"
Ok, I will. Just a question: since it's about 'correcting IPA transcriptions according to en.wikipedia itself' (in Help:IPA for Italian and Labiodental nasal sources are already provided), if I do what you said, I'll have to do it: a) from now on; and b) on every single page where somebody has modified an IPA transcription (such as that page whose history I linked). Right? Or wrong? If I'm right, no problem. If I'm wrong... Then why making distinctions between Pittura infamante and anything else? Why must I add a source in the article instead of indicate it in the edit summary 'there' but not anywhere else? That's what seems absurd to me.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.145.208.20   
Wikipedia is a collaborative site run by volunteers, and as such it is not always consistent.  If you change a page while nobody is watching, and nobody notices after the fact, it slides through.  If you always follow policies when it comes to sourcing, you can't go wrong. IV "