From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Business (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Still waiting for an answer......... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonder51 (talkcontribs) 20:04, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[edit]

This is not relevant to the article as a whole and so isn't appropriate as an External link link. RoyalBlueStuey (talk) 16:40, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Again stop adding a random external link to this article. RoyalBlueStuey (talk) 11:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

The page is relevant to the discussion of Absenteeism. In fact the entire wiki page needs an upgrade to reflect different aspects of this problem. I did notice you seem fine with a commercial link which should be removed as it adds nothing except a service to buy if you have the problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonder51 (talkcontribs) 16:05, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

If you want the Australian link gone I would be inclined to agree. The reason I have removed your link because it was new and so flashed up on my watchlist. The reason I left it previously, and the reason I presume it was added in the first place, is because the URL looks official and it contains a calculator tool that would be useful to article readers. The fact is that even if your blog is about absenteeism it doesn't mean it should be listed as an external link on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a directory. The External Links section should contain sites that are most relevant, most definitive authorities on the subject at hand. As I said previously if you think the Australian site should go I would agree. RoyalBlueStuey (talk) 09:04, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
Please be cautious adding external links. Wikipedia is not a collection of links and should not be used for advertising. Excessive or inappropriate links will be removed.
See Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Spam for details.
If there are already suitable links, propose additions or replacements on the article's talk page, or submit your link to the relevant category at the Open Directory Project ( and link there using Absenteeism at DMOZ. RoyalBlueStuey (talk) 08:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Dr. Pfeifer's comment on this article[edit]

Dr. Pfeifer has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

This short article excludes the (labor) economic perspective on absenteeism.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Pfeifer has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:

  • Reference : Christian Pfeifer, 2009. "Effective Working Hours and Wages: The Case of Downward Adjustment via Paid Absenteeism," Working Paper Series in Economics 152, University of Luneburg, Institute of Economics.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 18:58, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Potential Changes Needed[edit]

The last paragraph of the article says the evidence finds but there is not source listed. If the source is added and the source draws those conclusions, it should be kept. Otherwise, it is drawing your own conclusions and should not be included in the article. Polster.takala (talk) 22:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)