Correction

Correction: AZ-104 vs AZ-500: Which Should an Azure Admin Take Second in 2026

Corrected by Melik Can Sariyer · Software Engineer and Linux OS Developer

Melik Can Sariyer found something wrong, outdated, or unsupported on this page and proposed a fix. The publisher accepted the correction.

Role
Correction
Publisher
Pass4Sure
Status
Accepted
Date
11 July 2026

The exact change

Before

"AZ-305 reads like a McKinsey case study. AZ-500 reads like a CISSP-flavored Azure exam..." -- Mark Russinovich, CTO of Microsoft Azure / "AZ-500 is the natural depth path after AZ-104..." -- John Savill, Microsoft Technical Trainer / 'Mike Pfeiffer has written that "candidates who pick credentials they enjoy preparing for finish more of them..."' / 'Microsoft's own technology compensation studies' (alongside Skillsoft report)

After

AZ-305 reads like a business case study; AZ-500 reads like a security-flavored Azure exam (unattributed prose). / AZ-500 is the natural depth path after AZ-104; AZ-305 is the abstraction path (unattributed prose). / Reframed as an unattributed tiebreaker observation, without the fabricated direct quote attributed to Pfeiffer/Schauland. / Removed the unlinked 'Microsoft's own technology compensation studies' claim, kept only the real Skillsoft IT Skills and Salary Report reference.

Suggested change

De-attributed 3 fabricated quotes (Russinovich, Pfeiffer, Savill) and removed an unverifiable 'Microsoft compensation studies' reference. Verified and kept the accurate Heineken case study reference.

Why this is better

3 originally flagged claims plus 1 additional fabricated quote (John Savill) found in the same file. Mark Russinovich's real title was confirmed but the casual quote is unverifiable, de-attributed. Pfeiffer/Schauland claim de-attributed (though they ARE real co-authors of a real Microsoft Press AZ-305 book, cited correctly elsewhere in the article). The unlinked 'Microsoft's own technology compensation studies' claim removed. Verified and kept the accurate Heineken Azure migration case study reference, which is real and genuinely involves multi-region design work matching the article's claim.

How this record is verified

  • The contribution is tied to a real, identified contributor, not an anonymous byline.
  • It counts only because the publisher, Pass4Sure, accepted it. Self-claimed work earns nothing.
  • It is recorded against a specific page and cannot be bought or edited after the fact.
See the full page record View the published page

All of Melik Can Sariyer's contributions →