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 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