Talk:WUPHF.com

Television: Episode coverage / The Office Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by The Office task force.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Excellent!

I think it's great the way the article talks about WUPHF.com and all its investors without ever once mentioning what the heck WUPHF.com does. Keep the reader guessing! --Captain Infinity (talk) 03:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be marked as unreliable, unsourced

After examining this encyclopedia article, it became clear that it is almost all unsupported information. WP allows information in its article abstracts/ledes to appear without inline citation, because it summarises material with citations in the main body. But the information in this lede, in largest part, is not sourced in the main body. The two references that are appended support only the two sentences of the Reception section; despite this limited connection of material to source, readers are given no warning of the potential unreliability of the content (by WP's own standards). This is another case of WP editors boldly flaunting WP policy, and presenting an article with "just trust us" not linked to source as WP policy demands, and doing so with no warning. Readers deserve WP:OR and strong referencing tags at the head of this article until most of its content is sourced. In short, another article that violates WP policy, and so is not encyclopedic by WP's own standards. 2601:246:CA80:3CB5:A456:D658:3132:C205 (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]