Talk:McKenna Long & Aldridge

I am making additional revisions to the article so that it doesn't read like an advertisement which was not my intention. I will be adding additional references, too. --Legalprgirl (talk) 16:00, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing links to other Wikipedia articles discussing MLA attorneys/alumni? Most other law-firm articles contain this information. Your removal is making it more like an advertisement.

Please disclose your relationship to the law firm. THF (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am the new PR Manager for the firm and responsible for firmwide PR. The edits I'm making are based on what other similar firms include/don't include and were approved internally. If the removal of the notable attorneys/alumni make the article appear like an ad, I am happy to add that information back in to the article. This is the first time I've worked with Wikipedia and I am trying to include as many references as possible. I'm having a little difficulty with some of the coding. --Legalprgirl (talk) 16:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

COI and Wikipedia

You are a new editor here, and I would like your experience to be a positive one.

You should halt editing Wikipedia for a short while, and read the guidelines and tutorials. Wikipedia markup takes some getting used to.

Wikipedia guidelines exist to govern behavior. If you violate them, you may be blocked from editing, and that would be an unfortunate outcome, as your input could be helpful.

Here is a link to an important Wikipedia policy that exists to prevent the encyclopedia from becoming a series of press releases and advertisements:

Conflict of interest

Read this, and the other guidelines, and your experience here can be a positive one. --Stani Stani 16:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will thoroughly read the COI. It appears that since I work for the firm, there's a conflict, so I'm not sure how I can update the article to make it more substantive. I want to comply with all of the policies and I understand it should not read like an ad or press release. There are several sources of information I'd like to include, but I'm only available to work on the article (if it's permissible) at certain times. Not including more references earlier was due to time constraints. I'm also reviewing the Manual of Style and welcome feedback on content that should not be included. The firm's Wikipedia page is on the first page of search results for the firm in Google. So, we just want to make sure the content is the best it can be while also being verifiable and compliant with Wikipedia's guidelines. --Legalprgirl (talk) 17:08, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can make non-controversial changes in the article itself. You can propose more controversial edits on the talk page. You can also create a sandbox version in your userspace (say User:Legalprgirl/MLA), and experiment there, and then ask editors here to incorporate those changes into this article. THF (talk) 17:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy cleanup

So I just went through and cleaned up this article. It's just a start, of course, but I'll explain what I did. First, I removed nearly all of the inline links to the official website. Aside from being distracting, it doesn't really add anything to the page and really just makes it look like one huge advertisement. Second, I removed a lot - roughly half the article - of copyvio'd text. You can't copy text straight from the official website and add it here, as the text isn't in the public domain. And finally, I just removed anything that was promotional or otherwise POV. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:35, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on McKenna Long & Aldridge. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121107230421/http://caerusassociates.com/team/phillip-carter/ to http://caerusassociates.com/team/phillip-carter/

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) 02:20, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on McKenna Long & Aldridge. 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) 15:52, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]