who may have experienced problems finding their site or your site because you're not running redundant DNS) will find out that the nameservers you report as authoritative aren't and the ones that are authoritative aren't reported as authoritative.
Three, any time you or anyone else tries to troubleshoot your DNS chain using dig won't be able to because the information dig returns will be invalid.
Four, slave nameservers, if any, won't be able to get zone transfers, while the nameservers you list will, even though they've got no reason to.
Five, any time you have a DNS problem you'll find that no one will be able to help you until you are willing to do it right.
DNS is the world's largest distributed database. Just because it's resilient is no reason for you to work hard to intentionally break it.
This is the last time I intend to justify doing it right in this thread. I hope you took the time to understand the link I sent you, and all the other links from that link... the link page is simply an authoritative dictionary. And all the words in the listed definition are available for definition in other links as well.
The people behind
"Men and Mice" are world renowned experts in DNS and I trust both them and their explanations.
Before you ask me to explain anything further, please take the time to read either the book "DNS and Bind" or the book "Linux DNS Server Administration"; both are excellent introductions to using "bind" (the program DA uses for DNS) for DNS administration. If you have a choice, "Linux DNS Server Administration" is probably an easier read.
Thanks.
Jeff