Talk:Microsoft Certified Professional

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this duplicated one or more previously published sources. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:15, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Suggest rename to Microsoft Technical Certifications
While researching Microsoft certifications I discovered that the Microsoft Certified Professional certification is no longer available (see the red text on the Microsoft MCP webpage). Microsoft is now referring to their certification program as "Microsoft Technical Certifications." I am suggesting that this page is renamed accordingly to avoid confusion. Anyone agree? Leah96xxx (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2020 (UTC)


 * ✅ and ✅ ! ..I second this. WP Articles *"should"* match their Subject in reality. From Peter (I.T. worker) a.k.a. Vid2vid (talk) 05:27, 20 January 2020 (UTC), edits to my comment from 05:18, 20 January 2020 (UTC).


 * I can see that no action has been taken towards this yet. Even other editors are starting to notice that this article is seriously out of date. Leah96xxx (talk) 07:17, 29 January 2021 (UTC)