diff --git a/rules/S3618/plsql/rule.adoc b/rules/S3618/plsql/rule.adoc
index 4357f73623a..7fbc25b1f26 100644
--- a/rules/S3618/plsql/rule.adoc
+++ b/rules/S3618/plsql/rule.adoc
@@ -40,9 +40,6 @@ VALUES
 [source,sql,diff-id=1,diff-type=compliant]
 ----
 INSERT INTO MY_TABLE  -- Compliant; N3 has a default value
-(
-  N1
-)
 (
   N1,
   N2
diff --git a/rules/S3641/how.adoc b/rules/S3641/how.adoc
index f5231b8120c..312705eac0d 100644
--- a/rules/S3641/how.adoc
+++ b/rules/S3641/how.adoc
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 == How to fix it
 
-Use `NOT EXISTS` or `IS NOT NULL` instead od `NOT IN` when the subquery may return `NULL` values.
+Use `NOT EXISTS` or `IS NOT NULL` instead of `NOT IN` when the subquery may return `NULL` values.
 
 === Code examples
 
diff --git a/rules/S3651/plsql/rule.adoc b/rules/S3651/plsql/rule.adoc
index 44be472d9f6..fea874b9885 100644
--- a/rules/S3651/plsql/rule.adoc
+++ b/rules/S3651/plsql/rule.adoc
@@ -1,11 +1,13 @@
 == Why is this an issue?
 
-`WHERE` clause conditions that reinforce or contradict the definitions of their columns are useless; they are always either unconditionally true or unconditionally false. For instance, there's no point in including `AND column IS NOT NULL` if the column is defined as non-null.
+Conditions in the `WHERE` clause that either reinforce or contradict the definitions of their columns are redundant, as they are always either unconditionally true or unconditionally false. For example, including `AND column IS NOT NULL` is unnecessary if the column is already defined as non-null.
 
 include::../../../shared_content/plsql/data_dictionary.adoc[]
 
 == How to fix it
 
+Ensure that the conditions in the `WHERE` clause are not always true or false.
+
 === Code examples
 
 Given the following table: