User talk:Tucker5623

May 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Fallenfromthesky (talk) 20:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I am responding to you correctly, but I have a question about what I did wrong. Is it because the link that was on the page was in the wrong place, or that it didn't link directly to the Request info Predictive Index page? I am just trying to give people the opportunity to learn exactly what the predictive index is. If I can get it so that it links directly to the request info page and there is no biased information about the Predictive Index would that meet the standards? Tucker5623 (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Your question.
You should read External_links and WP:SPAM for help on what sort of links are acceptable on Wikipedia and how to place them, you should also avoid making unsourced modifications to articles. Fallenfromthesky (talk) 22:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Links that should be considered
Number 3 says:

"Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons."

I can't see how the opportunity to try a Predictive Index can be integrated into the article without a link or website address. A page that allows someone to request information would be neutral and give the most accurate information about the Predictive Index, the opportunity to complete one.Tucker5623 (talk) 22:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The link that you put in the article supplied no useful information about how the test functions, or how it is assessed, the opportunity to try the test itself is not very informative, as it offers no insight into the test mechanics. The link did, however, ask for many pieces of personal information which would indicate to most that this 'free' test is intended to collect information for sales use. Fallenfromthesky (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

In order to send someone a link to try the predictive index you need their name, email, and position. In addition to the written report that can be generated, there are graphs that are created when the predictive index is taken that require interpretation by someone who has been through PI training and are not addressed in the written results. The reading of the results back to an individual require a phone number to contact them. The company information is required because the Predictive Index is used by many companies and we do our best to not send samples of the Predictive Index to employees of companies that have already purchased the service, the specific address is because some companies only use the PI at some of their locations and it is important to identify from which office people are from. By the way I think you should try the PI that way when you make changes to the PI page you can have even more info. I can arrange this, you know where to go and I know Wikipedia is not a client. Tucker5623 (talk) 22:35, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * From your use of the word 'we' in your previous comment I infer that you are in some way employed either by PI, or by the company that you linked to. Please read WP:COI carefully before editing further. Fallenfromthesky (talk) 23:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

If you really think that taking a Predictive Index has no value in helping to explain more about the Predictive Index, I'm not really sure where to go from there. The most unbiased information you can get on the Predictive Index would be the results that you get, about yourself, after seeing for yourself exactly what the process was to get those results. I understand where you are coming from when others abuse the Conflict of Interest, however, I think denying users the opportunity to try the PI takes away the only unbiased information they can get. Who wrote the article that is excepted in the Predictive Index page? Is that really less biased than allowing someone to try the actual thing the page is about.

I understand that my previous editing may have seemed like blatent advertising, that was not my intention. I just want to give someone the option to try the PI if they are interested. Is there a compromise we can agree on? Maybe putting something like "Although we cannot guarantee that all the information obtained from this website and it's owners is unbiased, you can obtain an unbiased sample of the Predictive Index and your unbiased results".

Most any disclaimer before the link would be fine, just give userd the opportunity to decide if they want to take the survey or not. Also, I looked on the myers-briggs page and there are links to try the myers-briggs:

Free online Jungian typology tests (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers_briggs)

HumanMetrics Similar Minds 41 Questions

And the NOO-PI Personality Test: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEO-PI)

External Resources Long Version of IPIP NEO-PI Short Version of IPIP NEO-PI Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_NEO_Personality_Inventory"

And the Minnestota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Multiphasic_Personality_Inventory)

External links MMPI-2, Pearson Website

MMPI-A (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent) Test interpretation and description of scales (pdf) MMPI Research Project National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Home Page Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Multiphasic_Personality_Inventory"

How about a link under external links like in these pages?
 * Best Place to discuss this will be on Talk:Predictive_Index that way there will be more people involved, and you can see what people are interested in. Fallenfromthesky (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for all your help in this. I put a comment on the talk page under "this is a good article but" How long should I wait for comments? I think a week would be long enough. Your thoughts? Tucker5623 (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome
 Hi Tucker5623, and Welcome to Wikipedia!  Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

--- Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:


 * Table of Contents


 * Department directory

Need help?


 * Questions — a guide on where to ask questions.
 * Cheatsheet — quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes.


 * Wikipedia's 5 pillars — an overview of Wikipedia's foundations
 * The Simplified Ruleset — a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules.

How you can help:


 * Contributing to Wikipedia — a guide on how you can help.


 * Community Portal — Wikipedia's hub of activity.

Additional tips...


 * Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The [[Image:Signature_icon.png]] button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.


 * If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills the Sandbox is for you.

Fallenfromthesky Good luck, and have fun.