Talk:Valid characters in XML

Can anyone explain the comment "This article relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this article by adding secondary or tertiary sources."?

How would secondary or tertiary sources add value?

Mhkay (talk) 23:20, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HF 20191112: same comment from me. The sources are the law. Why do we need a second opinion on the law? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.128.91.231 (talk) 13:03, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Valid characters in XML. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140228010526/http://validchar.com/d/xml10/xml10_namestart to http://validchar.com/d/xml10/xml10_namestart

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:31, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]