Talk:E-professional

mAx's comment on merging E Professional with Telecommuting

I personally think from a psychological perspective that it synthesises alot of information - this will ensure that wikipedia maintains its vision to provide sticky knowledge so that users can easily see the interconnected links between different concepts -After all, E-Professionals do not become E-Professionals unless they have some valid insight into what they are doing - and what they are doing is Telecommuting - a trend so inherent in this world. This is up to date information in the bottom line.

Marc's comment on merging E Professional with Telecommuting

Let me strongly disagree with your statement. It is not because you are merging pages that it provides a clearer knowledge map even I would say it is the opposite. Why do you think links exist?

I would suggest that you simply make a link from Telecommuting to E-professional like it is with all other pages otherwise doing what you suggest means that at the end there is a risk of merging all pages into a single one as there are more or less all linked together and it becomes the full mess very soon!

One cannot summarise E-professional as Telecommuting.....that would be like summarising a computer as being a processor!

Kjetil's comment on merging E Professional with Telecommuting

I also disagree with the initial statement. What they are doing is not Telecommuting. Telecommuting in my mind implies that the person telecommuting replaces the daily commute to a central place of work with some type of telecommunication links. This definition is too limiting and biased towards the traditional way of relating work to a place rather than a state of mind. For many e-professionals today, the notion of a "central place of work" makes no sense, since their work is activity- and network-centric rather than dependent of one or more specific locations. Their only concern is availability of a proper network connection, and tools at hand that helps them accomplishing their tasks.

Copyright concerns

In March 2010, resemblance was noted between the text of this article and that of [1]. Evidence suggests that the content was copied from Wikipedia rather than the other way around. This article was created, with content present at the external site, on 18 September 2006. The website indicates it was submitted on Tue, 2006-12-19 19:29. It also acknowledges duplication in its body, with a note that indicates, "According to Wikipedia [3]:"

If other content within this article is found to duplicate that source that postdates 2006-12-19, it would be appropriate to reconsider, but all content posted here before that date should be presumed to have originated here.

Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and we appreciate contributors being mindful of these issues. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on E-professional. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 12:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]